A revised and expanded version of the PhD thesis STUDIES IN THE LEXIS AND WORD-

FORMATION OF OLD TIBETAN. COMPOUNDS AND COMPOUNDING will be published in 2018

at Indica et Tibetica, Marburg

STUDIES IN THE LEXIS AND WORD-FORMATION OF OLD TIBETAN.
COMPOUNDS AND COMPOUNDING

INAUGURAL-DISSERTATION

zur

Erlangung des Grades einer Doktorin der Philosophie (Dr. phil.)

dem
Fachbereich Fremdsprachliche Philologien

der
Philipps-Universität Marburg

vorgelegt von
Mgr. Joanna Białek
aus Świebodzin

Marburg 2015
Vom Fachbereich Fremdsprachliche Philologien
der Philipps-Universität Marburg als Dissertation
angenommen am: .....................................................

Gutachter: ....................................................
....................................................
 III

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of contents III
Acknowledgements IV
Abbreviations V
List of figures X
Introduction 1
Compounding in Old Tibetan 20
Compound and compounding. An attempt at definition 23
Classification 31
Form changes 52
Word-forming processes on compounds 75
OT compounds. Lexicological analysis 79
References 402
Abbreviations 403
Primary sources 403
Secondary sources 403
Internet sources 415
Indices 417
Index of OT morphemes 418
Index of lexemes from other Asiatic languages 422
Quotation index 424
Zusammenfassung 431
 IV

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Over a span of many years my thesis has benefitted from the exchange with numerous scholars to
whom I would like to express my deepest gratitude. First of all, I was very lucky to meet two persons
who did not hesitate to trust a young student they in fact barely knew. Late prof. Michael Hahn
agreed to supervise my thesis on Old Tibetan word-formation although my adventure with written
Tibetan had begun just about nine months earlier. From the perspective of many years that have
passed since then I dare to maintain that none of us had a real idea to what we both had consented -
a morphological analysis of a dead language on which there exist almost no linguistic studies may be
deemed not as much a challenge as just a rather risky undertaking.

The major impetus for finishing the research in the foreseeable future came from prof. Franz-Karl
Ehrhard who, without knowing much about me, offered his guidance in applying for a project to
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Thus, a considerable part of the presented thesis has been
completed within the granted project “Lexikologische Analyse des alttibetischen Wortschatzes mit
Sonderberücksichtigung der Komposita“ (official code: EH 102/6-1). Moreover, prof. Ehrhard has
agreed to supervise my thesis after prof. Hahn passed away. For the second time he risked for me by
putting himself in the uncomfortable situation of taking the responsibility over a work on which he
could not have much influence since it was already in its final phase. I am convinced that without
prof. Ehrhard’s commitment the thesis either would not have been finished at all or it would have
taken much more time for me to bring it to an end. I am greatly obliged for his support.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Brandon Dotson for his invaluable comments and many hours he
devoted to reading and discussing with me the most controversial points of the thesis. I am
especially thankful to Agata Bareja-Starzyńska, late Roland Bielmeier, Henk Blezer, Geert Booij, Toni
Huber, Karénina Kollmar-Paulenz, Petra Maurer, Klaus Sagaster, Johannes Schneider, Tsuguhito
Takeuchi, Helga Uebach, and Bettina Zeisler for sharing with me their comments and insights.
Needless to say, all flaws and shortcomings remain my own responsibility.
 V

ABBREVIATIONS
= the same as
< developed from
> evolved into
* reconstructed form/meaning
! ungrammatical form/meaning
~ alternates with
σ syllable boundary
+ morpheme boundary
# word boundary
’Bis ’Bis khog inscription
’Phyoṅ ’Phyoṅ rgyas inscription
*S derived subject
*O derived object
A adjective
A agent
ABS absolutive
ACC accusative
ACIP Asian Classics Input Project (see Internet sources)
AD Adjunct
Adv Adverb
AKBh Index to Abhidharmakośabhāṣya (see References)
ALLAT allative
APP apposition
AT Amdo Tibetan
ATTR attribute
B Buck, 1969 (see References)
BCRD The Buddhist Canons Research Database (see Internet resources)
BDN Gña’ goṅ dkon mchog tshes brtan, 1995 (see References)
BDSN Brda gsar rñiṅ gi rnam par dbye ba by Dbus pa blo gsal (see MIMAKI 1992 in
References)
BEN benefactive genitive
BNY Bsod nams skyid, Dbaṅ rgyal (eds.), 2003 (see References)
Bö Böhtlingk, 1855-75 (see References)
Bsam Bsam yas rdo riṅs inscription
Bsam Bell Bsam yas Bell inscription
BSh Bon gyi śes rig tshig mdzod, 2012 (see References)
BSODDBAṄ Bsod nams skyid, Dbaṅ rgyal (see References)
BTC Zhang Yisun, 1993 (see References)
BTK Go śul grags pa ’byuṅ gnas, 2001 (see References)
BYD Rnam rgyal tshe riṅ, 2001 (see References)
BYMD Ṅag dbaṅ bstan dar (see References)
C consonant
 VI

c-verb controllable verb

CDTD Bielmeier et al. (see References)
cf. confer, Eng. compare
Ch. Chinese
CM Classical Mongolian
COM comitative
CONV converb
COP copula
Cs Csoma, 1834 (see References)
CT Classical Tibetan
Central Tibetan
D Das, 1902 (see References)
DED Dzongkha English Dictionary (see Internet sources)
Desg Desgodins, 1899 (see References)
DGA’THAṄ Pa tshab pa saṅs dbaṅ ’dus, Glaṅ ru nor bu tshe riṅ, 2007 (see References)
DIM Diminutive
DISAD genitive of disadventage, Lat. genitivus incommodi
DSM Btsan lha ṅag dbaṅ tsul khrims, 1997 (see References)
DTH Bacot et al., 1940 (see References)
Duden Duden, 2007 (see References)
DudenH Duden, 2006 (see References)
DUṄDKAR Blo bzaṅ ’phrin las, 2002 (see References)
DWDS Das Digitale Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (see Internet sources)
e.g. exempli gratia, Eng. for example
EAT Eastern Amdo Tibetan
econ. economics
Edg Edgerton, Dictionary 1953 (see References)
EDPD English-Dzongkha Pocket Dictionary (see References)
EL elative
Eng. English
ERG ergative
etc. etcetera, Eng. and the others
EXPL explicative genitive, Lat. genitivus explicativus
f.e. folk etymology
GEN genitive
Ger. German
GC Chos kyi grags pa, 1957 (see References)
GLR Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me loṅ (Sde dge edition)
Gs Goldstein, 2001 (see References)
H honorific register
HCCA History of Civilizations of Central Asia (see References)
HH humiliating register
i.e. id est, Eng. that is
ibid. ibidem, Eng. in the same place
id. idem, Eng. the same
IDP International Dunhuang Project
IE Indo-European
IMPF imperfective
INDF indefinite
INESS inessive
INTR intransitive
ITJ IOL Tib J
ITN IOL Tib N
IW Ives Waldo via Nitartha (see Internet sources)
J Jäschke, 1881 (see References)
 VII

Jä Jäschke, 1871 (see References)

JV Jim Valby via Nitartha (see Internet sources)
Khri Inscription on Khri lde sroṅ brtsan’s tomb
Klein Klein, 1966 (see References)
Kow Kowalewski, 1844-49 (see References)
KT Kham Tibetan
Lat. Latin
Lcaṅ Lcaṅ bu (or: Mtshur phu) inscription
LCh Lokesh Chandra, 1959-61 (see References)
LCh.2007 Lokesh Chandra, 2007 (see References)
Ldan Ldan ma inscription
Less Lessing, 1960 (see References)
LEU Hamid, 1998 (see References)
LH Later Han Chinese
Lho Lho brag inscription
lit. literally
lw. loanword
LZB Tenzin, Pasar Tsultrim, et al., 2008 (see References)
MAT material genitive
MDBG Chinese-English Dictionary (see Internet sources)
metr. metrical passage
MG Mainwaring, G.B., Grünwedel, A., 1979 (see References)
MK Mon-Khmer
MT Modern Tibetan
Mvy Sasaki (ed.), 1965 (see References)
MW Monier-Williams, 2002 (see References)
n footnote (e.g., p.73n9 = page 73, footnote 9)
N Noun
nasal consonant
nasalis. nasalisation
nc-verb non-controllable verb
NEG negation
Negi Negi, 1993 (see References)
Nel Nel pa Paṇḍita, Me tog phreṅ ba (see References: UEBACH 1987)
NH Norberg-Hodge, H. et al., 1991 (see References)
NKFD The New Kosciuszko Foundation Dictionary (see References)
NOM nominative
NP nominal phrase
NPRC nominal particle
NUM Numeral
O object (O1 - direct Object; O2 - indirect object)
OBJV objective genitive
OCM Minimal Old Chinese
OEng. Old English
OPol. Old Polish
ORIG genitive of origin
OT Old Tibetan
OTA Old Tibetan Annals (PT 1288, IOL Tib 750, Or.8212/187)
OTC Old Tibetan Chronicles
OTDO Old Tibetan Documents Online
OTI Iwao et al. 2009 (see References)
OTurk. Old Turkic
p. page
PART partitive genitive
PIE Proto-Indo-European
 VIII

PLB Proto-Lolo-Burmese
PN proper name
Pol. Polish
POSS possessive genitive
POST postposition
pr.com. private communication
PRED predicative
PRF perfective
PRN pronoun
PS Proto-Slavic
PT Pelliot Tibétain
PTani Proto-Tani
PTB Proto-Tibeto-Burman
R Rerich, G.N., 1983-93 (see References)
Rkoṅ Rkoṅ po inscription
RKTS Resources for Kanjur & Tanjur Studies (see Internet resources)
RY Rangjung Yeshe via Nitartha (see Internet sources)
S subject
S summer
s.v. sub voce, under the heading
Sch Schmidt, 1841 (see References)
Schr Schröter, 1826 (see References)
Skar Skar cuṅ inscription
Skt. Sanskrit
so. someone, somebody
SR Sumatiratna, 1959 (see References)
ST Sino-Tibetan
ST Treaty Sino-Tibetan Treaty inscription
STC Benedict, 1972 (see References)
sth. something
STK Goṅ ba klu ’bum rgyal, 2006 (see References)
TB Tibeto-Burman
TERM terminative
TETT THL Tibetan to English Translation Tool (see Internet resources)
TLB Thesaurus Literaturae Buddhicae (see Internet resources)
TLTD Thomas, 1935-55 (see References)
Toch. Tocharian
TOP topicalisation particle
topic
TPS Tucci, 1949 (see References)
TR transitive
trsl. translation
trslr. transliteration
Ts Tshe riṅ dbaṅ rgyal, 1930 (see References)
Uig. Uighur
V1, V2, V3, V4 the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th stem of a verb
V verb
vowel
VA verbal adjective
VN verbal noun
VP verbal phrase
vs. versus
W winter
WAT Western Archaic Tibetan
WIT Western Innovative Tibetan
 IX

WT Written Tibetan
WTS Wörterbuch der tibetischen Schriftschprache (see References)
YeŚes Ye śes rdo rje, 1959 (see References)
ZSDB Zhaxi, H., Stuart, K., Dorji, R., Benson, S., (see References)
Źol Źol inscription
Źwa Źva’i lha khaṅ inscription
 X

LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.1 An open wooden box with a corpse placed inside kha sprod
Fig.2 Varnished lamellae khrab bse’
Fig.3 Tibetan lamellar armour khrab bse’
Fig.4 ITN 1249A khram skya
Fig.5 ITN 916A khram skya
Fig.6 Tibetan thread-crosses (mdos) in Leh (rgyal) thag brgyad
Fig.7 Thread-crosses of Angami Naga (rgyal) thag brgyad
Fig.8 ’dzaṅs kyaṅ (PT 1287:74) ’dzaṅs kyad
Fig.9 ’dzaṅs kyad (PT 1287:82) ’dzaṅs kyad
Fig.10 ’dzaṅs kyad (PT 1287:96) ’dzaṅs kyad
Fig.11 Sky burial zaṅs brgya’
Fig.12 Unwrapping a chest zaṅs brgya’
Fig.13 Funeral chests zaṅs brgya’
 1

INTRODUCTION
 2

The discovery of Old Tibetan manuscripts in the beginning of the 20th century in the Mogao caves of
Dunhuang located in the past on the Silk Road has opened a new chapter in the history of the young
discipline that Tibetan studies still were at that time. In parallel with the first research reports from
Central Asia (e.g., PELLIOT 1908, STEIN.MA 1921) the Lhasa inscriptions aroused the interest of
western scholars for the first time (WADDELL 1909-11). Owing to later palaeographic, philological as
well as historical studies it was possible to assign the findings to the period between the 8th and the
10th century. The uncovering of those hitherto oldest historical monuments of Tibetan literature to
international scholarship provided an unprecedented incentive for philological, linguistic,
historical, cultural, and religious studies within Tibetology that continue to the present.

The pioneering works in which Old Tibetan documents were for the first time philologically
analysed in-depth and translated into western languages comprise the publications of Jacques
BACOT, Frederick William THOMAS, Hugh RICHARDSON, and Rolf STEIN, among others. The former two
are authors of numerous renderings of Old Tibetan texts (manuscripts but also wooden slips) from
Central Asian finds (see References). On the other hand, we owe the vast majority of research done
in the field of Old Tibetan inscriptions to the long-standing studies of Hugh RICHARDSON. Unlike his
predecessors, Rolf STEIN used Old Tibetan documents as a starting point for his interdisciplinary
studies on the religion and culture of ancient Tibet by presenting the results of his philological and
linguistic studies in a wider cultural context and by incorporating Chinese sources.

In the late 1970s, the philological and historical research on Old Tibetan texts received a decisive
impulse through a series of publications that were created in a collaboration between French and
Japanese scholars. The facsimiles of dozens of Old Tibetan texts from Central Asia that were
published in two first volumes of Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale
(MACDONALD et al. 1978; SPANIEN et al. 1979) enabled many researchers around the world access to the
manuscripts.1 As a sign of increasing influence of digital data processing, these texts were then
transliterated and published in a KWIC layout (vols. 3 and 4 of Choix de documents tibétains conservés à
la Bibliothèque nationale; IMAEDA et al. 1990; IMAEDA et al. 2001). The publication of all previously
identified Old Tibetan inscriptions followed (IWAO et al. 2009). The natural evolution was to make the
documents available on the internet. This became possible due to two major international projects:
1. Old Tibetan Documents Online (OTDO; http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/) where the most significant
texts (manuscripts and inscriptions) are transliterated and made searchable in KWIC format;2
2. International Dunhuang Project (IDP; http://idp.bl.uk/) that makes scans of Dunhuang texts
(currently scattered throughout libraries all around the world) available.

1
In 1981 microfilms of the entire collection of the Bibliothèque Nationale were completed in order to provide access to
the documents to the academic community (COHEN 1996:2). I would like to thank Brandon DOTSON for drawing my attention
to this nowadays frequently neglected development in the history of the collection.
2
Unfortunately, due to changes in the displaying mode of the search engine, the new version of the site (http://otdo.aa-
ken.jp/search) has lost most of its functions that are crucial to corpus linguistic studies.
 3

These seminal works have led to a breakthrough in the study of written sources of Old Tibetan and
prompted many more publications that in the last 20 years substantially deepened our knowledge of
the early history of Tibet and its governance during the dynastic period. We owe the current state of
research on the non-Buddhist documents to the multifaceted studies of Tibetologists like Géza URAY,
Helga UEBACH, Tsuguhito TAKEUCHI, and lately, Brandon DOTSON and Kazushi IWAO (see References).

The present work is under an obligation to all previous scholars who have heretofore engaged in
studying Old Tibetan documents and strived to make their language intelligible to a wider spectrum
of students. An in-depth analysis of a part of their non-Buddhist vocabulary aimed at here has been
only possible due to the continuing interest and decades-long work of many Tibetologists to make
the texts available through all kinds of modern media. A special gratitude shall be expressed to
researchers participating in developing tools that were surely not even fancied by scholars like
LALOU or STEIN but that have added a completely new quality to the study of those old records.
Owing to the ongoing OTDO and IDP projects, a great progress in making the Old Tibetan language a
subject of study for corpus linguistics has been achieved. Now it becomes more urgent to develop a
reliable methodology in order to process the quantities of data available for the examination of the
language evidenced therein. Thus, one of the aims of the present study is to analyse and describe a
part of the Old Tibetan lexicon as realised in those texts.

AIMS
With a few exceptions (among others STEIN.RA 1939, 1970, 1985; LALOU 1952; DOTSON 2008, 2013a),
previous philological studies on non-Buddhist Old Tibetan texts concentrated on or, in many cases,
even limited themselves to the analysis of the historical content of the documents. Although the
publications mentioned in the earlier paragraph have presented us with invaluable source material
for studying the Old Tibetan language, only a small number of researchers has ventured to deal with
it. Lexicological and language-historical studies of ROLF STEIN still form the most important part of
all previously completed research in this area.1

Despite sporadic attempts undertaken by other Tibetologists - one should name here András RÓNA-
TAS, Weldon South COBLIN, Helga UEBACH, Nathan HILL, Géza URAY, and Bettina ZEISLER with her
linguistically oriented and unique in this respect analysis of the first chapter of the Old Tibetan
Chronicles2 (ZEISLER 2011) - linguistic (including lexicological) studies of the Old Tibetan material
remain a desideratum. The lack of philological and linguistic work is particularly tangible when, due

1
See his Tibetica Antiqua series, especially I, II, III, and V, for detailed semantic analyses of the OT vocabulary.
2
Throughout the thesis the plural form ‘Old Tibetan Chronicles’ will be used instead of the commonly accepted ‘Old Tibetan
Chronicle’. This choice is motivated by the author’s observation that the manuscript PT 1287 cannot be treated
linguistically as one text due to the fact that its language varies to a high degree depending on the respective chapter.
Moreover, the textual units composed most probably by different authors and written down side by side in one
manuscript PT 1287 do not present a coherent communicative discourse and the motivation behind the composition of
single texts seems to have varied considerably.
 4

to deficient lexicological studies, one is forced to leave some crucial terms untranslated and without
any semantic explanation - a ‘solution’ more than frequently resorted to in the present work as well.

Thus, notwithstanding the great interest in Old Tibetan texts on the part of Tibetologists our
understanding of their language and the specific time and culture-historical context is still only in
its infancy. The thesis presented herein to the reader is meant to create a basis on which more
detailed (text-)linguistic analyses could be founded in the future.

The present lexicological study, due to its intended broad perspectives and to the diverse methods
applied, shall contribute to increasing our knowledge about social, cultural, and historical events of
Tibet in their international context. Central Asia of the 8th and the 9th century was a melting pot of
different cultural and religious influences and the Old Tibetan language, being one of the most
instrumental languages in the region at that time, provides an important key to understanding
those intense transfers of cultural assets and ideas. In addition, the elucidation of the exact meaning
of culturally significant terms is supposed to contribute to our better comprehension of the
conditions in the ancient Tibetan society, governance, culture, religion, and international relations.
To achieve this goal, beside the primary sources, also the secondary literature has been included.
This concerns predominantly works on the cultural and linguistic history of Imperial Tibet, but also
those that deal with the general history of Central Asia in the period between the 7th and the 10th
century.

Based on the preliminary evaluation of the text corpus, the work aims at analysing selected lexemes
with respect to their semantics and word formation and at presenting them as they occur in
discourse. In this regard, the perspective of the project is primarily a lexicological one, i.e., it focuses
on the exploration and description of a very specific and sharply defined part of the Old Tibetan
non-Buddhist vocabulary. For the purpose of examining the rules of word formation in the Old
Tibetan language and especially the process of compounding, the author decided to limit the scope
of the surveyed lexemes to those which were not coined to meet the expectations and needs of the
new cultural system that was introduced to Tibet with Buddhism. It must neither be forgotten nor
neglected, however, that the religion of Buddha accompanied the development of the new
centralized state on the Tibetan Plateau actually from its very beginning and grew together with the
just-introduced written language.

Within the framework of the research project, a comprehensive lexicological study of the critically
evaluated Old Tibetan vocabulary is being presented. The scope of the vocabulary to be examined
was narrowed down to a group of lexemes that could be well-defined morphologically, enabling
concurrently a description of the respective word formation processes. Thus, the study concentrates
on analysing Old Tibetan compounds, their attested meaning, reconstructing their underlying
structure and thus their etymological meaning, semantic shift, morphonological changes, as well as
 5

on the morphosyntactic processes of compounding in general.1 Nevertheless, also simple lexemes

that are of special interest or significance for the understanding of a respective text passage or a
word family are occasionally examined. The study is based on searches for the lexemes embedded in
multiple contexts across large amounts of available texts, the so-called secondary corpus. It is hoped
that bringing together different methodological approaches will contribute to a better
understanding of not only the source material itself but also the historical and sociolinguistic
context in which the texts were produced.

The submitted work is conceived of as being of particular importance for the study of the later
stages of the language’s development and thus also for Tibetan dialectology. To wit, the preliminary
analysis conducted on the Old Tibetan material in general, and on compounds in particular proved
that in the earliest attested phase of the written language we find morphological forms that are
being reconstructed today using the modern dialectal material.

SOURCES
Corpus-based study of the lexicon of a language gives neither reason nor motivation for preferring
one kind of textual evidence over the other, or for disregarding a part of it. Accordingly, all sorts of
textual references available, as far as they could contribute to a more thorough-going elucidation of
an issue, were made use of in the course of the present research. Beside the textual corpus (for
which see below), also the lexicographic sources on Tibetan languages (written language as well as
modern spoken dialects) have been employed in the lexicological analyses. The survey of the
language-oriented material has been complemented by information extracted from secondary
literature regarding various aspects of social life and governance as documented for Tibetan
communities across the centuries.

OLD TIBETAN (OT)2

Primary corpus. Two groups of Old Tibetan sources were chosen to form the primary corpus for
selecting lexical units that were subsequently submitted to the lexicological analysis:
1. The already published Old Tibetan inscriptions from Central Tibet (inscription on Bsam yas
bell, Bsam yas rdo riṅs inscription, inscription on Khra ’brug bell, inscription on Khri lde sroṅ
btsan’s tomb, Lcaṅ bu inscription, ’Phyoṅ rgyas inscription, Rkoṅ po inscription, Sino-Tibetan
Peace Treaty inscription, Skar cuṅ inscription, inscription on Yer pa bell, Źol rdo riṅs
inscription, Źwa’i lha khaṅ inscription);

1
The complicated issue of defining ‘a compound’ in Tibetan is being addressed in the chapter Compounding in Old
Tibetan.
2
I use the label ‘Old Tibetan’ to refer generally to the language(s) of the non-translational Tibetan documents discovered
in Central Asiatic oases (Dunhuang, Turfan, etc.) and of the inscriptions from Central Tibet. I would like to stress that no
claim is made whatsoever to define the linguistic traits of the ‘Old Tibetan’ as against, for instance, the ‘Classical Tibetan’
language. In the personal opinion of the author, still not enough work has been done in the field of Tibetan linguistics to
allow us to put forward criteria for establishing the chronology of the development of the language. For some proposals of
defining, dating, and periodising Old Tibetan language see, e.g., RÓNA-TAS 1985:93ff., RÓNA-TAS 1992:697, and TAKEUCHI 2012.
 6

2. Manuscripts from Dunhuang (ITJ 750 - Old Tibetan Annals I; Or. 8212.187 - Old Tibetan Annals II;
PT 1042 - a text of a funeral ritual; PT 1285 - a ritual text; PT 1286 - Royal Genealogy; PT 1287 -
Old Tibetan Chronicles; PT 1288 - Old Tibetan Annals I).1

By determining the primary corpus, special attention was given to the thematic diversity of the
texts chosen. It was intended that the analysed compounds would represent semantically differing
sections of the lexicon.

Apart from the thematic variety, texts included in the primary corpus were chosen according to
their significance for the study of the ancient Tibet and its society. With regard to the manuscripts,
longer texts offering enough information for contextual and text-linguistic analysis were preferred.
The main reason for including the inscriptions was their dateability (even though rough) and the
official nature or ‘normativity’ of their language that could function as a benchmark in studying the
Central Asiatic manuscripts. Another important factor in selecting texts was the amount of studies
already done on the respective document that could facilitate their understanding.

The chief aim of the work consisted of the examination of the Old Tibetan non-Buddhist vocabulary.
However, even though some of the Central Tibetan inscriptions (e.g., Bsam yas bell and pillar, Źwa’i
lha khaṅ, etc.) are openly Buddhist, the author has decided to include them all in the primary corpus
owing to the fact that the inscriptions are the only early official documents stemming from Central
Tibet we possess that can be roughly dated.2 Besides, the Buddhist inscriptions share to a great
extent their official language with other inscriptions from the same region.

Since it was intentionally decided to examine only the part of the lexicon that does not bear overt
evidence of Buddhist influence exclusively non-Buddhist manuscripts were selected. As an
exception the Old Tibetan Chronicles (OTC), some passages of which were apparently exposed to
Buddhist ideas, were included mainly owing to their historical value and their significance for the
history of the Tibetan literature in general3.

Secondary corpus. In addition to the primary text corpus, other Old Tibetan documents (published
online on OTDO or in separate articles by various scholars4) as well as all available glossaries and
indices listing the early Tibetan vocabulary (e.g., TAKEUCHI 1995, 1998; TAUBE 1980; THOMAS 1935-55)
were examined in the search for further occurrences of the analysed lexemes. Accordingly, the

1
Detailed lists of references for each of the documents are provided on OTDO.
2
Although the latest paper analysis has proven that some of the documents discovered in Central Asiatic Oases could have
been composed in Central Tibet (in particular ITJ 1459 and Or.15000/513; cf. HELMAN-WAŻNY/VAN SCHAIK 2012:716, 735) their
dating to the latter part of the 8th or early 9th century is based solely on the fact that in this period the respective regions
were under Tibetan occupation (786-848; ibid. p.716). Nevertheless, one should not neglect the fact that paper production
and text composition are two independent processes that can be carried out in distinct places. In fact, only textual analysis
can bring evidence to the place of origin of the text as is the case with ITJ 1459. To wit, the latter document contains the
phrase pho braṅ ’on caṅ do nas bkye (trslr. after TLTD.2:47) “dispatched from pho braṅ ’On caṅ do”. The conclusion that a
document which contains the compound pho braṅ must have been composed at the court of a btsan po (see HELMAN-
WAŻNY/VAN SCHAIK 2012:716) seems to be premature.
3
See hereto a careful study of the narration layers in the OTC presented in DOTSON 2013.
4
E.g., COBLIN 1991a/b, RICHARDSON 1992, RICHARDSON 1998b, THOMAS/KONOW 1929.
 7

evidence for a single compound is substantially expanded and the research results better
documented.

Apart from the time frame of the ‘Old Tibetan stage’ of the language, no restrictions concerning the
origin or the subject matter of a discourse were imposed on texts incorporated in the secondary
corpus. In consequence, also Old Tibetan Buddhist literature was included to substantiate and
support the analysis of selected terms.1

CLASSICAL TIBETAN (CT)

In exceptional cases, literary works representing Classical Tibetan have been consulted for further
attestations of a compound. For obvious reasons, this procedure could only be introduced for
formations that were still, even if only peripherally, in use in later stages of the language and did
not, as far as we can judge, become completely obsolete after the fall of the Tibetan Empire. In
search for respective lexemes online search engines of Resources for Kanjur & Tanjur Studies
(RKTS), The Buddhist Canons Research Database (BCRD; both based on texts digitally edited by the
Asian Classics Input Project, ACIP), and Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre (TBRC) have been used. In
addition, indices and glossaries compiled for other Classical Tibetan works, translational as well as
native, have been referred to.2

MODERN TIBETAN (MT) DIALECTS

Data from modern Tibetan dialects have been consulted and incorporated into the analytical part of
the work principally to demonstrate the semantic shift of a single lexical unit. Since only a few of
the examined compounds are still attested dialectally, data from modern spoken languages have
been included for the most part to substantiate hypotheses put forward by the author that concern
either the earlier reconstructed meaning of an unbound morpheme or a construction of a
hypothesised word family. No claim is made regarding the historical continuity between the Old
Tibetan language or some of its representations/realisations in the OT documents and the modern
dialects. As the principal authority on modern spoken Tibetan dialects the draft (2013) of the
Comparative Dictionary of Tibetan Dialects (CDTD) put at author’s disposal in form of a pdf-file by late
prof. BIELMEIER has been consulted.

OTHER TIBETO-BURMAN LANGUAGES

Additional data from various Tibeto-Burman languages have been occasionally presented in order to
support the reconstructed meaning of a simple lexeme.3 However, no claim is made regarding the
reconstruction of Proto-Tibeto-Burman (PTB) or even Proto-Tibetan forms of the units cited.
Neither are lexemes quoted from other cognate languages asserted to be of common ancestry;

1
For a complete list of OT texts quoted in the present work see the Quotation index, section: OT sources.
2
For a complete list of CT texts quoted in the present work see the Quotation index, section: Canonical sources.
3
A list of all non-Tibetan lexemes, including those from other Tibeto-Burman languages, that are cited in the thesis is
provided in the Index of lexemes from other Asiatic languages.
 8

language contacts and mutual borrowings across centuries should not be neglected. The sole aim of
quoting material from other Tibeto-Burman languages is to provide the reader with the most
exhaustive information about a lexeme in case of insufficient evidence from the Tibetan languages.

In the author’s opinion, although the last years have brought about some new publications, still not
enough work has been done in the field of documenting Tibeto-Burman languages to allow us to
draw far-reaching conclusions regarding the reconstruction of proto-forms; cf. the discussion on OT
źa vs. CT źal s.v. źa ’briṅ and the impact of written Classical Tibetan forms on the (erroneously)
reconstructed PTB roots. As examples like OT źa ~ CT źal or OT gtshos (in, e.g., gtshos bal, PT 1285:r50,
r53) ~ CT gtsod1 clearly demonstrate, classical and sometimes even modern spoken forms of a
language do not always suffice to make definite statements about the history of a lexical unit.
Because in case of Tibetan we do, exceptionally, possess records documenting earlier stages of the
language, e.g. OT texts, those should necessarily be consulted before any hypothesis can be put
forward concerning the (pre)history of the language.

METHODOLOGY
Lexicology, understood as a thorough study of a lexicon, is positioned and defined in the present
study as a branch of science that forms a bridge between philology and linguistics. Accordingly, the
author resorted to methods applied in both areas in order to supply the most reliable reconstruction
and analysis of the Old Tibetan compounds.

Even though the text-critical apparatus could only sporadically be applied, internal text
reconstruction was undertaken if necessary, based, however, not on juxtaposition and comparison
of two or more transmitted versions of one text, but of single sentences or passages of similar
structure or content stemming from different documents. Already this approach, determined by the
specificity and, as a matter of fact, paucity of sources, brings philology and corpus linguistics
together with its emphasis on the distributional corpus analysis in which a lexical unit is examined
in discourse, i.e., in its relation to other lexical elements with which it co-occurs: left- and right-
hand neighbours, more complex compounds (cf. gtsug lag vs. gtsug lag khaṅ), collocations and idioms,
as well as other units that may occupy the same position in the argument structure of a respective
verb. In this regard, the author perceives the present study as positioned within the framework of
the contextual theory of meaning first formulated by MALINOWSKI and developed further for the
purpose of linguistics by FIRTH and SINCLAIR among others.2 Beside contextual analysis of

1
As against the classical -d, the final consonant -s is confirmed by the data from WAT dialects, cf. CDTD:6574. These
examples illustrate two points: how OT compounds have preserved morphemes in their archaic and otherwise unattested
or only dialectally attested forms and how exactly such ‘irregularities’ can and in fact should be targeted for any historical
analysis.
2
Cf., e.g., MALINOWSKI 1923, 1935, FIRTH 1957, HALLIDAY ET AL. 2004, SINCLAIR 2004. Unfortunately, due to the scarcity of textual
sources it was not always possible to rely solely on the contextual analysis of a lexical unit. Since “in corpus research [...] a
 9

compounds, the meanings of members of a compound occurring as simple lexemes in OT documents

are ascertained through the examination of the lexicographical sources, respective passages from
OT records, word families, and semantic fields to which the unit is assumed to belong. Internal
reconstruction as applied in historical linguistics, not being the primary goal of the research, is
resorted to only if, for the lack of other evidence, absolutely necessary.

Concerning the word formation of the Old Tibetan compounds, reconstruction of the underlying
structure is proposed for every lexical unit followed by a classification of compounds established on
the basis of their syntactic, semantic, and morphological characteristics (for details see the chapter
Compounding in Old Tibetan).

EVALUATION OF OLD TIBETAN TEXTS

A list of lexemes to be examined was created on the basis of the Old Tibetan texts evaluated
lexicologically during the preparatory phase. The semantic range of the vocabulary under study is
ensured by the selection of a differentiated source material. The primary corpus includes Old
Tibetan writings on the following sample topics: history (e.g., PT 1287, ITJ 750, Or. 8212.187, PT 1288,
ST Treaty), public administration (ITJ 750, Or. 8212.187, PT 1288), religion (PT 1285), ritual (PT 1042),
mythology (Rkoṅ po), and biography (PT 1287, Źol rdo riṅ). These texts were transliterated on the
basis of the available scans in case of manuscripts (cf. IDP, Gallica, Artstor), compared with the
existing transliterations (e.g., with OTDO or DOTSON 2009), translated, and evaluated. With regard to
the inscriptions, the texts as published by RICHARDSON (1985) and LI/COBLIN (1987) were accepted for
further analysis.

LEXICOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF COMPOUNDS

During the preliminary work it was established that Old Tibetan compounds often contained in one
of their members morphological units that seemed to have been lost from the language as
independent morphemes already by the time of the Tibetan Empire, cf. źa in źa sṅa or źa ’briṅ. Beside
conducting a semantic analysis of Old Tibetan vocabulary, the research focused on compounds since
another principal goal of the work consists in describing the rules of word formation of a
morphologically definable group of lexemes.

The first list of hypothetical compounds extracted from the primary corpus comprised
approximately 1.800 lexical units. Subsequently, it was estimated that a representative group of
compounds most valuable for the investigation should eventually encompass about three to four
hundred formations.1 Those were selected according to the strict criteria:

single instance is not evidence” (SINCLAIR 2004:119) in many cases morphological and historical analyses were given
priority.
1
For the sake of succinctness only 131 of the analysed compounds were selected to be included in the present doctoral
thesis. The lexemes chosen constitute, in the author’s opinion, a group of most convincingly analysed formations.
 10

1. Occurrence in the Tibetan literature: hapax legomena, and furthermore, compounds that were
attested so far exclusively in Old Tibetan sources or sparsely in later literature and those
which are known only dialectally;
2. Semantics: words with previously unregistered meaning or in an idiosyncratic usage;
3. Morphology: compounds that preserve archaic or deviating forms of a morpheme;
4. General linguistics: lexemes that for other reasons (syntax, etymology, etc.) are considered as
being of special interest for Tibetan linguistics;
5. Cognitive contribution: lexemes that are of particular interest and significance for the
understanding and study of the Old Tibetan language, society, culture, religion, or
governance.

Excluded from the outset from the lexicological analysis were polysyllabic formations such as
compounded honorifics (sku tshe, dbu rmog, etc.), new Buddhist terminology (e.g., dge sloṅ),
geographical compounds (e.g., bod yul, ’jaṅ yul, lha ri, dbyar mo thaṅ), loan translations (chos ’khor, gnas
brtan, etc.), and of course loan words (e.g., ke ke ru, kha gan).1 OT compounds that in the author’s
opinion have already been sufficiently and convincingly examined were likewise excluded from the
survey. Thus, only lexemes, our understanding of which is still not satisfactory, with regard to their
semantics, morphology, or any other aspect, were accepted for the analysis.2

The lexemes extracted from thematically differentiated texts were first examined lexicologically in
due consideration of social and cultural context in which they appear to have been used. The latter
point was secured through the inclusion of further Old Tibetan material from the secondary corpus.

The lexicological examination of a compound begins, if possible or necessary, in most cases with a
contextual analysis in which a given formation is found in its linguistic context, i.e., its attested
syntactic functions as well as collocations and idiomatic expressions containing the lexeme are
considered. As advertised in the motto to the lexicological part of the thesis, it is believed that,
although words are major meaningful units of a text, they do occur in a discourse and are not
isolated as one knows them from a dictionary; hence the importance assigned to the contextual
analysis of the compounds in the present work. Nonetheless, the reader should keep in mind that
every meaning proposed for a Tibetan compound, apart from being arbitrary as far as it results from

1
Geographical compounds as well as some other compounds containing proper names are shortly discussed in the
chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan, the subsection Classification/Syntax/Subsumptive.
2
Although some of the examined lexemes have already been discussed by other scholars, if their conclusions are in some
respect perceived by the author as unconvincing, insufficient, or just erroneous, another solution to the understanding of
the respective compound is proposed without, however, going into dispute with previous hypotheses. This approach
results from a necessity of conciseness required in a lexicographic work. Arguments of other scholars are shortly
presented in the Lexicographic section of the respective lemma.
By analogy, if some facets of a compound, for instance, its meaning, are well known and accepted in the scholarly
literature, although there is still some disagreement or ambiguity concerning, e.g., its morphology, only the arguable
aspects are raised; cf. rje blas, which is now universally acknowledged to have denoted “(official) service” even though
scholars who previously analysed the compound differed in their opinions on its underlying structure.
 11

a subjective decision of the author, is at best an approximation mirroring the current state of the
corpus that can change as soon as new texts or attestations have been included.

If the explanation of a lexeme does require it, a more in-depth discussion of the structure of the
lexicon in terms of semantic change, word families, semantic fields or native vs. borrowed
vocabulary is incorporated in the lemma. In a very few special cases reconstruction of an etymon of
a simple lexeme is tentatively put forward. It basically regards the internal reconstruction based on
modern spoken forms and assumed word families, although sometimes lexemes from other cognate
languages are consulted in order to establish the origins and the basic meaning of a root. However,
it should be stressed that the author is conscious of the fact that, on the one hand, the history or the
form of a lexical unit do not always determine its current attested meaning and, on the other hand,
the etymological form may have become blurred by its semantic or formal proximity to other
lexemes. In consequence, the underlying structure reconstructed for each compound, apart from
rare situations in which a given phrase is in fact documented1, should be seen as a theoretical
construct rather than a linguistic-historical reality. Besides, it is to be stressed that not all possible
hypotheses are regarded for every compound. If not absolutely necessary, only one, linguistically
most convincing, most simple in argumentation, and most probable hypothesis is being scrutinised.
Alternative or additional hypotheses for which the evidence at hand seems less significant or has
less explanatory value are, for the sake of conciseness, not being discussed.2 Thus, a reconstruction
of the underlying structure of a compound is proposed only after its semantic prosody and the
contextual meaning have been examined, the syntactic function(s) in a sentence ascertained, its
constituents identified and the syntactic relationship between them established.

The reader will surely notice that a considerable number of compounds is explained by referring to
the notion of ‘popular etymology’ or, more commonly used in the present work, ‘folk
etymologisation’. The latter term is understood as denoting a process of modifying a spelling (or a
pronunciation) of a word on a false analogy so as to make the original word resemble another, more
commonly used, more familiar or one stemming from an esteemed register (cf. rgyal thag brgyad <
*rgya thag brgyad). Thus, its main motivation is directed towards achieving morphological (and
eventually semantic) transparency.3 However, the author is fully conscious of the danger lurking
behind the (over-) usage of ‘folk etymologisation’ as an important explanatory framework. Its
greatest flaw is the resort to analogy defined as a cognitive process of hardly identifiable
psycholinguistic motivation, a process that occurs idiosyncratically.

1
Cf., for instance, dgra thabs < dgra chos kyi thabs, mṅa’ dbaṅ < mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ, or mjal dum < mjald ciṅ ’dum.
2
By way of example, the German compound Parkplatz “car park” is commonly understood and explained as “zum Parken
bestimmter Platz” (cf. DWDS: http://www.dwds.de/?qu=parkplatz; 13.01.2015) and there is no need to propose other, less
probable readings, like, e.g., *“a place where a park is planned” or *“a place where a park is located”.
3
According to GEEREARTS, “A morphologically complex word is semantically transparent if its meaning can be derived from
the meaning of its constituent parts and the regular semantic aspects of morphological structure.” (2007:121n26).
 12

It is conceivable that this very process continued to be particularly productive in the period when
the language was for the first time committed to paper and shortly afterwards before a need for
orthographic standardisation arose and the influence of spoken language on written forms was still
significant. Furthermore, insufficient knowledge of the language, that might be suspected in the
multilingual context of Central Asiatic oases, could also have triggered folk etymology - a hypothesis
supported by the fact that at least some of the documents preserved in Dunhuang were composed
and written down by Chinese, i.e. non-native speakers of Tibetan.1

RESULTS
The results of the survey are presented in two independent approaches, as a linguistic analysis and
as a dictionary.

Typology of compounds, morphonological changes within the formations, and syntactic rules
governing compounding in Old Tibetan are discussed together in the chapter Compounding in Old
Tibetan to which the reader is advised to refer in search of an explanation, or for other examples of
a concrete linguistic process mentioned in a lemma. For the sake of succinctness and in order to
omit redundancy, typological information concerning compounding is removed from the lemmata
and collected in the chapter on morphology.

For clarity, the information on individual lexemes is presented in the form of structured lemmata
(for details see below) that constitute the dictionary part of the thesis.

Additionally, in order to facilitate the orientation within the bulk of linguistic data, an Index of OT
morphemes, an Index of lexemes from other Asiatic languages and a Quotation index have been
attached.

MACRO- AND MICROSTRUCTURE

For the presentation of the lexicological results of the survey a model of a strict alphabetical
macrostructure without grouping has been chosen.2 This means that the lemmata, listed according
to the alphabetical order of the Tibetan language, are equal in their formal status.

In the following, the microstructure of a single lemma consisting of six sections (1. Lemma section
[1]; 2. Formal section [2]; 3. Lexicographic section [3]; 4. Analytical section [4-9]; 5. Lexicological

1
Interestingly enough, regarding Classical Tibetan texts, TERJÉK observes that “[t]he mistakes occur mainly in the Chinese
xylographs, the engravers of which did not know Tibetan.” (1972:40n3).
Other factors, like the fall of the Tibetan Empire and Buddhist influence on Old Tibetan vocabulary, are the subject of the
author’s paper “Erneuerbare Wörter: Alttibetischer Wortschatz im neuen kulturellen Umfeld. Sprachwandel durch
Übersetzungskultur” (forthcoming a); cf. also s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad. On the multilingual environment of Dunhuang see,
e.g., TAKEUCHI 1995:133f. In an earlier paper, TAKEUCHI writes that “Chinese inhabitants who were in charge of copying
Buddhist sūtras in Tibetan also acted as scribes of Tibetan contracts.” (1992:781n26).
2
Cf. SVENSÈN 2009:371f.
 13

section [10]; 6. Text section [11])1 shall be introduced, illustrated with the example of the lemma kom
tse:
1. Lexeme 1 kom tse

2.1 OT variants [V] [-]

2.2 CT form CT kom rtse
2.3 Dialectal data D [-]

3. Lexicographic notes
3.1 Non-western dictionaries
3.2 Tibetan works
3.3 Western dictionaries
3.4 Western works
DSM:9b: ko ba’i khug ma (s.v. kom rtse).
BDN:368n24: khrab (s.v. kom rtse); BTK:73n9: ko khug (s.v. kom rtse); BNY:140n57: ko khug
(s.v. kom rtse); STK:153n43: ko khug.
[-]
DTH:143: le tanneur; la fourrure; DOTSON.2013a:283: armor.

4. Underlying structure [S] [-]

5. Etymology [E] *ko ba mtshe “rawhide [that is like one’s own] twin”
6. Meaning(s) [M] (N) armour (made of rawhide)
7. Grammatical forms [F] [-]
8. Classification [C]
SEM
8.1 Semantic classification endocentric
SYNT
8.2 Syntactic classification attributive/appositional/comparative
STRC
8.3 Morphological classification [N+N]
9. Related compounds [R] [-]

10. Lexicological analysis
[A] Few other compounds are attested in lexicographic
sources that share some morphological traits with kom tse;
namely, their second member consists of the syllable -ts(h)e and
the final consonant of the first constituent is -m; cf.:
skyim tse “scissors” (Gs:71c);
grim tse “scissors” (J:77a);
grum tse “a thick woolen blanket” (J:78a);
cem tse “scissors” (J:142a);
cham tshe “cloak” (Gs:358a; = cam tse “sm. cham tshe”, Gs:330b);
jem tse “scissors” (Gs:391a);
phyam tse “(rñiṅ) gos kyi bye brag zla gam” (BTC:1738a);
tsem tse “sm. jem tse” (Gs:846c);
tshem tshe “go khrab” (DSM:725b);
yam tshe (PT 1285:v136) “companion?”.

1
The numbers in square brackets refer to layers within the sections. For the sections assigned in the microstructure
compare SVENSÉN 2009:345ff.
 14

Apart from the morphological parallels, all the compounds

listed above reveal some similarity with regard to their
semantics. To wit, they denote objects that either consist of two
identical parts (like scissors, tweezers, etc.) or are perceived as a
kind of substitute made from material that is referred to by the
first member of the compound (“armour” < lit. “hide-twin”;
“cloak” < lit. “fabric-twin”, etc.). The underlying phrases are
reconstructed in both cases as appositional, however, with
diverging semantic interpretations: 1”X that are twins” (proper
appositional) vs. 2”X that [like is its own] twin” (comparative
appositional) respectively.

Thus, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the

compound in question as *ko ba mtshe “rawhide (i.e. untanned
skin) [that is like one’s own] twin”. The following
morphonological processes are assumed to have taken place:
*ko ba mtshe > *ko mtshe (compounding) > *kom tshe (leftward
migration) > kom tse (deaspiration).1

11. Quotations from Old Tibetan texts
[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa // pho ma ʼi ni ʼbroṅ bkum ba / lho śiṅ ni (241)
smyug mo rgyal // lcags kyis ni ma dral na // smyug gis ni re myi pugs //
rgod kyis ni (242) ma bsgron na / ʼbroṅ la ni re myi ʼjen // ṅas po ni ra yul
gyi / kom tse ni gzig mo (243) rgyal // khab kyis ni ma pug na / rgyus kyis ni
re myi pugs / rgyus kyis ni ma (244) draṅs na / kom tse ni ñid myi ʼjo (PT
1287:240-4)
“A year ago, two years ago, formerly, an immature wild yak that [one]
killed - the tree of the south, bamboo, was victorious [against it]. If
[one] did not tear [it] open with an iron [tool], the bamboo would not
pierce anything. If [one] did not cover [it] with [feathers of] a bird of
prey, [it] would never reach the wild yak. Regarding the armour from
Ṅas po, the goat land, porcupine is victorious [in fight against it]. If
[one] did not pierce [it] with a needle [at first], [it] could never be
pierced with a thread. If [one] did not draw [it] tight with the thread,
the armour could not be accomplished by itself.”

The lemma section contains two elements: a number (1) and a lexeme (kom tse). In order to facilitate
the use of indices (see below) the lexemes are consecutively numbered. Each lexeme is written in a
bold text for the purpose of typographical highlighting.

1
The transparency of the present exposition required some details to be omitted from the Lexicological section of the
lemma. For the complete analysis see s.v. kom tse in the lexicological part of the thesis.
 15

The formal section encompasses information regarding the attested variants (Old [2.1], Classical
[2.2], and Modern Tibetan [2.3]) of the lexeme. Due to the fact that the primary aim of the present
research project consists in surveying the Old Tibetan lexicon, the Old Tibetan variants of the
lexeme are marked in bold type, [V] < ‘variant’, and accompanied by the reference data on their
localisation. Additionally, a rule explaining the sound change is provided in a simplified form
allowing cross-referencing to the respective paragraph in the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan;
cf., for instance, the [V]-layer from the lemma mun mag:
[V] mun dmag (ITJ 740:337, 339; Or.15000/329:r1; hypercorrection).
In case a compound is documented in more than one orthographic variant (e.g., skya sa ~ rkya sa),
the one that stands morphologically closest to the reconstructed etymological form of the lexeme
(here: skya sa) is cited in the lemma section and the remaining one(s) is/are to be found registered as
its OT variant(s). The classical as well as the modern variants of a compound are extracted from the
available lexicographic sources.

The lexicographic section [3] furnishes the reader with the most important semantic and, in special
cases, morphological information that could be collected from the previous studies of other
scholars. Four groups of sources, presented each in a typographically separated paragraph, are
incorporated in this section: [3.1] Non-western dictionaries including monolingual native Tibetan as
well as Tibetan-Sanskrit and Tibetan-Mongolian dictionaries; [3.2] Commentaries of Tibetan
authors; [3.3] Western dictionaries; [3.4] Works of Western authors. All the sources are listed
chronologically within the respective group. Apart from strictly philological or linguistic analyses,
the last group of works also encompasses general studies concerning Tibetan culture and history in
so far as they could enhance our knowledge and understanding of the respective word or a notion
connoted by it. Alongside the meanings, hypotheses concerning the etymology as well as
morphological analyses of a lexeme as proposed by previous authors are likewise noted here.
However, the criteria set for the choice of compounds (see the paragraph Lexicological evaluation of
compounds) already predict that a vast majority of the examined lexemes is not at all or only
sparsely documented in the secondary literature. As a consequence, the lexicographic section is
either completely absent or considerably reduced in many lemmata.

The sections discussed hitherto comprise exclusively already known information that has been
gathered by the author from the available secondary sources published in the course of few hundred
years by other students and scholars. The presentation of these data is supposed to give the reader a
general overview of the work done in the field thus far, as well as to serve as a benchmark for the
present survey. This approach is justified by the fact that the data stem from works scattered
through frequently hardly accessible or highly specialised publications, like those on historical
Tibetan weaponry or medical plants.
 16

The layers [4] - [11] (i.e. the analytical [4] - [9], lexicological [10], and the text section [11]) constitute
the principal part of the research project and thereby also of each lemma. Within these sections the
proper lexicological research is carried out and the conclusions presented; the layers [4] - [9]
summarise the results of the analysis undertaken in the layer [10].

The layer [S] (< ‘underlying structure’) is provided if the underlying structure of a compound is
assumed to have been subject to further derivational processes that have eventually led up to the
respective compound. This concerns essentially the classes of verbal incorporating and exocentric
compounds. In other cases, the underlying structure [S] is identical with the reconstructed
etymology [E] of a compound and thus omitted from the lemma.

The layer [5], marked with [E] < ‘etymology’, contains information concerning the reconstructed
underlying structure of a compound together with the proposed etymological meaning. The
reconstructed lexemes are given Classical Tibetan forms even though these may differ from the
attested Old Tibetan forms. The same holds true for the reconstruction of case particles in the
underlying structure of the compounds.1

In the following with [M] < ‘meaning’ indicated part [6], the actual meaning of a compound as
ascertained for its OT occurrences is put forward. In addition, the information concerning the word
class of a compound is supplied in brackets.

The next layer, [7] = [F] < ‘form’, provides the reader with other attested grammatical forms of a
lexeme. This layer concerns compounds, conjugated forms of which could be gathered from OT
sources, cf. rṅo thog and its V2 rṅo thogs.

The layer [8] ([C] < ‘classification’) furnishes details classifying a compound according to three
criteria.2 First, every compound is classified semantically (abbr.: SEM) as either endo-, eso-, or
exocentric. Further given is the syntactic relationship (SYNT) underlying the surface structure of each
compound as reconstructed in the course of the research. Finally, in the structural segment (STRC), a
schematic formal representation of the underlying structure as reconstructed in [E] or, if included,
[S], is given. The head member of the compound, if present, is highlighted by using bold type. As an
example, the layer [8] from the lemma zaṅ yag is quoted below:
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[A+A]

1
The author is fully aware of the danger lurking behind this approach. Nevertheless, it is deemed justified in so far as not
all unbound lexemes are attested in Old Tibetan. Besides, many of the attested OT compounds have undergone word-
internal changes (for details see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan) and their constituents are not documented
separately or at least not in the form occurring in the very compound. Thus, in order to avoid the inconsistency of giving
the reconstructed units once in the Old once in the Classical Tibetan orthographical form, the author decided to provide
the Classical Tibetan reconstruction for all lexemes. By analogy, because the rules of assimilation for the case particles
differ from text to text, they are reconstructed in the underlying structure according to the rules of Classical Tibetan.
2
For details on the criteria according to which compounds are classified in the present work see the chapter
Compounding in Old Tibetan.
 17

The summarising layers [4] - [9] terminate with information on other examined compounds that
share one or more lexical morphemes of identical meaning with the compound surveyed in the
respective lemma. Thus, [R] < ‘related’ is the label given to this segment pointing to the historical
relationship between two or more formations investigated in the present work.

Thereafter, the exposition focuses on the actual analysis of a compound (layer [10], [A] <
‘lexicological analysis’) and thus forms the principal part of each lemma. The main concern in this
segment pertains to the lexicological study of compounds involving in particular lexical semantics
and morphology. Occasionally (i.e. if necessary or of avail), also the issue of an hypothetical
historical relationship between lexemes and thereby of their etymology is addressed. In addition,
various information, provided, for instance, by anthropology or religious studies, that can enhance
our comprehension of the respective term, has been integrated within this segment of the lemma.
However, for the sake of succinctness, the explanations are intended to be as concise as possible,
restricted solely to data directly related to the presented line of argumentation.

The eleventh and last section, [T] < ‘text’, comprises textual evidences from Old Tibetan sources that
demonstrate the discourse context of the respective compound. To this end the use is made of texts
from the primary as well as the secondary corpus. In order to document the compound within a
syntactic frame and thus to capture its linguistic context, preferably complete sentences are cited,
inclusive of a translation and, if necessary, a syntactic annotation. The translations were made as
literal as possible with the aim, however, not to threaten their intelligibility. The author strived for
furnishing the reader with all OT attestations of a given compound that could be localised except for
a small number of better explored compounds (like rje blas) that have already been treated in depth
by other scholars. In the latter case, reference to further occurrences is provided in a footnote at the
end of the [T] section. The order of quotations within the section parallels the order of texts listed in
the Quotation index.

STATISTICS
The following table demonstrates the frequency of overall textual occurrences of the examined
compounds in the available OT sources:
Hapax legomena 37
Dis legomena 29
3-5 33
5< 32

LEXICOLOGICAL ANALYSIS VS. HISTORICAL FACTS AND ETHNOGRAPHIC REALITY

Since the main object of the study remains the lexicological analysis of the OT vocabulary and thus
the work is primarily concerned with the language of the respective documents, social and
administrative functions of offices denoted by some of the analysed terms are not at all, or only
 18

peripherally, examined. Neither is it the goal of the present study to offer an encyclopaedic
knowledge on every notion or product of Tibetan culture denoted by the analysed lexemes. The
same should be remarked about the historicity of the events described in the sources; equal status is
given to, e.g., mythical narrations and historical accounts. The sole concern of the author consists in
supplying a convincing lexicological explanation of linguistic units defined as compounds. This
approach is justified by the fact that, as far as the author is aware, no comprehensive large-scale
archaeological excavations were done in Central Tibet that would enhance our understanding of the
material culture in Tibetan Empire. The OT documents remain our sole authority on the earliest
period of Tibetan polity, and philology and linguistics the only branches of science that provide us
with tools for studying those.1

Nevertheless, every text is embedded in a certain social setting that should be recognised in order to
make the text a meaningful unit of a discourse. The more sociolinguistic information we can gather
the better our understanding of the conditions, i.e. the context, in which the texts were created or
circulated. Thus, information concerning different aspects of social life on the Tibetan Plateau and
among Tibetan speaking Himalayan societies of modern times is sporadically used to compensate
for the lack of archaeological finds from the period of the Tibetan Empire. It should be stressed,
however, that no straightforward continuity is claimed between the social context of the period
documented in the OT sources and modern times. Neither should the geographic factor be
neglected; Dunhuang, from which the vast majority of our sources comes, is over 1.200 km away as
the crow flies from the region that was the cradle of the Tibetan Empire, i.e. the Yarlung valley, and
the ethnographic data used in the present work comes from area covering the Tibetan Plateau and
Himalayas.

GENERAL PHILOLOGICAL REMARKS

In the present work, the Tibetan script is transliterated according to the principles put forward in
HAHN 1996:1. If not otherwise stated, passages quoted from OT sources were transliterated by the
author on the basis of scans that were rendered available by the IDP, Gallica and Artstor. No special
signs are used for transliteration of Old Tibetan texts; this concerns letters as well as punctuation
marks. Accordingly, the so-called ‘reversed gi gu’, encountered frequently in the analysed
documents, is transliterated as a regular gi gu.2 The Old Tibetan orthography is strictly followed. No

1
Our knowledge on other domains of early Tibetan culture has increased significantly in the last years due to the
archaeological and art-historical studies of scholars like Mark ALDENDERFER, Guntram HAZOD, and Amy HELLER.
2
Although, according to our current state of knowledge, the ‘reversed gi gu’ had no phonemic status (cf. MILLER
1966:260ff., TERJÉK 1969:292, ULVING 1972:210ff., RÓNA-TAS 1992:698-9, but see LAUFER (1914a:53-4n1, 84-5) who suggested the
relevance of the grapheme in historical reconstruction of ST), in the author’s opinion there are hints that in some cases it
was used to replace two consecutive ‘i’ vowels resulting from a genitive particle being added to an open syllable ending
already in -i; thus -i’i > -ī (‘ī’ = ‘reversed gi gu’); for the employment of the ‘reversed gi gu’ in transcriptions of the Sanskrit
long vowel ī see PELLIOT 1915:2.
Namely, we observe in the OTA I in phrases introducing a new entry (the general structure: ‘XGEN lo la [bab ste]’, lit.
“[having fallen] on the year of the X”) that whenever the year of the dog (khyi) is referred to, instead of the expected
 19

distinction is made in the transliteration between a single and a double tsheg. Punctuation marks
other than tsheg and śad (transliterated as a space and a slash respectively) are not accounted for.

If not otherwise remarked, all the passages from Tibetan texts (Old as well as Classical) were
translated by the author. In two cases Tibetan passages have been left without translation: 1. if a
quotation provided in the [A] section of a lemma should only demonstrate a particular structure of a
clause or sentence as compared with other constructions; 2. if the respective passage was too
obscure to the author but nevertheless contained an important term.

Sigla of OT manuscripts were converted as to conform to the current standards, i.e. Or.15000/150
instead of M.Tagh.a.V.0015 or ITN 417 for M.I.viii.43.

Critical aparatus:
[---] Text damaged
[...] Text omitted in the transliteration
[b] Text amended
du Part deleted by JB
*...* Tentative translation of a passage that has been incorrectly transmitted
?bgyis? Transliteration uncertain
?urgently? Translation uncertain
!XXX Grammatically impossible translation

*khyi’i, the Annals regularly read khyī (i.e. with the ‘reversed gi gu’), although in case of any other year the name of the year
is clearly added a genitive particle, cf. phagi, byi ba’i, glaṅ gyi, yos bu’i, etc. This usage of the ‘reversed gi gu’ is attested in six
instances (PT 1288:17; ITJ 750:60, 127, 175, 224, 303) as opposed to two occurrences of khyī’i (PT 1288:41; ITJ 750:94) and one
occurrence of khyī’ī (ITJ 750:268).
Another example of a similar usage of the ‘reversed gi gu’ concerns toponyms that end with the vowel ‘i’ and are used in
genitive to modify another NP, cf., for instance, skyī gliṅ riṅs tsal (ITJ 750:112), skyī byar līṅs tsal (ITJ 750:304), skyī bra ma taṅ
(ITJ 750:109), and skyī lhas gaṅ tsal (ITJ 750:246). These can be juxtaposed with, on the one hand, the same place names
deprived of the modifier *skyi’i: glīṅ riṅs tsal (ITJ 750:154), byar līṅs tsal (ITJ 750:149, 250), bra ma taṅ (ITJ 750:95), lhas gaṅ tsal
(ITJ 750:148-9, 163, 168, 172, 178, 181, 235, 263, 266), and, on the other hand, with other analogously formed toponyms like
glagi pu chuṅ (ITJ 750:61, 92, 118), glagi ryu bye (ITJ 750:71-2), rtsaṅ gyi gliṅ kar tshal (ITJ 750:106). Both groups of NPs
corroborate the reading of skyī as going back to *skyi’i.
The same device of writing -ī instead of *-i’i can be observed also in the OTC, cf. ldoṅ prom gyi ral gyī mdor cod for *ldoṅ
prom gyi ral gyi’i mdor cod, lit. “sheaths of (i.e. for) swords [made] of white copper”. Thus, a tentative hypothesis could be
put forward that, under certain circumstances, the ‘i’ vowel marked with the ‘reversed gi gu’ did indeed possess a
phonemic status of a long or at least lengthened ‘i’.
Besides, as a preliminary analysis of the OTA I has shown, the ‘reversed gi gu’ seems to have been used to mark the first
vowel ‘i’ occurring in a line of the manuscripts; on this usage see also MILLER 1966b:264. This rule is confirmed for 278 out of
296 lines (ca. 93 %; the first eleven lines of PT 1288 were excluded from the calculation due to the fact that their beginnings
are missing); in fourteen cases (PT 1288:26, 28, 34; ITJ 750:58, 85, 93, 129, 154, 172, 182, 201, 205, 208, 238) it does not apply
and the further four lines do not possess words with the vowel ‘i’. To support the latter finding one could juxtapose the
following two identic phrases from the ST Treaty:
blon po che phra mjal dum gyī (2) gtsīgs ’dzin pa la gtogs pa (ST Treaty S 1-2)
blon po che phra mjal (2) dum gyī gtsigs ’dzīn pa la gtogs (3) pa (ST Treaty N 1-2)
In the first passage, it is the syllable gtsīgs (with the ‘reversed gi gu’) that occurs at the beginning of the second line,
whereas in the second passage the first syllable of the second line with the vowel i is gyi, hence written with the ‘reversed
gi gu’.
The problem of the ‘reversed gi gu’ will be addressed in more detail in a forthcoming work of the author that is planned
to contain a text linguistic analysis and a text grammar of the OTA I.
 20

COMPOUNDING IN OLD TIBETAN

 21

The study of compounds and compounding in OT provided to the reader in the following is not
intended as a coherent model within a concrete theoretical framework that could be generalised to
apply also to other languages, whether Tibetan or not. Rather, it attempts to supply the reader with
the most comprehensive description feasible at the moment that is primarily based on the material
collected in the corpus. In this respect, it draws on various theoretical approaches in order to
present OT compounds in the most adequate and exhaustive way possible.

In order to facilitate the navigation within the present chapter a detailed table of contents is
provided below mirroring the levels of organisation of the chapter:

Compound and compounding. An attempt at definition 23

Headedness 30
Classification 31
Semantics 32
Endocentric 32
Esocentric 32
Exocentric 34
Proper exocentric 34
Possessive 35
Syntax 36
Subordinate 36
Determinative 36
Pleonastic 37
Converbial 37
Coordinate 38
Syntactic classification 38
Additively coordinate 38
Alternatively coordinate 39
Adjectival 39
Numeral 40
Semantic classification 40
Internal semantic relations 40
Synonymic 40
Bilingual synonymic 41
Antonymous 42
Co-hyponymic 42
External semantic relations 43
Copulative 43
Generic 44
Hyperonymic 44
Collective 45
Abstract 45
Attributive 45
Proper attributive 45
Appositional 45
Comparative 46
Subsumptive 46
Incorporating 47
Verbal 48
Subject-incorporating 49
Object- incorporating 49
Adjunct- incorporating 49
Predicative- incorporating 49
Adjectival 49
 22

Metacompounds 50
Formal classes 50
Form changes 52
Sound changes 53
Elision 53
Deaspiration 55
Assimilation 56
Consonant 56
Progressive 56
Regressive 57
Vowel 57
Progressive 58
Regressive 58
Voicing 59
Consonant migration 60
Leftward 60
Rightward 61
Devoicing 61
Dittography 62
Hypercorrection 62
Nasalisation 62
Epenthesis 63
Haplography 63
Alternations 63
Scribal errors 64
Morphological changes 65
Folk etymology 65
Clipping 67
Suffix -s 68
Collective 68
Past tense 68
-s with attributive compounds 68
Possessive 69
Lexicalising 70
Linking elements 70
-b- 70
-l- 74
Inflection 74
Paraphrase 74
Word-forming processes on compounds 75
Compounding 75
Truncation 75
Derivation 75
Nominal particle -pa 76
Nominal particle -ma 76
Clipping 76
Reduplication 77
 23

COMPOUND AND COMPOUNDING. AN ATTEMPT AT DEFINITION

According to the common linguistic understanding, compounding is “the process of concatenating
two existing stems from the lexicon of a language to form a new, more complex stem which has the
potential to enter the lexicon as a stable morphological unit” (OLSEN 2000:898a-b).1 Thus, in the most
general terms, compound is a result of the very process of compounding. An Old Tibetan compound,
which due to the language-specific morphosyntactic rules of Tibetan languages ought to be defined
independently of the existing definitions that were coined mainly for Indo-European languages,
expresses the following salient characteristic features2:
- it is a complex lexical and morphological unit;
- it expresses one coherent concept (exception: coordinate copulative compounds);3
- its constituents represent at least two distinct words;4
- it consists of at least two syllables none of which is a syllabic derivative morpheme;5

1
Two main objections based on the examined corpus of OT could be made to this definition: there exist compounds of
more than two stems (cf. notes on recursive patterns below and the subsection Classification/Metacompounds), as well as
such, constituents of which belong to two different languages (cf. the subsection Classification/Syntax/Bilingual
synonymic).
Internal references to the subsections within the present chapter are shortened for the sake of transparency to only
three levels: the first two and the one concerning the proper subsection; i.e. when a reference is made to the subsection on
copulative compounds it will contain only the following elements: Classification/Syntax/Copulative instead of the
complete path Classification/Syntax/Coordinate/Semantic classification/External semantic relations/Copulative.
2
Each of the criteria should be understood as indispensable. Taken alone, none of them suffices to distinguish compounds
in OT from other units, phrases or derived forms. The difficulty in providing a definition of compound lies partly in the
fact that it seems to occupy a place between grammar (morphology and syntax) and lexicon displaying features of both.
There is also a growing consensus in the linguistic literature that “compounds might be considered halfway between
morphology and syntax” (SCALISE/BISETTO 2009:34). A similar position is held by WÄLCHLI who regards coordinate
compounds as “intermediate between syntax and morphology” (2005:90) and proposes to treat them as a lexical class
(ibid.). Compare hereto also VOLLMANN “Komposition liegt somit ein bißchen zwischen den ganz typischen
morphologischen Operationen (Derivation und Flexion), bei denen ein freies und ein unfreies Morphem zusammentreffen,
und der Syntax, in der nur freie Einheiten zusammenkommen.“ (2001:106).
Although the following list as well as the subsequent discussion of classes of compounds and changes within them are
based solely on OT material analysed in the lexicological part of the present work, most of the conclusions, or probably
even all, can be drawn for the Classical language and modern dialects as well. However, one can expect that the latter two
groups of languages evidence some additional types of compounds due to the intense contacts with, on the one hand,
Sanskrit and, on the other hand, Chinese as well as Hindi which might have also contributed to sound changes in the
existing lexemes. Besides, the most significant difference between identifying and defining compounds of the written
Tibetan languages and those of modern spoken dialects consists in the role that stress and/or tone contour may play in
the latter group. Nevertheless, the linguistic analysis presented here is expected to prove essential in recognising the main
features of Tibetan compounds and to contain the core information on compounding in Tibetan languages in general.
3
This must not be understood as implying unconditionally a high lexicalisation of OT compounds for, as LIEBER/ŠTEKAUER
remark, “[...] the more productive the process of compounding in a language, the less chance that individual compounds
will be lexicalized.” (2009:7). This is exactly what we observe in OT; in plenty of cases no significant difference in semantics
can be established between a compound and its underlying phrase. This feature of Tibetan compounds has caused BEYER to
distinguish between ‘clips’ and compounds according to the degree of lexicalisation (1992:92ff.). Thus, many of his ‘clips’
are in fact compounds as defined in the present work. On productivity of compounding in OT see below.
4
This condition is introduced deliberately to exclude the so-called reduplications which, in author’s opinion, represent
yet another means of derivation in Tibetan languages and are subject to distinct rules of word-formation. A similar
position is held also by WÄLCHLI (2005:17) as against, for instance, VOLLMANN 2001:113ff., VOLLMANN 2006:87f., VOLLMANN 2009
(cf. “[reduplication] forms part of the wide range of possibilities of endo- and exocentric compounding and clipping of
words”, p.115), CECCAGNO/BASCIANO 2009:482, SCALISE/BISETTO 2009:52, and LIEBER 2009b:364-5. Reduplications may, however,
be used in compounding. A single OT compound has been identified in the present corpus as formed from two
reduplicated stems, for details see s.v. zaṅ yag.
I deliberately use here the term ‘word’ instead of ‘lexeme’; for details see below.
5
The additional condition specifying that none of the constituents of a two-syllable lexical unit is allowed to be a
derivative morpheme is needed in the light of the next condition of (historically) freely occurring morphemes since it is
well known that at least some of the nominal particles developed historically from unbound morphemes.
 24

- its underlying lexical units are (historically) freely occurring morphemes;1

- its constituents fill in one syntactic slot within a phrase, a clause, or a sentence;
- its constituents are synchronically inseparable;
- it possesses no overt word-internal grammatical marking;2
- at least one of its constituents shall represent a truncated form of the underlying word that
can occur only in derived formations;
- the order of its constituents corresponds to the order of words in the underlying phrase;3
- its head is determined by the character of the underlying phrase (exception: exocentric
compounds);
- its head does not have to be realised on the surface;
- only its head can be additionally modified in a phrase;
- only its head can take an argument position in more complicated structures like (nominal or
verbal) phrases, collocations, or idioms;
- it may undergo different sound or morphological changes, mainly word-internally or in the
second syllable, that are otherwise not attested in syntax (for details see the section Form
changes)4;
- its stress remains unmarked in text.5

1
There is of course a logical flaw in the assumption that a compound must consist of at least two freely occurring lexical
morphemes since, if those occur in a compound they are not unbound anymore and there is always a danger that a freely
occurring morpheme is not identical with the one attested in the compound. This is even more obvious for Tibetan
compounds in which the underlying words are by rule represented only partly in compounds.
The condition of unbound lexical morphemes occurring freely in the history of the language is crucial for characterising
those of the OT compounds that contain some archaic elements not attested independently in any of the available OT
texts, like, for instance, źa- in źa ’briṅ (for details see s.v.). This condition does not concern, however, non-lexical units
(apart from derivative morphemes like nominal particles) that can also form part of compounds, cf. the elucidation of pho
ma below.
Another problem that should be addressed in this context is the relation between synchronic and diachronic
perspectives in analysing OT compounds. It can be illustrated with the well-known example of English cranberry or Tibetan
źa ’briṅ. Their first elements, cran- and źa-, are unanalysable synchronically, i.e. are not attested as independent
morphemes in the respective phases of the languages. By means of historical reconstruction, however, it was possible to
identify Tibetan źa- and interpret its function and meaning in the compound źa ’briṅ. This example represents a typical
situation in which “the existence of a diachronic shift results in a synchronic cline” (KASTOVSKY 2009:327).
On the other hand, the corpus on which the present study is based comprises texts composed over a time span of
approximately 200 years. This factor alone necessitates a freer treatment of the categories of synchrony and diachrony in
the present work.
2
It does not matter whether the grammatical marking has been omitted due to metrical rules or not. In every such case, if
the remaining conditions are fulfilled, the resulting formation is a compound.
3
Thus, the syntactic criterion proposed for some languages that one can identify two or more lexemes as a compound “if
a sequence of lexemes displays an order that cannot be generated for syntactic phrases” (LIEBER/ŠTEKAUER 2009:12) cannot
be applied for Tibetan.
4
For a preliminary list of changes that may affect the second syllable of CT compounds see TERJÉK 1972:41n7.
5
Stress remains unmarked in OT texts. Nevertheless, its hypothetical position can be inferred from other factors (for
details see below). Although it seems that the role of stress in compounding and in word formation in general was, if any,
highly limited at least in the historically documented phases of the language.
The old rules of punctuation preserved in some of the OT texts might provide further evidence for identifying
compounds. We observe, namely, a remarkable consistency in the application of the so-called ‘double tsheg’ particularly in
earlier parts of the OTA I where in clauses like those quoted below for illustration it seems to have functioned to separate
words in a clause (the square brackets mark off the arguments; ‘ī’ = reversed gi gu; ‘.’ = single tsheg; ‘:’ = double tsheg), cf.:
[bal: po: yu. sna: kug. tī.] bkum / [na. rī. ba. ba:] [rgyal. phor:] bchug / [gnag. nad: chen. po:] byuṅ /// (PT 1288:12)
[da. rgyal: maṅ. po. rjes:] [źiṅ. gyī. phyiṅ. ril:] bgyīs / (PT 1288:24)
[[mdo. smadu:] [kam: khri. (26) bzaṅ: bye. ʼdaʼ:] [thoṅ. myis:] bkum: ste. [śa.] gñard. phar:] lo. gchīg / (PT 1288:25-6)
 25

Below I shall comment on some of the features in more detail. In terms of general linguistics, the
vast majority of Old Tibetan compounds should as a matter of fact be labelled “blendings”1 defined
broadly as a “combination of two words in such a way that one or both of the resulting constituents
have less substance than the stems from which they derive.” (OLSEN 2000:901a-b). The “truncated”
morphology of Tibetan compounds partly explains the language’s predilection for, or better, its
strong tendency towards folk etymologisation as demonstrated also by OT examples analysed in the
present work. Another consequence of this morphological peculiarity is the semantic ambiguity of
Tibetan compounds.2 These two factors alone can cause serious difficulties in comprehending OT
texts. Additionally, one has to consider that Tibetan makes an extensive use of compounds3 many of
which are formed ad hoc and are highly idiosyncratic becoming insurmountable obstacles in reading
OT texts complicated already enough by their very contents. All these factors contribute in a
negative way to any lexicological analysis of the documents, and therefore hinder not only their
better understanding but even the division of sentences into words and the identification of a
sequence of lexical units as compounds, especially in metrical texts. Thus, apart from the criteria
listed above, also the argument structure and the semantic prosody4 of the analysed passages must
be taken into consideration when defining a string of syllables as a compound.

As already suggested in the above introductory notes, what distinguishes Tibetan compounds not
only from respective phrases but also from compounds of many other languages is their “defective”
morphology. The following examples chosen from the corpus shall illustrate some of the most
common patterns of Tibetan compounding in this respect.5 The underlined morphemes are deleted
when it comes to compounding (the remaining changes are not accounted for in this description).
(1) kom tse (N) σσ < *ko ba mtshe σσ#σ [N+N]
dku rgyal (N) σσ < *dku źiṅ rgyas pa σσ#σσ [V+V]
dkyel mkhas (A) σσ < *dkyel ba la mkhas pa σσσ#σσ [VN+A]

1
This remark holds true also for the Classical language as well as for modern dialects.
2
According to BAUER (1978:81), “ambiguity is inherent in the structure of the compound. This is because a compound
appears to be a surface neutralization of a number of different logical/semantic/underlying representations.” In case of
Tibetan compounds, one should also add the neutralisation of morphological representations.
3
An equally common usage of compounds in Chinese has been explained by SKALIČKA (1979:188; cf. also CECCAGNO/BASCIANO:
“[...] in Chinese compounding is the most productive means of word formation.”, 2009:478) as a consequence of the
frequent homonymy resulting from the monosyllabic character of the language. Undoubtedly, the monosyllabic character
of many lexemes (i.e., basic meaningful units of the lexicon and not words (!) which are understood here as units of a text)
in OT language as well as the phonotactic restrictions imposed on a syllable in Tibetan might have reinforced the tendency
towards compounding. Still, other factors must not be neglected. The frequency of occurrence as well as the degree of
lexicalisation of compounds may also depend on the register or style in which they are used in a given language. For a
preliminary discussion of overrepresentation of coordinate compounds in folk poetry as against other registers see
WÄLCHLI 2005:264ff. Although a detailed study on the subject is missing, from the material gathered in the present work it
may tentatively be stated that compounds seem to be more extensively used in, for instance, the Old Tibetan Chronicles than
in the Old Tibetan Annals or the inscriptions.
4
On semantic prosody see SINCLAIR 2004:141f.
5
The following presentation of the patterns of compounding owes much to the discussion of truncation’s patterns by
ALBER/ARNDT-LAPPE (2012). The rules of compounding in Tibetan seem to correspond to their templatic truncation in which
“the output of truncation conforms to a prosodic template” (ibid., p.290; emphasis - JB) with the left-anchoring pattern
preserving the leftmost segment of the base of derivation (p.299). The process was shortly addressed in VOLLMANN
2001:110ff. as ‘clipping’. I would like to thank Prof. Geert BOOIJ for drawing my attention to this very insightful paper.
 26

thaṅ kar (IA; IIN) σσ < *thaṅ dkar po σ#σσ [N+A]

doṅ ral (N) σσ < *(l)doṅ po ral ba σσ#σσ [N+VA]
snam phrag (N) σσ < *snam bu’i phrag σσσ#σ [N+N]
mu su (N) σσ < *myi su yaṅ σ#σσ [N+[PRN+INDF]]
As these examples clearly demonstrate, in the first pattern it is always the first and lexical syllable
of a simple unit that is preserved in the compound. Thus, the first formulation of a compounding
rule could be proposed: if in the underlying phrase only two lexical syllables occur both will be
chosen to form a compound.

Beside grammatical and syllabic derivative morphemes, however, also lexical morphemes of the
underlying structure can be deleted. This happens especially when more than two lexical
morphemes are present in the underlying structure and recursion, i.e., compounding of compounds,
takes place (the list contains all respective disyllabic compounds from the corpus):
(2) rkaṅ ’gros (N) σσ < *rkaṅ thaṅ du ’gro ba σσσ#σσ [[N+N]+V]
dgra thabs (N) σσ < *dgra chos kyi thabs σσσ#σ [[N+N]+N]
dgra bźer (N) σσ < *dgra chos kyi bźer σσσ#σ [[N+N]+N]
ṅam len (N) σσ < *ṅam grog len pa σσ#σσ [[N+N]+V]
stag ’phraṅ (N) σσ < *stag lpags kyi ’breṅ σσσ#σ [[N+N]+N]
thoṅ myi (N) σσ < *thoṅ myig gi myi σσσ#σ [[N+N]+N]
dog yab (N) σσ < *sa dog gi yab σσσ#σ [[N+A]+N]
dog srin (N) σσ < *sa dog gi srin bu σσσ#σσ [[N+A]+N]
rtsis mgo (N) σσ < *rtsis mgo nan σ#σσ [N+[N+V]]
zaṅs brgya’ (N) σσ < *zaṅs tiṅ rgya ma σσ#σσ [N+[N+N]]
(3) khu ljo (N) σσ < *khul gyi ’jo khug σσ#σσ [N+[VN+N]]
mṅa’ dbaṅ (N) σσ < *mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ σσσ#σσ [[N+N]+[N+N]]
chu rlag (N) σσ < *chu sri(n) rlag pa σσ#σσ [[N+N]+VA]
pho ma (A) σσ < *pho ma niṅ pa σ#σσσ [N+[NEG+V]]
mun mag (N) σσ < *mu’i dmag myi σσ#σσ [N+[N+N]]
(4) dog mon (N) σσ < *sa dog mun pa σσ#σσ [[N+A]+A]
As these groups demonstrate, the tendency to preserve only two syllables from the underlying
structure is prevalent also here. In the second pattern, which is the most numerous one among the
three “recursive” patterns, it is always the first syllable of the underlying words that is chosen to be
represented in the compound of the second order disregarding whether the chosen syllable is the
head of its own compound or not. Another common trait of these formations is that they are all
endocentric and their heads are explicitly represented on the surface. The vast majority are right-
headed subordinate compounds with the only exceptions being rtsis mgo and zaṅs brgya.
 27

There are, however, two further compounds that, on the one hand, should be included in the second
pattern, but, on the other hand, differ in some way from the majority of the formations in this
group. These are:
zaṅ yag (A) σσ < *zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag [[A+A]+[A+A]] σσσ#σσ
ru lag (N) σσ < *ru (gsum) gyi yan lag [[N+(NUM)]+[N+N]] σσσ#σσ
The first example concerns a compound formed from two reduplicated stems. Reduplicated
formations do not possess a head constituent and since by definition they consist of two identical
syllables1 it is not possible to determine which one is being represented on the surface. In the case of
ru lag, the form *ru yaṅ would be predicted by the second pattern: *yaṅ lag (assimilated from *yan
lag) underlying the compound should be represented by its first syllable, i.e. yaṅ. It is assumed,
however, that the form *ru yaṅ has been blocked due to the homonymy of its second syllable with
the grammatical suffix -yaṅ, that, according to the assimilation rules of OT, may occur after vowels.
Thus, the form ru lag was decided upon instead.2 In this case, a superficial treatment of the
formation could bring about the false conclusion that the head constituent outbalances syllabic
position in Tibetan compounding.

In the third pattern the rule of the first syllable being surfaced has clearly primacy even over the
head of the whole compound. In all listed cases the first syllable of each word is taken over and the
head of the compound, although contained in the underlying structure, is not expressed on the
surface. I call this type of endocentric compounds ‘esocentric’ (for details see the subsection
Classification/Semantics/Esocentric).

dog mon, another esocentric compound and the sole example representing the fourth pattern, does
not follow the rule of the first syllable (*sa mun); neither does it choose the head of the underlying
structure to be represented on the surface (*sa mun). A tentative hypothesis is put forward that the
regular pattern was blocked in this very case due to the advanced lexicalisation of dog- as
representing *sa dog; compare its occurrences in dog mon, dog yab, dog gśen, and dog srin etc. where it
invariably stands for *sa dog. Hereto one could also cite the alternating forms sa dog rum and dog rum
(see s.v. sa dog). Moreover, the predicted form *sa mun would have caused problems in
communication for being, contrary to the intentions, most naturally interpreted as “a dark place” <
*sa mun pa. To conclude, in my opinion the deviation from the widely attested first-syllable-
choosing pattern in case of dog mon resulted from the economy of communication; in this sole
example the transparency of semantics was given priority over morphological rules.3

1
Other forms of reduplication as examined, e.g., by URAY 1954a or VOLLMANN 2009, do not need to be accounted for in this
discussion because they do not occur in the corpus.
2
For a supplementary explanation of the compound ru lag see s.v.
3
Another means of coping with problems of potential misinterpretations and ambiguity in OT compounds was clipping,
for which see the subsection Form changes/Morphological changes/Clipping. In our present case, clipping of the
underlying compound *sa dog would have given rise to the form *sog which in turn would have been homonymous with a
lexical morpheme of at least one further important lexeme attested already in OT documents, namely sog ma “straw”.
 28

The corpus of the examined OT compounds contains two examples of compounds formed from more
than two syllables:
(5) źal ce gra σσσ < *źal ce’i grwa σσσ#σ [[N+N]+N]
yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs σσσσ < *yul gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs pa σσ#σσ#σ#σσ [N+[N+[N+A]]]
It can be assumed that in the first case the three-syllabic formation was chosen over *źal gr(w)a
mainly to avoid the reading of the compound as a honorific equivalent of gr(w)a. As concerns the
second example, it is feasible that, contrary to the previously discussed examples, it was not formed
from an underlying compound (*’brog gdaṅs > *yul gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs) but directly from the NP *yul
gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs pa. Since it is attested only twice and, in addition, in parallel metrical passages,
we can assume that it was formed ad hoc to meet the requirements of metrics. This example,
however, is valuable in so far as it enables us to extend the proposed rule of deleting morphemes in
compounding to the following ultimate formulation:
σ1-RULE
Every word of the underlying structure of an OT compound must be represented in the surface
structure of the compound by its first syllable.
This might be supplemented with a further condition:
If there is no danger of misinterpretation, the first syllable of the underlying word chosen to be
surfaced does not have to be a lexical morpheme.
The latter addition proves important not only in the above discussed case of ru lag (instead of the
predicted *ru yaṅ) but also when we look closer at the compound pho ma which is proposed to be
reconstructed as *pho#ma+niṅ+pa. ma- is understood here to be a negation particle and to form one
word with *-niṅ pa.1 Thus, it is the first syllable of the underlying word *ma niṅ pa. Contrary to *ru
yaṅ, there is no ambiguity in interpreting ma- here since the first member of the compound, pho-,
denoting explicitly a male individual, cannot acquire the nominal particle -ma which by default
marks the feminine. Neither can any other function of -ma be reasonably connected with the stem
pho.2 To sum up, the compound pho ma can be deemed to conform to the above formulated rules of
compounding in OT confirming at the same time the validity of the left-anchoring pattern in
templatic truncation of Tibetan compounds (cf. ALBER/ARNDT-LAPPE 2012:299). Moreover, it proves
that the rules of compounding in OT operate on the word (*pho#ma+niṅ+pa > pho+ma) and not on the
lexeme level (*pho#ma+niṅ+pa > *pho+niṅ).3

1
For the negation particle ma in Tibetan compounds compare formations of the type ‘N1+ma+N2’ like, for instance, bya ma
rta or ra ma lug; more examples are supplied in SCHIEFNER 1859. Their underlying structure is assumed to be ‘X N1 yaṅ ma yin
N2 ma yin’ (i.e., “X is neither N1 nor N2”) for which compare pha yaṅ ma yin gñen ’dun min “neither father nor relations”
(D:494a, s.v. gñen ’dun) and sa ma rdo “neither earth nor stone, conglomerate” (D:1259b) paraphrased in DAS with sa min rdo
min. I would like to thank Toni HUBER for drawing my attention to this group of compounds.
2
On other functions of the nominal particle -ma see HAHN 1996:34f., VOLLMANN 2001:98ff., and the subsection Word-forming
processes on compounds/Derivation in the present work.
3
This approach differs from the one represented by VOLLMANN (2009) who considers Tibetan morphology to be ‘syllable-
based’ and states that “Tibetan assumes morphological independence of each ‘syllable’ - and not a ‘word’.” (2009:130, cf.
also VOLLMANN 2001:124). In an earlier paper, VOLLMANN writes “Eine adäquate Lösung (i.e., an explanation of deleting
nominal particles in Tibetan compounding - JB) liegt in der Berücksichtigung der morphotaktischen Besonderheit der
 29

The comparatively simple σ1-RULE has been formulated on the basis of 131 OT compounds examined
in the present work. Although it is always possible to extend the corpus and include still more
examples, the rule has proven to possess an explanatory potential for all compounds but the
following two: dog mon and ru lag in which cases, it was argued, the semantic transparency was given
priority over the morphological rules.1

The kind of morpheme truncation described above occurs irrespective of syntactic and semantic
properties of a given formation or its underlying structure. Neither do the word classes of the
affected lexemes play any role in this process. The morpheme truncation is a crucial element of
compounding in Tibetan languages by which a sequence of two syllables may be identified as a
compound. The identification, however, is not always straightforward and so a detectable degree of
ambiguity exists. Compare the following OT lexemes:
za ri < *za ri zi ri
zaṅ yag < *zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag [A+A]

Partikeln, nämlich daß die sich nie vollständig univerbieren lassen und immer auf der Ebene der Syntax verbleiben; sie
tragen semantisch wenig bei und können beliebig erscheinen und wieder ausfallen - oder nie da sein.” (2001:112). This,
however, does not explain the ‘truncation’ of lexical morphemes when a compound is used to form another compound as
described above.
As I try to demonstrate in this chapter, since Tibetan compounds may be analysed as truncated phrases their basic
components are in fact words understood as units of text though, and not of lexicon. Otherwise, it seems to me, it would be
difficult to present any coherent rule of word formation for Tibetan. The perspective differentiating between words and
lexemes differs also from the one widely accepted in comparative studies of compounds. BAUER, for instance, explicitly
states that he uses the term ‘word’ in his definition of compounding meaning actually ‘lexeme’ (2009:343). However, if one
assumes that compounds in Tibetan result from the process of univerbation, it is more than natural that the rules of
compounding must be taken to operate on a word level.
1
The existence of the σ1-RULE favouring in compounding first syllables of underlying words might appear somehow
surprising in view of stress patterns encountered in modern Tibetan dialects as well as those reconstructed for Proto-
Tibetan. CAPLOW, who examined the stress patterns in Balti and Rebkong Amdo, summarises the results of her survey as
follows: “Since nouns, adjectives, and numerals in both Balti and Rebkong Amdo are stressed on σ2, I reconstruct a pattern
of σ2 stress for Proto-Tibetan nouns, adjectives, and numerals. Likewise, since verbs in both Balti and Rebkong Amdo are
stressed on σ1, I reconstruct a pattern of σ1 stress for Proto-Tibetan verbs.” (2009:518). She also observes that in both
dialects disyllabic words, including compounds, are always stressed on σ2; thus she concludes, “stress is associated with
syllable position, not with segmental or semantic content.” (ibid., p.135f.). CAPLOW’s results may be understood as
confirming the prediction made by BIELMEIER almost 30 years ago: “The simplest way to explain how the prefixes of WT
became non-syllabic is to assume a strong word-final stress, which is in complete accordance with the situation in Balti.”
(1988a:53). Now, although we are by no means in a position to speak authoritatively about stress in OT, one feels obliged to
juxtapose these findings with the σ1-RULE of compounding as proposed here. To wit, in the face of the uncovered pattern of
compound formation, rules of clipping, and various other processes (deaspiration, devoicing, folk etymologisation, for
which see below and TERJÉK 1972:41), that predominantly affect the second syllable of a compound, one would actually
expect the first syllable to have been stressed. If that was not the case, the only logical conclusion would be that stress did
not play any significant role in word formation and derivation, at least not at the time of OT. Still, more work on stress
needs to be done accounting for different types of compounds that can be formed in Tibetan languages before it will be
possible to draw final conclusions on the issue.
Another problem that could be addressed in this context is the non-existence of any kind of syllabic prefixes in historical
Tibetan. All grammatical and lexical markers are always suffixed to the stem. The questions arise: How the σ1-RULE of
compounding, the WT syllabic suffixes, on the one hand, and the word-final stress and the assumed syllabic character of
the verbal prefixes in Proto-Tibetan can be connected to each other? Why did the language switch from syllabic prefixes
to syllabic suffixes without leaving any trace of the change in the syntax nor affecting it in any other manner?
The fact remains that for some reason the first syllable sufficed to outweigh the importance of a head constituent in
compounding. Morphologically it means also that there is no noticeable difference between a simple lexeme and a
compound underlying another compound; in both cases the σ1-RULE operates indiscriminately. The insignificant role of a
head element is additionally confirmed by the very existence of the so-called esocentric compounds in OT for which see
below.
 30

Both are abbreviated versions of reduplicated stems. However, only in the second case is the
underlying structure based on two independent lexemes (bzaṅ po and yag po respectively). The
underlying formation of za ri, although consisting of four syllables, is in all probability a derivative
by reduplication of the verbal stem gzir.

In this context the condition prescribing that at least one of the constituents of a compound shall
represent an abbreviated form of the underlying word proves decisive for determining whether two
syllables form a compound or not. Namely, there are two cases, in which it is impossible to establish
whether two consecutive syllables form a compound or a phrase. These are:
1. An attributive sequence N+A in which both elements are monosyllabic lexemes;
2. An appositional sequence N+N in which both elements are monosyllabic lexemes.
Unless phonetic changes characteristic for compounding occur, such sequences, for lack of decisive
evidence, should be treated as phrases.

To sum up, compounds in Old Tibetan, originating demonstrably from syntactic constructions and
still preserving their structural characteristics, seem to be a result of a univerbation process. An
additional indication that such a process indeed took place is provided by the very existence of the
linking element -b- considered as a remnant of an old genitive particle.1 However, compounding
was, and still is, a highly productive process in Tibetan languages and for this reason the degree of
lexicalisation of single compounds may differ considerably.

HEADEDNESS

Headedness is a widely discussed topic related to the typology and classification of compounds. In
this respect, OT language formed all possible compounds: headless (exocentric), right- (subordinate,
incorporating) and left-headed (attributive), two-headed (coordinate), or even ‘head-hidden’
(esocentric) compounds.2 This situation resulted from another peculiar feature of Tibetan
compounding, namely, that the order of constituents within a compound mirrors exactly the word
order of the underlying phrase.3 This seems to be a consequence of a few specific characteristics of
Tibetan word formation. First of all, truncation in compounding veils the involved words, and so
hinders their identification. This, in turn, results from the strong tendency of the language towards
disyllabic lexemes.4 To conclude, it occurs that the relative freedom in the headedness of the OT

1
For a short overview of analogous hypotheses concerning the origins of compounds in the IE languages see KASTOVSKY
2009:328ff. A similar opinion is formulated by WÄLCHLI as a ‘Condensation hypothesis about the origin of compounds’, cf.
“Patterns of compounds always derive diachronically from semantically corresponding syntactic constructions.” and
“Strong evidence for the condensation hypothesis comes from compounds that still contain some traces of morpho-
syntactic marking, that is, strictly speaking, from incomplete compounding.” (WÄLCHLI 2005:246).
For details on the linking element -b- see the subsection Form changes/Morphological changes/Linking element.
2
For more details on each type see the respective subsections.
3
Neither this fact nor the practice of reconstructing the underlying phrase for each compound followed in the present
work implicate that the meaning of a compound corresponds exactly to the meaning of the respective phrase. In fact, in
most cases the opposite is true; thus, no straightforward correlation between form and meaning is assumed.
4
Cf. hereto also VOLLMANN: “Morpheme sind im Tibetischen also (fast immer) einsilbig bzw. die Sprachbenutzer gehen
davon aus, daß sie einsilbig sind; Lexeme hingegen sind (meist) zweisilbig.“ (2006:92); cf. also BEYER 1992:90ff.
 31

compounds, restricted only by the structure of the underlying phrase, guarantees in fact their
comprehensibility and compensates for the loss of morphemes in the process of compounding.

In terms of language universals, one could tentatively state that if a language (e.g., Tibetan,
Chinese1) displays synchronically such a wide spectrum of solutions for headedness, the structure of
its compounds mirrors the underlying syntactic patterns. In the so-called headed languages, i.e.
languages with a strong tendency towards one type of headedness, paraphrasing rather than
‘unfolding’ is needed in order to explain the grammatical structure of their compounds.2

CLASSIFICATION3
Since compounds can be studied and analysed from different perspectives, a threefold classification
is proposed below to provide the most comprehensive description of OT formations. To wit, each
compound is surveyed with regard to its semantics as well as the underlying syntactic structure and
the formal classes of the constituents in the underlying structure. Although treated independently,
they do in fact intermingle, so that it is actually impossible to discuss some syntactic types (e.g.,
coordinate or attributive) without recalling the semantic and formal relations between their
constituents or to introduce further divisions that would represent the existing differences.

The proposed typology is based solely on the compounds analysed in the present work. It follows
that there might exist some other types which are not represented in the corpus although their
number is assumed to be rather limited. The most underrepresented group are certainly compounds

1
Cf. the characterisation of the headedness in Chinese in CECCAGNO/BASCIANO (2009:489): “Chinese does not have a
canonical position for the head. In Chinese, endocentric compounds exhibit head on the right, head on the left, and both
constituents as heads.”
2
Compare hereto the widely disputed statement of MARCHAND (1969:18) that “all compounds are explainable on the basis
of syntactic relations underlying them in sentences” which, as far as Tibetan languages are concerned, indeed proves true.
A similar opinion is shared by SCALISE/BISETTO: “[...] the peculiarity of compounds lies in their being word forms whose
constituents are connected by a grammatical relation that is not overtly expressed [...]” (2009:44).
However, the author is of the opinion that compounding is to a high degree a language-specific process and cannot be
analysed in isolation of the language’s morphological and syntactic peculiarities. For this very reason any attempt at a
cross-linguistic classification has to be done either on a level of generalisation and abstraction that would lack any
substance, or must fail to succeed.
3
A few attempts have already been undertaken at presenting a classification of Tibetan compounds, cf. FRANCKE/SIMON
1929:116-9, BEYER 1992:103-6 for native compounds and 107-11 for translational compounds, GOLDSTEIN 2001:xiii-xvi,
VOLLMANN 2001:105ff., and VOLKART 2003:238-46. A list of OT compounds divided into four classes according to their syntax
is supplied in THOMAS 1957:*37ff. Another important study devoted in particular to Tibetan compounds is SCHIEFNER 1859
(on compounds of the type ‘N+ma+N’).
The following classification is based on different approaches and owes much to morphological studies within modern
linguistics. CECCAGNO/BASCIANO (2009:479ff.) have proposed a classification of compounds based on Mandarin Chinese.
Compounding in Chinese seems to share many common features with compounding in Tibetan languages. However, the
existing differences, first of all those concerning the word order in a sentence, forced the author to put forward yet
another classification based on the Old Tibetan corpus that can also be applied to Classical Tibetan and most probably to
all modern Tibetan dialects. However, it should be stressed that the author neither claims any universal applicability for
the classification nor is interested in developing a commonly valid description of the types of compounds. The work has a
descriptive character and is focused solely on the OT language of the examined corpus. This alone limits the scope of the
proposed classification since the analysed compounds were chosen according to strict, mainly semantic, criteria (see the
Introduction) and most probably do not provide a comprehensive and exhaustive representation of compound types in
OT.
It is needless to state that classes of compounds based in the examined corpus on only one example are subject to doubt
untill further examples have been provided.
 32

that belong to the word class of verbs. The following contains a detailed list of compound types
accompanied by definitions and exemplary cases taken from the lexicological part of the present
work.

SEMANTICS

The terms ‘endocentric’ and ‘exocentric’ refer to the relation of a compound to its semantic head
(“centre”) which can be expressed by one of the constituents of the underlying phrase
(‘endocentric’) or not (‘exocentric’). As remarked by BAUER (2009:350), the classification of
compounds as either endo- or exocentric, although primarily based on semantic grounds, may also
have some syntactic implications.

Endocentric (121)1

Endocentric compounds refer to objects that are expressed by one (or more in case of copulative
coordinate compounds) of the compound’s overt constituents. The syntactic head of an endocentric
compound is also its semantic head, i.e., the constituent determining its argument structure and
semantic prosody, cf.:
thoṅ myi (N) “murderer” < * thoṅ myig (< *thoṅ gi dmyigs) gi myi [[N+N]+N] “a man of a
suicide/murder attempt“
mdo lcags (N) “iron arrowhead” < *mda’i lcags [N+N] “iron part of an arrow”
sa dog (N) “1valley; 2earth” < *sa dog mo [N+A] “narrow space”

Esocentric (6)

The Old Tibetan language demonstrates a strong tendency to restrict the length of compounds to
two syllables.2 As a result, some parts of the underlying phrases had to be omitted from the final
form which in consequence hinders the analysis of a compound and obscures its structure. For
instance, khu ljo (< *khul ’jo) “a woollen sucking-bag” on the surface consists of two stems: *khul < khu
lu “woolly hair of yak” and *’jo “to milk; to suck”. Taken literally, only two readings are possible: *”a
milking/suckingATTR wool” and *“milking/sucking wool” (< *”to milk/suck wool”), none of which
really makes sense. From the context in which the compound occurs, however, we gather that it
must have referred to a kind of bag in which a child could be carried or put (buABS khu ljo naINESS ’dug).
Thus, either *khul is to be understood metonymically as *“a bag made of wool” and the meaning of
khu ljo would be *”a suckingATTR bag”, or still another underlying phrase must be assumed to account
for the lacking word “bag”. In Tibetan syntax the attributive position of ’jo ba in the tentatively
reconstructed *khul ’jo ba could only be understood as qualifying the bag as “sucking”, i.e., *khul ’jo
ba, lit. “a sucking woollen bag”, would denote a bag which sucks, not a very appealing solution

1
The number of compounds from the corpus assigned to the respective category is given in brackets.
2
This tendency became all the more significant in the Classical language in which even simple lexemes documented as
monosyllabic in Old Tibetan have acquired an additional syllable, one of the so-called nominal particles, with the sole
purpose to conform to the rule of disyllableness.
 33

either. The sense of “a woollen bag that is used [for children] to suck” would require a
determinative position of ’jo- and the underlying phrase *’jo ba’i khul as against the attested order of
stems in khu ljo. It follows that the correct understanding of the compound necessitates an
additional lexeme in the underlying structure that would account for the meaning “bag”; thus the
reconstructed underlying phrase becomes *khul gyi ’jo ba’i khug or the more general *khul gyi ’jo ba’i
BAG, lit. “a bag that [is made] of wool [and used] for sucking”. The first genitive particle gyi connects

khul with the head of the following phrase, i.e. khug/BAG, and not with ’jo ba: khul gyi [’jo ba’i khugHEAD].1
*khul and *’jo ba both modify the unstated referent word BAG as “of wool” and “for sucking” but the
respective semantic relations in *khul gyi BAG and *’jo ba’i BAG differ: the first expressing the material
from which a BAG is made and the second its purpose. Thus, there is no syntactic relation between
*khul and *’jo ba but each of them relates independently to BAG.2 This example clearly demonstrates
that, on the one hand, the head of a compound (here: *khug/BAG) does not have to be explicitly
stated and, on the other hand, in case it is missing, the compound still may be an endocentric
compound. I propose to call this subgroup of endocentric compounds ‘esocentric’ < eso- “within”,
defining the respective formations as being endocentric but with the head unrealised on the
surface.3 These are all esocentric compounds encountered in the corpus:
khu ljo (N) “a woollen sucking-bag” < *khul gyi ’jo khug [N+[VNV1+N]]
mṅa’ dbaṅ (N) “domain” < mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ [[N+N]+[N+N]]

1
Compare the phrase ldoṅ prom gyiGEN ral gyiGEN (read: gyi’i) mdor cod (PT 1287:262), lit. “a sheath for swords [made from]
white copper”, in which the head of the phrase, mdor cod, is modified by both ldoṅ prom “of white copper” and ral gyi “for
swords”. The reading *”a sheath for white-copper swords” cannot be correct for pragmatic reason: swords were not made
of white copper. It is also interesting to note the order of genitives in ldoṅ prom gyi ral gyi mdor cod and *khul gyi ’jo ba’i BAG.
To wit, the first ones are material genitives (“made from white copper” and “made from wool”, respectively) whereas the
second ones have benefactive function (“for swords” and “for sucking”).
2
The interpretation of khu ljo as a coordinate compound, constituents of which express two attributes *khul daṅ ’jo ba, is
impossible for the following reasons: 1. khu lu/khul is a noun denoting a material, thus its translation as “woolly” is only
possible if it modifies another object in a phrase like ‘khul gyi NP’; 2. coordination requires that the coordinated elements
belong to the same word class; since khu lu/khul is a noun, also *’jo ba should be noun, i.e. “a sucking”; 3. an additively
coordinate phrase requires also that its constituents are co-hyponyms of one superordinate semantic category. That would
clearly not be the case with *khu lu daṅ ’jo ba “a wool and a sucking”. Additionally, as proven by WÄLCHLI, coordinate
compounds are based on the natural coordination which “[...] implies, among other things, that the parts express
semantically closely associated concepts [...] which are on the same hierarchical level, and that the whole meaning [...] is
more general than the meaning of the parts.” (2005:1).
In fact, the underlying structure of the compound khu ljo should in the first step be reconstructed as *khul gyi ’jo khug, i.e.
the second constituent *-’jo stands not for the phrase *’jo ba’i khug but for another compound, *’jo khug, which, however,
goes back to the phrase *’jo ba’i khug.
The process of forming compounds from lexemes which themselves are already compounds and must be reduced in
their form has been analysed with regard to Mandarin Chinese by CECCAGNO/BASCIANO and given the name of
“metacompounding” (2009:486ff.; cf. “[...] we define as metacompounds those compounds that require reference to their
underlying compounds in order to ascertain semantics, lexical category, or head of the compound.”, ibid., p.488). An
analogous process is known under the term “recursion” in other languages, for instance, Germanic (cf. BAUER 2009:350). In
the latter case, however, every underlying compound is represented in its full form. In the present work the term
“metacompound” is applied to refer to compounds formed from other compound(s) on the condition that all lexical
morphemes of every underlying compound are attested on the surface, for details see the subsection
Classification/Metacompounds.
3
It should be stressed that not every compound with an unrealised element is to be called ‘esocentric’ in Tibetan. The
term is restricted to those with the unrealised head. In any other case a compound is endocentric, cf., for instance, thoṅ myi
[N1+N3] < *thoṅ myig gi myi [[N1+N2]+N3].
Even though the meaning of prefixes eso- and endo- remains, roughly speaking, the same in modern English (cf. KLEIN
1966:520a and 542a), the term ‘esocentric’ is proposed by analogy with ‘esoteric’ which additionally connotes something
hidden from the public; in our case, it is the head of a compound.
 34

chu rlag (N) “a lost water-demon” < *chu sri(n) rlag pa [[N+N]+VAV2]
dog mon (N) “dark earth” < *sa dog mun pa [[N+A]+A]
pho ma (A) “immature” < *pho ma niṅ [N+[NEG+VV1]]
mun mag (N) “border guard” < *mu’i dmag myi [N+[N+N]]
The conditions under which a head (or any other element) of a compound may be deleted have been
discussed at length above in the section Compound and compounding.

Exocentric (10)

An exocentric compound has a referent which in itself is expressed neither by an overt constituent
of the compound nor by an element of the underlying phrase. This category encompasses in OT at
least two quite distinct groups of formations. One can distinguish between ‘proper’ exocentric
compounds or exocentric compounds in a narrower sense and possessive compounds.1

Proper exocentric (1)

As concerns this group, its cornerstone is BLOOMFIELD’s definition of compounds whose formal
features do not correspond with the formal features of either of their constituents, cf. “[...] in
gadabout and turnkey the head member is an infinitive verb, but the compound is a noun; these
compounds are exocentric (Sanskrit bahuvrihi)” (BLOOMFIELD 1935:235).2 Due to the peculiar
truncated character of compounds and the instability of word classes in Tibetan it seems hardly
ever possible to identify proper exocentric compounds.3 The only example found in my OT corpus is:
ñiṅ rim (A) “of internal order” < *ñiṅ gi rim pa [N+N] “having the place in a row of the internal
order”

1
Some authors consider also different types of coordinate compounds as exocentric (cf. BAUER 2009:351f., LIEBER
2009a:91ff., LIEBER 2009b:360). VOLLMANN (2009:129), for instance, classifies as exocentric indiscriminately copulative
(synonymic, antonymic, enumerative) and reduplicative compounds, although in an earlier paper (2001:108) he seems to
have differentiated between exocentric compounds and what he called “hauptlose Komposita” (lit. headless compounds).
Also BEYER perceives antonymic coordinate compounds in Tibetan (his: [A+A]N) as headless (1992:105n6). As will be argued
below (see the subsection Classification/Syntax/Generic), the respective groups are deemed to be endocentric but with a
semantic shift.
2
In fact, referring to this group of compounds as bahuvrīhi is much misleading since the latter term has been understood
in the Indian tradition as referring to possessive compounds, cf. WHITNEY 1889:502: “[...] the relation of the qualified noun
to the compound should have come to be so generally that of possession, not of likeness, nor of appurtenance, nor of any
other relation which is as naturally involved in such a construction”. Because in Sanskrit adjectives (and so, also bahuvrīhi
compounds) may be used freely as substantives, the change in word class was not understood as an intrinsic or
distinguishing feature of possessive compounds. For the problems of (mis)using Sanskrit terminology in modern linguistic
discourse see, e.g., SCALISE/BISETTO 2009:35f.
It is a deliberate decision of the author not to use Sanskrit terms in the description of Tibetan compounds. First of all,
they do not cover all the types of compounds that are attested in the examined language. Secondly, they are bound to the
language-specific understanding of some of its morphological phenomena and thus acquired definitions that respond to
the needs of this very language. And lastly, those are the terms coined by native Indian grammarians and their traditional
definitions do not necessarily meet the standards of modern linguistics.
3
Cf. VOLLMANN: “Wenn man nun davon ausgeht, daß die Nominalisierungspartikeln und andere unfreie Morpheme
(Partikeln) so leicht durch eine reguläre Clippingregel ausfallen können, ist ja gar nicht gesagt, daß die
Kompositionsbeispiele, in denen die Wortart des Haupts kein Nomen war, aber ein Nomen erzeugt hat, tatsächlich keine
Nomen waren.“ (2001:111-2).
 35

Possessive (9)

A possessive compound refers to an object that possesses the very attribute expressed by the
compound.1 The underlying phrase may be either an attributive (N+A, N+VA, N+NUM) or a
determinative phrase (N+N). The resulting compound may be either a noun or an adjective, cf.:
kha sprod (A) “open” < *”kha sprod pa [N+VAV2] “having a delivered orifice”
gru bźi (A) “having four corners” < *gru bźi [N+NUM] “having four corners” (s.v. (se) gru bźi)
ñes dgu (A) “malicious” < *ñes pa dgu [N+NUM] “of nine evils”
ste’u ka ma (N) “(those) having an axe-blade[-shape]” < *ste’u’i kha [N+N] “having an axe-edge”
stod rims (N) “elite members” < *[stod kyi rim pa]+-s [N+N] “those (having the place in) a row of the
upper part”
thag brgyad (A) “eight-threaded” < *thag brgyad [N+NUM] “having eight threads” (s.v. (rgyal) thag
brgyad)
thaṅ kar (A/N) “Iwhite winged; IIwhite-winged one” < *thaṅ dkar po [N+A] “white spread (ones)”
thaṅ prom (N) “white-winged one” < *thaṅ phrom [N+A] “white spread ones”
źu bub (A) “with a headgear” < *źu phub pa [N+VAV2] “with a cover spread over”

1
BAUER (2009:351) argues that possessive compounds are actually not exocentric but “synecdochic uses of headed
compounds”; cf. also OLSEN: “the possessive interpretation simply arises by virtue of an extended meaning in the pars pro
toto or metonymic sense” (2001:312n3) and “Regular exocentric possessives differ from determinatives only in a process of
meaning extension.” (ibid., p.291). In fact, BAUER’s argument about figurative reading of otherwise endocentric compounds
does not account for cases in which an exocentric compound needs an overtly stated referent that is modified by the very
compound, cf. ñiṅ rim which, taken alone, would be a determinative compound (< *ñiṅ gi rim pa) with the meaning *“a
place in a row of the internal order”. However, its single occurrence in my corpus proves that it is used as an attribute of
another NP. The issue is even more obvious with the OT primarily attributive compound thaṅ kar [N+A] which is attested as
an adjective with the meaning “white-winged” [N+A]A and as a substantive “white-winged one” [N+A]N denoting in the
latter case a species of birds. Thus, we can infer that what started as a possessive exocentric compound requiring the co-
occurrence of a referent word has undergone lexicalisation (probably through a stage of being an epithet of one particular
class of objects) and became indeed rather an endocentric compound that is allowed to function with a figurative meaning
independently in a sentence. CECCAGNO/BASCIANO do not recognise a semantic change as a potential factor and classify all
such compounds in Mandarin Chinese as exocentric (2009:487).
This issue has pragmatic implications for constructing a dictionary. In order to be consequent one must include two
separate lemmata for thaṅ kar, one reckoning it as an adjective and an exocentric possessive compound, the other as a
substantive and an endocentric compound.
Nonetheless, a question arises concerning the difference between BAUER’s greenshank (2009:351) and BLOOMFIELD’s
bittersweet (1935:235). Both are generic names, the latter additionally being a common adjective. In BAUER’s classification
the former is an endocentric compound with a figurative reading referring to a species of birds that possess green shanks
but the latter would still be an exocentric compound. There seems, however, to be a formal difference between these as
well; green-shank [A+N]N being a substantive and denoting a concrete object can be “possessed” whereas bitter-sweet [A+A]A
as an adjective cannot. Thus, although both lexemes seem to have acquired figurative meanings, *“[a bird that has] green
shanks” and *“[a plant of] bittersweet [taste]”, the second one is still an exocentric compound (although proper exocentric
and not possessive) since its grammatical categories differ from the categories of its constituents and the referent word
taste must be added when paraphrasing. To sum up the discussion, the following classification of the quoted compounds
could be given:
greenshank an endocentric compound with a figurative meaning;
bittersweet 1an endocentric coordinate compound describing something as bitter and sweet at the same time;
2
a proper exocentric compound denoting a species of plants;
1
thaṅ kar a possessive exocentric compound meaning “white-winged”;
2
an endocentric compound with a figurative meaning.
 36

SYNTAX

Depending on the syntax of the underlying phrases OT compounds may be classified as either
subordinate, coordinate, attributive, or incorporating.1 Each of the types is bound to a particular
pattern of underlying phrases. The proposed tree diagram accounts for syntactic relations within OT
compounds consistently only on its first level. Further levels provide additional information on
possible syntactic (black), semantic (blue) or formal (green) distinctions within one specific
category:
Compounds

Subordinate Coordinate Attributive Incorporating

Determinative Converbial Additively Alternatively Proper Appositional Verbal Adjectival

Adjectival Numeral Proper Comparative Subsumptive Subject Object Adjunct Predicative

Subordinate (61)

In subordinate compounds the meaning of the head is restricted by additional modifiers that
precede it, the so-called premodifers. Thus, these compounds are always right-headed in Tibetan.
Depending on the word class to which the head belongs and which determines the structure of the
underlying phrase one can speak in OT of determinative or converbial subordinate compounds.2

Determinative (51)

The head of a compound is a noun modified by another noun or an NP. The following examples
additionally illustrate the already identified semantic relations (partitive (PART), material (MAT),
benefactive (BEN), possessive (POSS), disadventage (DISAD), explicative (EXPL), purposive (PURP),
objective (OBJV), source (SOUR), origin (ORIG)) between members of a compound3:

1
SCALISE/BISETTO (2009:48) justify their threefold classification in the following words: “The categorization into
subordinate, coordinate, and attributive compounds is confirmed by the manner in which the head selects the non-head in
each of the three groups.” and further “The grouping of compounds in three major classes is thus supported by the fact
that the mechanisms by which the head selects the non-head are consistently different in each of the three classes.” (ibid.,
p.49; see also BISETTO/SCALISE 2005:329f.). As I will demonstrate in the subsection on incorporating compounds, non-head
selection in case of subordinate and incorporate compounds differs to a high extent in OT and so necessitates the
assignment of these two groups to two independent classes.
2
In a revised version of their classification, SCALISE/BISETTO (2009:50) subdivide their subordinate compounds into
“ground” and “verbal-nexus” compounds in order to highlight “the nature of the constituent that determines the
semantic relation between members - and, therefore, the interpretation of the compound”. In their words, “[t]he
interpretation of verbal-nexus compounds is [...] determined by the presence of the base verb of the derivative acting as the
head.” (ibid.). This definition would necessitate the inclusion of my incorporating compounds together with converbial
compounds. My determinative compounds seem to correspond to ground compounds of SCALISE/BISETTO. For arguments
against the application of SCALISE/BISETTO’s classification to OT compounds see the subsection on incorporating
compounds.
3
Since in some cases more than one interpretation could be given it is arguable to what extent the specification of
semantic relationship within a determinative compound is useful at all.
 37

dku gaṅ (N) “1ambush; 2house of deceit” < dku’i gaṅ [NPURP+N] “a house [intended] for a deceit”
rkaṅ pran (N) “rkaṅ-serf” < *rkaṅ gi bran [NPART+N] “a serf [that is taken] from a rkaṅ[-land unit]”
khu ljo (N) “a woollen sucking-bag” < *khul gyi ’jo khug [NMAT+[VNV1/PURP+N]] “a bag [made] of wool
[and used] for sucking”
khyim rtsis (N) “inventory of households” < *khyim gyi rtsis [NOBJV+N] “calculation of houses” (cf.
*”to calculate houses”)
dgra chos (N) “warfare” < *dgra’i chos [NDISAD+N] “proceedings against an enemy”
dgra thabs (N) “military tactics” < dgra chos kyi thabs [[NDISAD+N]EXPL+N] “means [to lead a] warfare”
rje blas (N) “official duty” < *rje’i las [NBEN+N] “a work [done] for [one’s] lord”
rje sa (N/A) “1what is lordly, courtly; 2lordly, courtly” < *rje’i sa [NPOSS+N] “a place belonging to a
lord”
stag ’phraṅ (N) “1tiger-strap; 2tiger-path, path on which tiger walks” < *stag lpags kyi ’breṅ
[[NSOUR+N]MAT+N] “a strap [made] from the hide of a tiger ”
dog srin (N) “an earth-worm” < *sa dog gi srin bu [[N+A]ORIG+N] “a worm [coming] from earth”

In OT there also exists a special, relatively large, group of determinative compounds in which the
first member is a proper name; for some examples see the subsection on subsumptive compounds
(Classification/Syntax/Subsumptive). These compounds were not included in the lexicological part
of the present work.

Pleonastic (1)

This is a highly tentative class of determinative compounds in which the first member is understood
as clarifying the meaning of the otherwise polysemic second constituent without, however,
contributing to the overall semantics of the formation. In this function the pleonastic compounds
would resemble some of the synonymic compounds (see below).
kha bso (N) “prosperity” < *kha gso ba [N+VNV1] “feeding (the mouth)”
Other OT examples:
*kha zas > kha bzas (PT 239:r6.3)
*śi dur > śi bdur (PT 986:154: after COBLIN 1991a:310b)

Converbial (9)

Both constituents of a converbial compound go back to verbal stems that are connected with each
other by means of a converbial particle that at the same time subordinates the preceding stem to
the head verb.1
dku rgyal (N) “nobility” < *dku źiṅ rgyas [VV1+VV1] “to spread while exceeding”
dku ’pel (V) “to be revealed” < *dku źiṅ ’phel [VV1+VV1] “to spread while exceeding”

1
For some further examples from modern Lhasa dialect see BEYER 1992:109n10.
 38

mjal dum “Ito reconcile (V); IIreconciliation (N)” < mjald ciṅ ’dum [VV2+VV1] “to reconcile while
having met”
thugs ñen (N) “supply” < *thug źiṅ sñen [Vv1+Vv1] “to receive [sth.] while [it] arrives”
ldeg ren pa (N) “instigator” < *ldog par ’dren [VV1+VV1] “to pull so that one turns away”
bsnan bskyed (V) “1to extend; 2to add” < *snon źiṅ skyed [VV1+VV1] “to increase while adding”
bu spur (A) “blown away and flying” < *bus śiṅ ’phur [VV2+VV1] “to fly while having been blown
away”
riṅ lugs (N) “1envoy; 2representative” < *riṅs par zlugs [VV1+Vv1] “to inform so that [it] is quick”
lhag chad (N) “deficiency” < *lhag par chad [VV1+VV1] “to consume so that it (i.e. the consumption) is
exceeding”

Coordinate (25)1

Coordinate compounds may be classified on two levels: syntactically, according to the character of
the underlying coordination (additive or alternative), and semantically, regarding the semantic
relation between its constituents or between the constituents and the compound’s overall meaning.
Coordinate compounds retain a strong semantic relationship between a part and the whole.2 The
direction of their lexicalisation is predictable. In my corpus of OT material only adjectives and nouns
occur in coordinate compounds.3 Coordinate compounds seem to be less vulnerable to word-
internal changes than other types of compounds.

Syntactic classification

Two kinds of coordinative relation can be distinguished in OT compounds: additive (“and”) and
alternative (“or”).

Additively coordinate (24)

Additively coordinate compounds found in the corpus are formed from adjectives or (deverbal)
nouns. The conjunctions in the underlying structures are assumed to be la and daṅ respectively.
khur ra (N) “loads and fences” < *khur daṅ ra ba [N+N]

1
An obvious misunderstanding of true coordinate compounds as they appear, e.g., in Sanskrit, has led some Western
authors (cf. OLSEN 2001:292ff.) to the false assumption that German and English compounds like Opfer-Zeuge or actor-
songwriter are also coordinate whereas they are in fact either proper or comparative appositional compounds. The
misconception is especially evident in the following statement: “[...] in all these cases of unembedded copulatives (my
coordinate - JB), a complex nominal stem establishes the identity of a single - ontologically coherent - individual via the
combination of two or more salient concepts to identify the relevant individual.” (OLSEN 2001:297). For a detailed cross-
linguistic analysis of coordinate compounds and their underlying structures see WÄLCHLI 2005.
VOLLMANN (2001:112) distinguishes between the following types of coordinate compounds (his Kopulativkomposita):
reduplication, adversative (my antonymous), synonymic, and dvandva.
2
WÄLCHLI defines coordinate compounds, his ‘co-compounds’, as “word-like units consisting of two or more parts which
express NATURAL COORDINATION. Natural coordination [...] implies, among other things, that the parts express semantically
closely associated concepts [...] which are on the same hierarchical level, and that the whole meaning [...] is more general
than the meaning of the parts.” (2005:1). Accordingly, some types of coordinate compounds discussed in the present work,
e.g., copulative, are excluded from his analysis.
3
Compounds, in which numerals are coordinated, are attested in OT documents as well, cf. below the subsection
Classification/Syntax/Numeral.
 39

gum chad (N) “death and extinction” < *gum pa daṅ chad pa [VN+VN]
gyur sram (N) “otter” < *gyur bu daṅ sram [N+N]
dgyes skyems (N) “delicacies and beverage” < *dgyes pa daṅ skyems [VNV1+N]
dgra zin (N) “enemy and ally” < dgra daṅ zin pa [N+VNV1]
rgod g.yuṅ (N) “braves and weaklings” < *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ [N+N]
ṅan źan (A) “(to be) mean and wicked” < ṅan la źan [A+A]
mṅa’ dbaṅ (N) “domain” < mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ [[N+N]+[N+N]]
che phra (A) “major and minor” < *che la phra [A+A]
rje blon (N) “lords and councillors” < *rje daṅ blon [N+N]
rje dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N]
*ñes yo (N) “mishap” < *ñes pa daṅ yo ba [N+N] (see s.v. ñe yo ba)
staṅs dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N]
noṅs yo (N) “mishap” < *noṅs (pa) daṅ yo ba [N+N]
nol thabs (N) “battle” < *nold pa daṅ thabs [N+N]
snon god (N) “balance” < *snon daṅ god [N+N]
pur myi (N) “1a man; 2a leader” < *pu ru ṣa daṅ myi [N+N]
bla ’og (N) “superior and inferior officials” < *bla daṅ ’og [N+N]
dbuṅ mtha’ (N) “central and border regions” < *dbuṅ daṅ mtha’ [N+N]
’byuṅ ’jug (N) “replacing” < *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa [VNV1+VNV1]
zaṅ yag (A) “excellent”< * zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag [A+A]
zla dpe (N) “exemplar” < *zla daṅ dpe [N+N]
lug rtug (N) “dung” < *lud daṅ rtug [N+N]
so nam (N) “1progeny; fruit; 2abundance, prosperity” < *so daṅ nam [N+N]

Alternatively coordinate (1)

Two groups of alternatively coordinate compounds could be identified so far; one coordinating
adjectives, and the other - numerals.

Adjectival (1)

Alternative coordination of adjectives concerns only antonyms, cf. CT che chuṅ *“big or small” (<
*che’am chuṅ) > “size”, since things can be either big or small with regard to their size.
gces spras “Iesteemed or understated” < *gces pa’am spras pa [VAV2+VAV2] “magnified or
understated”
The resulting lexeme may be either an adjective or a noun. In the latter case the compound acquires
a generic meaning (see the subsection Classification/Syntax/Generic).
 40

Numeral

This group of compounds, although present in the surveyed OT sources, has not been accounted for
in the lexicological part of the present work. It concerns compounds formed from two successive
numerals that go back to the phrase ‘NUM1’am NUM2’, i.e., “NUM1 or NUM2”, cf.:
lṅa drug “five or six” < *lṅa’am drug [NUM+NUM]1

Semantic classification

Compounds whose constituents are connected with each other in the underlying structure by
means of coordination can be further divided according to the semantic relations either between
their members (internal) or between their members and the overall meaning of the compound
(external).2

Internal semantic relations

From the lists presented below, it occurs that consitutents of coordinate compounds can be defined
as either synonyms, antonyms, or co-hyponyms with regard to their mutual semantic relations. In
the examined corpus, there are no coordinate compounds the constituents of which could not be
ascribed one of these relations.

Synonymic (11)3

Constituents of additively coordinate compounds may be synonyms. In case those are referential
nouns, the compound has only one referent.
gum chad (N) “death and extinction” < *gum pa daṅ chad pa [VNV2+VNV2] “(what is) dead and
extinct”
gyur sram (N) “otter” < *gyur bu daṅ sram [N+N] “watercourse-animal and otter”
ṅan źan (A) “(to be) mean and wicked” < ṅan la źan [A+A] “(to be) mean and wicked”
mṅa’ dbaṅ (N) “domain” < mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ [[N+N]+[N+N]] “extent of power and extent of
power”
*ñes yo (N) “mishap” < *ñes pa daṅ yo ba [N+N] “offence and crookedness” (see s.v. ñe yo ba)
noṅs yo (N) “mishap” < *noṅs (pa) daṅ yo ba [N+N] “offence and crookedness”
nol thabs (N) “battle” < *nold pa daṅ thabs [N+N] “a fight and a combat”
1
For an example see PT 1287:89-93 quoted s.v. snam phrag.
2
As already observed by WÄLCHLI (2005:136), a semantic classification of coordinate compounds is never exclusively
semantic but always concerns formal factors as well. According to the latter author, “Co-compounds can be classified
semantically on the basis of: (a) the semantic relationship between the parts; (b) the semantic relationship between
the parts and the whole; (c) the meaning of the whole (irrespective of the meaning of the parts); (d) the semantic
relationship between the whole and the contexts in which co-compounds are used, or a mixture of (a), (b),
(c), and/or (d).” (ibid.). As opposed to WÄLCHLI who, despite the proposed classification, concentrates in his study solely on
the second kind of relation, in the following the first (here: internal) and the second (here: external) kinds of relation will
be considered.
3
Although the term ‘synonymic’ is used here it should be kept in mind that the very notion of ‘synonymy’ taken in a strict
sense is very problematic and it is widely accepted that true synonyms are a rather rare phenomenon. In the present work,
the ones understood as ‘synonymic’ are lexemes semantically close to each other that may occur in similar textual
contexts. On synonymy in coordinate compounds see also WÄLCHLI 2005:159f.
 41

zaṅ yag (A) “excellent”< * zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag [A+A] “fine and good above all”
zla dpe (N) “exemplar” < *zla daṅ dpe [N+N] “example and pattern”
lug rtug (N) “dung” < *lud daṅ rtug [N+N] “manure and dung”
so nam (N) “1progeny; fruit; 2abundance, prosperity” < *so daṅ nam [N+N] “fruit and produce”
The main function of synonymic compounds and, at the same time, the very reason for their
formation in OT seems to have been the need to distinguish between two homonymic/homophonic
lexemes1 or between different meanings of a polyseme, cf.:
nol thabs (N) “battle” < *nold pa daṅ thabs [VNV2+VNV2], lit. “a fight and a combat”,
in which nol- seems to have been added in order to highlight one of the meanings of the polysemic
thabs. Additionally, some of the synonymic compounds might have been coined for purely stylistic
(gyur sram) or emphatic reasons (ṅan źan and zaṅ yag). The emphatic function applies most
frequently to adjectival synonymic compounds. Besides, synonymic compounds are frequently
encountered in ritual language.2

Bilingual synonymic (1)

So far one compound from the corpus could be reconstructed as bilingual consisting of Sanskrit and
Tibetan elements that are in fact synonyms:
pur myi (N) “1a man; 2a leader” < *pu ru ṣa daṅ myi [N+N] “puruṣa and a man”
I propose to classify it as an endocentric synonymic coordinate compound. Similar hybrid Sanskrit-
Tibetan formations, although not necessarily coordinate compounds, are attested at later stages of
the language as well, for further examples see s.v. pur myi.3

1
On this role see also PATHAK 1958:166, VOLLMANN 2001:116 & 125; compare MATISOFF 1973:83 on a process of forming
homonymic compounds in diachrony.
2
The significance of synonymic compounds in ritual language is addressed in GAENSZLE 2002:47f. (for Mewahang Rai) and
ALLEN 1978:250f (for Thulung). According to the former author, they are conceived of as possessing “a special illocutionary
force: similarly to mantras, they are considered to exert a kind of magical influence.” (ibid., p.48). An interesting issue
worth deeper analysis is the potential development of the honorific register in Tibetan from such a ritual lexicon.
Compare hereto once more GAENSZLE: “As ritual language is used only in particular, more or less formal contexts, when a
certain etiquette, or politeness, is required, I prefer to regard it as a special register. This register, which may be further
subdivided, is employed when talking to others to whom respect is due, in situations where ancestral traditions are
invoked.” (ibid., pp.48-9). In the examined corpus an example of a ritual term that has been adopted from ritual language
as an honorific may be the compound staṅs dbyal (see s.v.).
The issue of the occurrence of synonymic compounds cross-linguistically is addressed in WÄLCHLI 2005:171ff. who,
however, treats them as a case of redundancy; cf. also his remark concerning the reasons for developing synonymic
compounds: “the use of redundant co-compounds is due either to contextual motivation or to conventionalization
resulting from earlier contextual motivation” (ibid., p.172).
On synonymic compounds in Classical Tibetan see also PATHAK 1955, 1958, and VOLLMANN 2001:116. For similar synonymic
or near-synonymic compounds in other Central Asiatic languages (mainly Tocharian, Uighur, Mongolian and Old Turkic)
see AALTO 1964. The latter author remarks also with regard to the occurrence of this special type of compounds in
numerous Central Asiatic languages that “[s]ome of the instances quoted above can also be literary translation loans in
imitation of Tokharian expressions. It is not impossible that in some cases they are meant to be special honorific
expressions instead of the plain words of the colloquial language.” (ibid., p.76). However, he expresses the opinion that
these formations in Tocharian are of non-Indo-European origins and might have been borrowed from a (Proto) Turkic
language (ibid.). Otherwise, due to their universal occurrence in many unrelated Central Asiatic languages synonymic
compounds could possibly be counted among areal features.
3
In modern works on Bon one can sometimes encounter formations that are claimed to consist of a Źaṅ źuṅ and a Tibetan
lexeme, cf. gu laṅ gser “a Źaṅ źuṅ term for gold used in conjunction with the Tibetan word” (BELLEZZA 2008:314n333) and tiṅ
mtsho “bilingual term, probably the equivalent of g.yu mtsho, indicating a lake with a blue or turquoise color” (ibid.,
p.324n357). The process of combining loanwords with their native equivalents is still productive in modern Tibetan. Due to
 42

Antonymous (6)

Two antonyms may be coordinated either additively or alternatively:

dgra zin (N) “enemy and ally” < dgra daṅ zin pa [N+VNV1]
rgod g.yuṅ (N) “1braves and weaklings; 2bondservants” < *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ [N+N] “fierce and weak
ones”
gces spras “I(A) esteemed or understated; II(N) respect” < *gces pa’am spras pa [VAV2+VA V2]
“magnified or understated”
che phra (A) “major and minor” < *che la phra [A+A] “major and minor”
snon god (N) “balance” < *snon daṅ god [N+N] “increase and loss”
’byuṅ ’jug (N) “replacing” < *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa [VNV1+VNV1] “removing [and] appointing”
For different semantic outcomes of coordination of two antonyms see below the subsection
Classification/Syntax/External semantic relations.1

Co-hyponymic (7)

Two (in CT also more) co-hyponyms may be combined to form a compound which can, through
semantic generalisation, become their hypernym. This is the case with CT pha ma; the remaining
compounds quoted below are conceived of as copulative as concerns the relationship between the
meanings of their members and the meaning of the whole compound.
khur ra (N) “loads and fences” < *khur daṅ ra ba [N+N]
dgyes skyems (N) “delicacies and beverage” < *dgyes pa daṅ skyems [VNV1+N] “what is delicious and
beverage”
rje blon (N) “lords and councillors” < *rje daṅ blon [N+N] “lords and councillors”
rje dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N] “husband and wife”
staṅs dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N] “husband and wife”
bla ’og (N) “superior and inferior officials” < *bla daṅ ’og [N+N] “superior and inferior [ones]”
dbuṅ mtha’ (N) “central and border regions” < *dbuṅ daṅ mtha’ [N+N] “the centre and the limits”

the contemporary political situation of Tibet a great number of loanwords from Chinese does exist in modern Tibetan
languages forming with native words new hybrid (although perhaps not always strictly synonymic) compounds mainly in
the field of administration, cf. pu’u khaṅ “ch.tib. 1crematorium; 2tomb” (Gs:645a) and taṅ mi “ch.tib. party member”
(Gs:444b); cf. hereto also VOLLMANN 2001:118. The same process may be observed in the language of the Tibetan Diaspora in
India where Hindi (sometimes even English) words are being used in compounding, cf. tar khaṅ “hind.tib. telegraph office”
(Gs:444c), pad rdzus “hind.tib. counterfeit money” (Gs:642c), keb źwa “eng.tib. cap, hat” (Gs:7b; < Eng. cap), or ’jib ’khor
“eng.tib. automobile” (Gs:397b; < Eng. jeep). Interestingly, it seems that in Tibetan languages the order of the constituents
in such compounds has always been fixed: the first constituent is a loan, the second - a native word. This fact can prove
crucial in identifying the underlying words in case they underwent truncation.
Compare in this context BOEDER’s observation on the development of bilingual synonymic compounds: “Starting their life
as the metalinguistic device of translation and nativization in bilingual contact, they soon can be identified with
independently motivated forms of reinforcement, e.g. in medieval Georgian poetry.” (1991:97). On Sanskrit-Tocharian
compounds of this type see AALTO 1964:69. Bilingual synonymic compounds from different Central Asiatic languages are
discussed also in BOEDER 1991:110ff. The latter author perceives synonymic compounds as multifunctional units with their
most important functions being the metalinguistic and expressive (ibid., p.119). In case of OT pur myi we observe, however,
that this group of compounds has indeed a potential to form new words the meanings of which do differ from the
meanings of their constituents even though those are synonyms.
1
More examples of antonymous compounds from CT can be found in BEYER 1992:105 and VOLLMANN 2001:115-6.
 43

or the well known CT examples1:

pha ma “parents” < *pha daṅ ma “father and mother”
ṅag lus sems < *ṅag lus daṅ sems “speech, body, and mind”

External semantic relations2

As concerns the external semantic relations, constituents of OT coordinate compounds can either
provide a copulative meaning (i.e. each has a distinct meaning which is transferred to the overall
meaning of the compound), or a new meaning is formed for the whole compound. It is not
infrequent for a coordinate compound to have more than one meaning and thus be included in
more than one of the following types. This situation is another facet of diachronic changes being
projected onto a synchronic perspective.3

Copulative (10)4

A copulative compound lists elements of a particular set. The elements belong to one taxonomic
level. In Tibetan these are the only coordinate compounds that may consist of more than two
constituents and may be followed by a numeral that denotes the number of elements forming the
compound, most frequently gñis or gsum, rarely bźi. Furthermore, although the examined corpus
does not contain respective formations, it seems that copulative compounds are the only ones that
permit reversibility of constituents within the formation, cf. OT dbon źaṅ (ST Treaty, repeatedly) vs.
źaṅ dbon (PT 1042:14; ITJ 750:245), dbon sras (PT 1287:289; Khri 18; Lho 4; Skar 34, 48) vs. sras dbon (PT

1
The vast majority of CT examples quoted in the present chapter for the sake of illustration are mentioned in the
lexicological part of the thesis.
2
WÄLCHLI divides this group of compounds into: additive (my copulative), generalising, collective (my hypernymic),
synonymic, ornamental (my subsumptive), imitative, figurative, alternative and approximate (my alternatively
coordinate), and scalar (my abstract) (2005:137ff.). His generalising compounds are attested in Old and Classical Tibetan (cf.
phan tshun, ñin mtshan, etc.) but were not included in the lexicological analysis of the present work. As regards WÄLCHLI’s
synonymic compounds, I do not find any grounds for considering them additionally under External semantic relations. In
OT no meaning is added to compounds formed from two synonyms and the same is true for WÄLCHLI’s type for we read: “In
SYNONYMIC CO-COMPOUNDS the parts A, B, and the whole C all have the same or almost the same meaning (there is no contrast
in meaning between A, B, and C, and A and B are not at opposite poles).” (2005:143; small capitals in original). Ornamental
compounds, are defined as containing “a semantically empty part that does not contribute to the meaning of the whole
and may even be misleading” (ibid., p.146). The same holds true for WÄLCHLI’s imitative compounds which, however,
appear to be comparable to some patterns of Tibetan reduplication (i.e., with alternating initials, cf. URAY 1954a:235f.) that
is not recognised as a type of compounding in the present work. Figurative compounds in which “C belongs to another
domain than A and B” (WÄLCHLI 2005:149) do not seem to be known in Tibetan at all, at least not among Tibetan coordinate
compounds. WÄLCHLI’s group of “alternative and approximate co-compounds” (ibid., 151f.) is roughly identical with my
alternatively coordinate compounds and, in my opinion, erroneously defined by him as based on semantic relation.
It needs to be stressed that due to the fact that the present work is based on written sources and, in addition, of a dead
language, it is not always possible to trace all the semantic nuances that may occur when studying a spoken language.
3
A good example demonstrating how complicated the semantics of a coordinate compound may be is the well-known
lexeme pha ma, lit. “father and mother”, often translated as “parents”. Notwithstanding the high lexicalisation of the
compound, even in the classical literature (see RKTS) and modern dialects it occurs frequently followed by the numeral
gñis “two” that highlights its copulative rather than generic meaning. Compare hereto also the remark by WÄLCHLI
(2005:37), “co-compounds consisting of the same parts may belong to different semantic types depending on how the
meaning of the parts is related to the meaning of the whole.” For possible directions of semantic change within coordinate
compounds in comparative perspective see WÄLCHLI 2005:157.
4
WÄLCHLI, who calls this group ‘fusional compounds’, does not count them among co-compounds (2005:7-8) explaining
that “[t]he whole is not really a superordinate concept but is rather on the same level as the parts [...].” (ibid., p.8).
 44

1287:287; Źol N 12; Źwa W 29, 59) and CT mchod yon vs. yon mchod.1 A complete list of copulative
compounds encountered in the corpus follows:
khur ra (N) “loads and fences” < *khur daṅ ra ba [N+N]
dgyes skyems (N) “delicacies and beverage” < *dgyes pa daṅ skyems [VNV1+N]
dgra zin (N) “enemy and ally” < dgra daṅ zin pa [N+VNV1]
rgod g.yuṅ (N) “braves and weaklings” < *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ [N+N]
che phra (A) “great and petty” < *che la phra [A+A]
rje blon (N) “lords and councillors” < *rje daṅ blon [N+N]
rje dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N]
staṅs dbyal (N) “husband and wife” < *staṅs daṅ dbyal [N+N]
bla ’og (N) “superior and inferior officials” < *bla daṅ ’og [N+N]
dbuṅ mtha’ (N) “central and border regions” < *dbuṅ daṅ mtha’ [N+N]
Other OT compounds:
rgya drug ’jaṅ < *rgya drug daṅ ’jaṅ [N+N+N] “Chinese, Turks, and ’Jaṅ”
as well as CT:
ṅag lus sems (gsum) < *ṅag lus daṅ sems (gsum) “(the three:) speech, body, and mind”
skye rga na ’chi (bźi) < *skye rga na daṅ ’chi (bźi) “(the four:) birth, aging, illness, and death”

Generic

A copulative compound may evolve semantically acquiring a generic meaning (cf. also WÄLCHLI
2005:6, 139). A new meaning arises from a generalisation of meanings of its constituents, i.e., from
an upward shift in the taxonomy: from denoting members of a class to the name for the class itself.
Although there is a strong tendency in the linguistic literature to classify these compounds as
exocentric (see above), in my opinion, they should rather be treated as highly lexicalised
endocentric compounds that underwent a semantic shift, in most cases based on metonymy.
Depending on the denotation of the whole compound the following types could be discerned for OT:

Hypernymic (1)

The meaning of the compound is a hypernym with respect to the meanings of the constituents of
the compound. The following single example from the corpus can be quoted:
rgod g.yuṅ (N) “2bondservants” < *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ [N+N] “fierce and weak ones”
One can also add hereto:
pha ma “parents” < *pha daṅ ma “father and mother”
*za thuṅ MT “food” < *za ba daṅ thuṅ “eating and drinking”1

1
More research is required in order to ascertain which copulative compounds can reverse the order of their constituents
and which cannot. A cursory look at the presented examples would point to co-hyponymic compounds with referential
constituents as a potential class of reversible formations. In addition, we observe that the above compounds are formed
from relational terms like, e.g, kinship terms.
 45

Collective (1)

It seems that when a lexicalisation process has set in and numerals used after copulative compounds
have been left out an additional tint of collective meaning is sometimes given to a compound, cf.:
rgod g.yuṅ “2bondservants” < *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ [N+N] “fierce and weak ones”

Abstract (3)

Two antonymous lexemes may be compounded additively or alternatively2 to form coordinate

compounds that denote an abstract notion. This group of compounds is sometimes called in the
linguistic literature “scalar compounds” (cf. WÄLCHLI 2005:153ff.). In OT the underlying lexemes may
be either adjectives or nouns but the compound as a whole is a noun.
gces spras (N) “IIrespect” < *gces pa’am spras pa [VAV2+VA V2] “magnified or understated”
snon god (N) “balance” < *snon daṅ god [N+N] “increase and loss”3
’byuṅ ’jug (N) “replacing” < *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa [VNV1+VNV1] “removing [and] appointing”

Attributive (27)

Attributive compounds, being always left-headed, can be reconstructed as phrases consisting of a

noun and its postmodifier.4

Proper attributive (23)

In the group of ‘proper attributive compounds’ the postmodifier might be an adjective, a numeral,
or a deverbal adjective, i.e. a participle. In the examined compounds, the latter is always derived
from a V2 stem of a verb.
kha sprod (A) “open” < *kha sprod pa [N+VAV2] *“having a delivered orifice”
khram skya (N) “plain tally” < *khram skya bo [N+A] “a pale criss-cross [piece of wood]”
chu rlag (N) “a lost water-demon” < *chu srin rlag pa [[N+N]+VAV2]
thag brgyad (A) “eigth-threaded” < thag brgyad [N+NUM] “having eigth threads”

Appositional (3)

The underlying structure of an appositional compound is reconstructed as an appositional phrase

two elements of which, usually nouns or a noun and an NP, have one and the same referent
although identified in a different way. As opposed to additively coordinate compounds, appositional
compounds are never followed by the numeral gñis in text, nor do they have a conjunction daṅ in
their underlying structure. The first element is always the head and the second - the appositive.

1
Cf. Toch. śwātsi yoktsi ~ Uig. aš ičkü ~ CM idegen umdaγan “eating-drinking” = “food”, as well as Skt. annapāna and
pānabhojana (AALTO 1964:74, where further examples also from Finno-Ugric languages are quoted).
2
Compare hereto a similar formation of some of Chinese abstract terms in SKALIČKA 1979:183, although only the first type
out of four presented there is known in Tibetan.
3
For parallel examples in Tocharian, Uighur, Mongolian and Old Turkic see AALTO 1964:75f.
4
In a revised version of their classification, instead of the earlier group of attributive compounds (cf. BISETTO/SCALISE
2005:326), SCALISE/BISETTO (2009:50f.) propose the ATAP group that is further subdivided in attributive and appositive (my
appositional) compounds.
 46

Appositional compounds both constituents of which belong to one semantic field may be called
‘proper appositional’ as against comparative and subsumptive compounds (see below).
mdor cod (N) “sheath” < *mdoṅ chod pa [N+N] “a tube-like case that is a cover”
rtsis mgo (N) “initial account” < *rtsis mgo nan [N+[N+VV1]] “an account [which is] an incipit”
zaṅs brgya’ (N) “a large copper vessel” < *rgya ma zaṅs tiṅ [N+[N+N]] “a wide receptacle [which is] a
copper-brass vessel”
As opposed to determinative compounds, no appositional compounds were identified so far in
which the underlying structure of a postmodifier could be reconstructed as an NP or a nominalised
clause.

Comparative (1)

The difference between comparative and proper appositional compounds concerns mainly the
semantic relations of their constituents to each other. Whereas the constituents of a proper
appositional compound belong to one semantic domain and are both referential, the second element
of a comparative compound refers to the referent of the first member by way of a metaphor, cf.:
kom tse “armour” < *ko ba mtshe “rawhide [that is like one’s own] twin”

Subsumptive

An important group of compounded formations not accounted for in the lexicological part of the
present work is attested in OT material. They are characterised by a peculiar kind of hyponymic
relation between their constituents; namely, the first member of a compound refers to one concrete
item from among a set of items that is specified by the second member. By analogy with MARCHAND’s
(1969:62f.) oaktree, I propose to call them ‘subsumptive’.1 Since OT subsumptive compounds have the
structure ‘PROPER NAME+APPELLATIVE’ they should on the basis of their syntax be treated as a subgroup
of appositional compounds with the provisional reading “PROPER NAME which is an APPELLATIVE”. A
preliminary list of appellatives encountered in this type of OT compounds is given below together
with one example for each type:
-chu “river” rtsaṅ chu
-yul “land” kog yul
-la “pass” bog la
-luṅ “valley” yar luṅ

1
Of course there is an important difference between oaktree and the OT examples which concerns their first element: a
generic term and a proper name respectively. However, considering the fact that compounds of the type ‘GENERIC
TERM+HYPERNYM’ do not seem to be represented in OT, I decided to adopt the term ‘subsumptive’ to the only attested group
of this variety.
This group is called redundant compounds and is treated as a subgroup of coordinate compounds in Chinese by
CECCAGNO/BASCIANO 2009:481-2. WÄLCHLI refers to them as ‘ornamental co-compounds’ giving the following definition: “co-
compounds in which the meaning of one part does not contribute anything to the meaning of the whole” (2005:6).
Although the same definition could be applied to pleonastic compounds as discussed in the present work.
 47

Their compositional character may be proven by the first quoted example, rtsaṅ chu, the underlying
structure of which should be reconstructed as *rtsaṅ po chu, rtsaṅ po being the complete version of
the proper name of the river. On the other hand, the existence of the following two clauses:
rtsaṅ chu ’i gźuṅ la btaṅ ṅo (PT 1287:20), and
rtsaṅ po ’i gźuṅ la btaṅ ṅo (PT 1287:32-3)
provides the conclusive proof for the hypothesis that these compounds are appositional and their
constituents have one and the same referent.

This group must not be confused with similar formations, like mchims yul “the land of Mchims[-
clan]”, skyi ro “the horn of Skyi[-clan]”, etc. The latter compounds, being determinative like rṅegs lha
or skyi rje, are usually accompanied in texts by a proper name, cf. mchims yul [dgu sul]PN, skyi ro [lṅaṅ
sṅon]PN, rṅegs lha [bya rmaṅ sruṅ]PN, and skyi rje [rmaṅ po]PN.1 Here, the semantic relation between the
constituents is that of POSSESSION (in case the second member refers to a non-human being, yul, ro,
luṅ, lha) or ORIGIN (if the second member denotes a human being, rje, za, gśen, etc).

Still another type of phrase should be mentioned in this context. Compare, for instance, mtsho ma
paṅ and mkhar khyuṅ luṅ, in which the first syllable consists of an appellative whereas the remaining
part is a proper name. They are proposed to be interpreted as a subclass of appositional phrases and
not as compounds.2

Incorporating (16)3

In incorporating compounds a syntactic complement of a word is morphologically incorporated into

a compound. These compounds consist of a head element (either a verb or an adjective), which is
always the right constituent, and its grammatical complement. The scope of potential non-head
elements depends on semantic and syntactic constraints of the head element.

Although incorporating compounds are seldom recognised in linguistic literature as an independent

group,4 there are important reasons to acknowledge their special status, notably in Tibetan
languages. First of all, the constituents of their underlying structure are characterised by a
complement-head relation. In incorporating compounds, the non-head element has to satisfy the
1
One compound of this kind has been analysed in the present work, see s.v. ’jaṅ dum.
2
Already in OT texts we encounter phrases like yul rṅegs yul or rje skyi rje which prove that what was originally a
determinative compound with a proper name within, i.e. rṅegs yul and skyi rje, has been re-analysed as a proper name itself
and re-used as an appositive in an appositional phrase.
3
Traditionally, incorporation, or more specificly, noun incorporation is understood as “a construction in which a noun
stem is combined with a verb to form a new, morphologically complex verb” (MITHUN 2000:916). This construction is also
well known in Tibetan languages, being, however, more distinct in Classical Tibetan and modern dialects than in the oldest
extant documents. The term ‘incorporating compounds’ is used in the present work by analogy with this very syntactic
construction, although it should be stressed that the resulting formations, at least those in the surveyed corpus, are all
nominal. BEYER noted the existence of the respective formations in CT (cf. “[m]any such compounds consist of a transitive
verb and its patient participant functioning as a single unit”, 1992:106), although he indiscriminately treated true
incorporations and incorporating compounds. For more examples of modern incorporating compounds see BEYER
1992:109n10.
4
CECCAGNO/BASCIANO, following the classification put forward by BISETTO/SCALISE (2005:326f.), include Chinese compounds of
the type I call incorporating within the group of subordinate compounds, which they broadly define as “those in which
constituents have an argument-head (or head-argument) relation.” (2009:480-1).
 48

requirements of the argument structure of the head element; thus, for instance, in the adjectival
incorporating compounds with the second element -mkhas, the first constituent, if verbal, must be
derived from a controllable verb.1 This kind of restriction is absent from subordinate compounds
that are right-headed as well. The choice of the first constituent in the latter group may be
narrowed down only by the semantics of the head. If the first constituent cannot be a complement
of the second constituent for formal reasons, the compound is not incorporating. Furthermore, head
elements of subordinate compounds do not need a determinant or a converb. If they were missing
from the formation, the sentence or clause would nevertheless be grammatically correct. Head
elements of incorporating compounds, on the other hand, do need a complement; otherwise their
argument slot remains empty.

Verbal (14)

To date four types of verbal incorporating compounds in OT could be identified: subject-, object-,
adjunct-, and predicative-incorporating.2 They are all right-headed and contain as their second
constituent a verbal stem of which the respective part of argument structure occurs on the surface
as the first member of the compound. In all examined cases, the second member could be
reconstructed as a V1 stem. The resulting formations are nominal, mostly nouns. The crucial factor
in identifying a compound as incorporating is the semantic prosody of the sentence helping one to
decide which member of the compound is the head. For instance, the compound bu srid, taken in
isolation, could theoretically be analysed as either attributive (< *bu srid pa [N+A] “an existing child”)
or incorporating (< *bu srid [N+V], lit. “a child is there”, i.e. “posterity”).

The syntactic difference between converbial subordinate and verbal incorporating compounds
consists in the fact that in the first group neither syntactic nor semantic restrictions are imposed on
the choice of the subordinate constituent of the compound. In incorporating compounds, on the
other hand, the first member is bound to the argument structure (and semantics) of the head.

In addition, it may be observed that the verbal incorporating compounds examined in the present
thesis are characterised by non-compositional semantics, i.e. they are highly lexicalised as
compared with other classes of compounds and their overall meanings are not easily retrievable
from their constituents.

1
According to SCALISE/BISETTO (2009:51), the verb of verbal-nexus compounds (i.e. my incorporating compounds) “selects
‘semantically’ the non-head to combine with, be it an argument or an adjunct”. As I argue, the selection in Tibetan has a
grammatical character and is anchored in the valence of the head. The difference in the treatment of complement-head
compounds may partly be attributed to the very character of Tibetan languages and to the role nominalisation of verbal
phrases and clauses plays therein. The latter feature prevents the paraphrasing of verbal-nexus compounds like taxi driver
as *driver of a taxi. The ‘of’ relation is not allowed in the underlying structure of compounds with the verbal head
constituent.
2
According to SHIBATANI (1990:61-2, 72, apus BAUER 2009:344), Ainu possesses three kinds of incorporation: direct-object
incorporation, subject incorporation, and adverb incorporation.
 49

Subject-incorporating (1)

The underlying structure is that of an intransitive clause with one argument, namely, the subject,
cf.:
bu srid (N) “posterity” < *bu srid [N+VV1] “a child is there”

Object-incorporating (8)

The first member of the compound is the direct object of the verb in the underlying structure:
mgo nan (N) “incipit < *mgo nan [N+VV1] “to press the head”
ṅam len (N) “ravine” < *ṅam grog len [[N+N]+VV1] “to catch ravine’s torrents”
rṅo thog (A) “capable” < *rṅo thog [N+VV1] “to reach power”
’phrog rlom (N) “boldness” < *’phrog par rlom [VNV1+VV1] “to boast about deprival”
źa ’briṅ (N) “entourage” < *źa ’breṅ [N+VV1] “to follow the [btsan po’s] face”
źaṅ lon (N) “aristocrat” < *źaṅ lon [N+VV1] “to take the źaṅ[-position]”
ram ’da’ (N) “support force” < *ra ma ’da’ [N+VV1] “to pursue/follow advance guard”
lhun stug (A) “grand” < *lhun stug [N+VV1] “to condense a mass”

Adjunct-incorporating (4)

The first member of the compound fulfils the function of an adjunct in the reconstructed underlying
clause:
rkaṅ ’gros (N) “herded livestock” < *rkaṅ thaṅ du ’gro [[N+N]+VV1] “to go on foot”
rkaṅ ton (N) “rkaṅ-conscription” < *rkaṅ nas ’don [N+VV1] “to take out from a rkaṅ[-unit]”
dgra zun (N) “hostility” < *dgrar zun [N+VV1] “to take as an enemy”
ñam noṅs (N) “1mourner; 2afflicted (one)” < *ñams la noṅs [N+Vv1] “to be gone in heart”

Predicative-incorporating (1)

Although, for the sake of completeness, I propose to recognise this additional class of incorporating
compounds, the reconstruction of its only member identified so far, should be nevertheless
considered tentative.
pho ma (A) “immature” < *pho ma niṅ [N+[NEG+VAV1]] “to not be an (adult) male (yet)”1

Adjectival (2)

The head of a compound is an adjective. The syntactic relation between the constituents of the
compound is determined by the argument structure of the head.
dkyel mkhas (A) “experienced in overthrowing” < *dkyel ba la mkhas pa [VNV1+A]
rgal mkhas (A) “skilled in fighting” < *rgol ba la mkhas pa [VNV1+A]A

1
Compounds of the structure ‘N1 ma N2’, lit. ”(what is) neither N1 nor N2”, addressed to shortly on the page 28n1 above
should be included in this class as well.
 50

Metacompounds (2)

Two metacompounds could be identified in the OT corpus analysed in the present work:
źal ce gra (N) “school of law” < *źal ce’i grwa [[N+N]+N]
yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs (N) “vast pastures of the marches of the country” < *yul gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs pa
[[N+[N+N]]+VAV2]
As these examples already demonstrate, metacompounds could be formed either directly from
phrases (yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs) or from other compounds all constituents of which are still represented
on the surface of the target compound and no truncation of lexical elements takes place (źal ce gra).
One could add to these two further examples attested in OT sources: a determinative-coordinate
sṅo sa skya sa < *sṅo’i sa daṅ skya’i sa [[N+N]+[N+N]] “lands with unripe and sunburnt crops”1
and a determinative-determinative
gtsug lag khaṅ “temple” < *gtsug gi lag gi khaṅ [N+N]+N] “a house of principles”
More analogous formations shall be examined in order to ascertain whether there exist any
constraints regarding the possible syntactic combinations within metacompounds.

Metacompounds could undergo truncation in order to conform to the rule of disyllableness, cf.:
mun mag myi [[N+N]+N] > mun mag
ru yaṅ lag [N+[N+N]] > ru lag
This process might have been blocked in case of culturally important terms (gtsug lag khaṅ, źal ce gra)
truncation of which would have led to semantic opacity causing problems in communication.

FORMAL CLASSES

Due to the truncated character of Tibetan compounds and uncertainty concerning word classes of
some lexemes, I have decided to include a schematic representation of their underlying structures
[S] in the classification. Sigla following the bracketed scheme provide the information on the word
class of the whole compound as attested in the examined sources. The following contains a complete
list of types encountered in the analysed corpus grouped according to their heads (marked in bold)
and frequency of occurrence within a particular group; each type is illustrated with one example.
Excluded from the list are formations derived from compounds by means of nominal particles.
Right-headed (69)
[N+N]N (31) bla skyes “baksheesh” < *bla’i skyes
[N+VV1]N (8) bu srid “posterity” < *bu srid
[[N+N]+N]N (5) dgra thabs “military tactics” < dgra chos kyi thabs
[VV1+VV1]N (4) dku rgyal “nobility” < *dku źiṅ rgyas
[VV1+VV1]V (2) dku ’pel “to be revealed” < *dku źiṅ ’phel
[VNV1+N]N (2) dku ’gel “an extra addition” < *dku ba’i ’gel
1
This formation is discussed in the present work split into two compounds, skya sa and sṅo sa (see s.vv.). This approach is
justified by the fact that the former lexeme is attested also independently in OT sources.
 51

[N+N]ADV (2) ñin źiṅ “during the day” < *ñin gyi źiṅ
[VNV1+A]A (2) dkyel mkhas “experienced in overthrowing” < *dkyel ba la mkhas pa
[[N+A]+N]N (2) dog yab “the sky” < *sa dog gi yab
[[N+N]+VV1]N (2) ṅam len “ravine, gorge” < *ṅam grog len
[N+VV1]A (2) lhun stug “grand” < *lhun stug
[N+N]N/A (1) rje sa “what is lordly, courtly” < *rje’i sa
[PN+N]N (1) ’jaṅ dum “House of ’Jaṅ” < *’jaṅ gi sdum pa
[[N+(NUM)]+[N+N]]N (1) ru lag “dependency of the (Three) Horns” < *ru (gsum) gyi yan lag
[N+VNV1]N (1) kha bso “prosperity” < *kha gso ba
[VV2+VV1]V/N (1) mjal ’dum “I(V) to reconcile; II(N) 1reconciliation; 2an (international)
agreement” < mjald ciṅ ’dum
[VV2+VV1]A (1) bu spur “blown away and flying” < *bus śiṅ ’phur
[VNV1+VV1]N (1) ’phrog rlom “boldness” < *’phrog par rlom
Two-headed (23)
[N+N]N (15) khur ra “loads and fences” < *khur daṅ ra ba
[A+A]A (3) ṅan źan “(to be) mean and wicked” < *źan la źan
[N+VNV1]N (1) dgra zin “enemy and ally” < *dgra daṅ zin pa
[VNV1+N]N (1) dgyes skyems “delicacies and beverage” < *dgyes pa daṅ skyems
[VNV2+VNV2]N (1) gum chad “death and extinction” < *gum pa daṅ chad pa
[VNV1+VNV1]N (1) ’byuṅ ’jug “replacing” < *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa
[VAV2+VA V2]A/N (1) gces spras “I(A) esteemed or understated; II(N) respect” < *gces pa’am spras
pa
Left-headed (18)
[N+A]N (9) khrab bse “varnished lamellar armour” < *khrab (b)se ba
[N+VAV2]N (4) spos lam “roasted spices” < *spod slam pa
[N+N]N (2) kom tse “armour (made of rawhide)” < *ko ba mtshe
[N+[PRN+INDF]]N (1) mu su “everyone” < *myi su yaṅ
[N+[N+N]]N (1) zaṅs brgya’ “a large copper vessel” < *rgya ma zaṅs tiṅ
[N+[N+VV1]]N (1) rtsis mgo “initial account” < *rtsis mgo nan
Headless (9)
[N+NUM]A (3) ñes dgu “malicious” < *ñes pa dgu
[N+VAV2]A (2) kha sprod “open” < *kha sprod pa
[N+N]A (1) ñiṅ rim “of internal order” < *ñiṅ gi rim pa
[N+N]N (1) stod rims “those (-s) (having the place in) a row of the upper part” <
*[stod kyi rim pa]+-s
[N+A]N/A (1) thaṅ kar “Iwhite winged (A); IIwhite-winged one (N)” < *thaṅ dkar po
[N+A]N (1) thaṅ prom “white-winged one” < *thaṅ phrom
 52

Head-hidden (i.e. esocentric) (6)

[N+[VNV1+N]]N (1)
[[N+N]+[N+N]]N (1)
[[N+A]+A]N (1)
[[N+N]+VAV2]N (1)
[N+[N+N]]N (1)
[N+[NEG+VV1]]A (1)
Metacompound (2)1
[[N+N]+N]N (1)
[[N+[N+N]]+VAV2]N (1)
khu ljo “a woollen sucking-bag” < *khul gyi ’jo khug
mṅa’ dbaṅ “domain” < mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ
dog mon “dark earth” < *sa dog mun pa
chu rlag “a lost water-demon” < *chu srin rlag pa
mun mag “border soldier” < *mu’i dmag myi
pho ma “immature” < *pho ma niṅ
źal ce gra “school of law” < *źal ce’i grwa
yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs “vast pastures of the marches of the country” < * yul
gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs pa

FORM CHANGES
In the course of reading OT documents and analysing their vocabulary it turned out that numerous
formations identified as compounds were subject to various changes that, in some cases, have
obscured their original structure. As a result, their individual constituents were hardly identifiable
and the meanings of the compounds could be retrieved only from the context. However, repeating
patterns of changes in the written forms could be revealed by a detailed comparative survey. The
vast majority of them seems to have come into being as a consequence of the very process of
compounding that forced, for instance, various kinds of assimilation within a lexical unit.
Furthermore, one may surmise that some of these changes occurred primarily in spoken language
and were subsequently transferred to paper2, some might have resulted from the unstable
orthography or insufficient knowledge of the language in case of foreign scribes, and others seem to
have appeared in the process of copying texts.

The problem of motivation behind these changes, however, goes far beyond the sphere of language
and is closely related to the question of why some of the texts have been written down at all. Many
of the manuscripts, chiefly the mythological and ritual ones, contain textual material that is not
known to have been committed to paper in other cultures before the 17th century. In case of some
texts, e.g., PT 1042, one may suspect that they have been written down by Buddhists and used in
order to create written refutations of ‘old’, i.e. non-Buddhist, religious customs. Others (PT 239)
contain explicit references to Buddhist teachings as well as critiques of non-Buddhist ritual
practices. But why and for what reasons did one commit to paper, for instance, shamanic healing
ritual (PT 1285), myths of the origins of the horse (PT 1134, ITJ 731), or funeral rituals (PT 1134, PT
1136, ITJ 731)? Knowing answers to these much more fundamental questions would certainly

1
For the sake of completness I add metacompounds as a distinct category since in some cases (yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs, skya sa
sṅo sa) they could be counted under more than one type of headedness.
2
For a similar hypothesis concerning the influence of the spoken language on CT language see TERJÉK 1972.
 53

contribute to our understanding of many linguistic changes that can be observed in OT documents
and that might have been closely related to the sociolinguistic environment in which the texts were
written down and circulated.

A detailed description of changes attested in the examined corpus of OT compounds is presented

below. With regard to their character, I propose to classify them as either sound or morphological
changes. The latter are assumed to be peculiar to compounding. The changes are listed according to
their frequency in the corpus. In some cases additional evidence from Old or Classical Tibetan has
been provided in order to substantiate the hypothesised change.

SOUND CHANGES

The author is conscious that describing “sound changes” within a written text may be considered
far-fetched. We do not know in case of OT documents how faithfully a text reflects the
contemporary spoken language. Moreover, the texts chosen for the corpus do not come from the
same period of time. In fact, they might have been written in a span of more than two hundred
years, between ca. 750 and 950. Some of them are copies of earlier manuscripts, some were written
down by scribes who did not have much knowledge about the text’s contents. The instability of
orthography should not be neglected neither. Some of the changes occur only in variant readings - a
fact that could possibly point to a local character of those sound changes. Besides, one and the same
text can contain a few different forms of a word or a particle. However, a detailed description of
form variations within a text is not the aim of the following discussion. Instead, I would like to
concentrate on apparently regular changes that occur word-internally within compounds.

The following section contains a detailed list of sound changes encountered in the corpus. Each
subsection deals only with the respective change, and overlooks those which are not relevant for
the current discussion; for a complete picture of sound changes of a lexeme see the lexicological
part of the work.1

Elision (21)

Two main patterns of elision can be discerned: (1) simplification of word-internal consonant clusters
to two consonants; (2) elision of the final consonant of the first syllable if the onset of the second
syllable begins with a consonant of the same class. In the first pattern we observe that from a
sequence of consonants *-C1C2C3- it is always the middle one that is elided > -C1C3-. If the second
syllable contains the sequence *(C)Cr- in onset, all consonants preceding -r- are elided. This does not
seem to happen with the onset *(C)Cy- which in our two examples is preserved as Cy- evidencing
that in these very cases -y- is just an orthographic device used in script before the front vowel -i-.

1
Some of the changes discussed in the following have already been noticed by THOMAS (cf. 1957:18*ff.) with regard to
simple as well as compounded lexemes in OT documents.
 54

(1) *rkaṅ ’don > rkaṅ ton ’a- > Ø / -ṅσ_d-

1
*khul ’jo > khu ljo ’a > Ø / -lσ_j-
2
migration: CVCσCV > CVσC+CV
*mchog dkar > mchog gar d- > Ø / -gσ_k-
*mjal ’dum > mjal dum ’a- > Ø / -lσ_d-
*’jaṅ sdum > ’jaṅ dum s- > Ø / -ṅσ_d-
*ñams noṅs > ñam noṅs -s > Ø / -m_σn-
*ñes yo > ñe yo assimilation: 1y- > ś- / -sσ_
2
ś-: -s > Ø / _σś-
3
voicing: ś- > ź- / -Vσ_V-
f.e.: źo > yo / ~ yo ba
*thaṅ dkar > thaṅ kar d- > Ø / -ṅσ_k-
*thoṅ dmyigs > thoṅ myig d- > Ø / -ṅσ_m-
f.e.: -s > Ø / ~ myig
*mthing ’phraṅ > mthing braṅ ’a- > Ø / -ṅσ_CC-
*ldog ’dren > ldeg ren ’d- > Ø / -gσ_r-
*noṅs dmyigs > noṅs myig d- > Ø / -ṅσ_m-
*noṅs źo > noṅ źo (see s.v. noṅs yo) -s > Ø / -ṅ_σź-
*nold thabs > nol thabs -d > Ø / -l_σth-
*spos slam > spos lam assimilation: -d > -s / _σs-
s- > Ø / -sσ_l-
*bus ’phur > bu spur ’a- > Ø / -sσ_ph-
źa ’briṅ > źam riṅ (PT 126:153; Źol N 14; Źwa W 34) nasalis.: Ø > -m / -_σN-
’b- > Ø / -mσ_r-
(1)
*riṅs zlugs > riṅ lugs -s > Ø / -ṅ_σz-
(2)
z- > Ø / -ṅσ_l-
*lhag ’chad > lhag chad ’a- > Ø / -gσ_ch-
(2) *mkhos śam > mkho śam -s > Ø / _σś-
*ñes śo > *ñe śo (see s.v. ñe yo ba) -s > Ø / _σś-1
Other OT examples:
(1) *mṅan dpon > mṅan pon (ST Treaty N 32-3) d- > Ø / -nσ_p-
*chibs dpon > chibs pon (ITJ 750:205) d- > Ø / -bsσ_p-
*rtiṅ dkar > rtiṅ kar (PT 1042:100) d- > Ø / -ṅσ_k-

1
The word-internal elision of the syllable final -s after a vowel and before a particle beginning with ś- (e.g.
indefinite/imperative śig) is commonly attested in numerous OT sources; compare the alternating pairs in OTDO: ’bras śig ~
’bra śig, mchis śig ~ mchi śig, byos śig ~ byo śig, gyis śig ~ gyi śig, etc. Further examples are provided and shortly discussed in
THOMAS 1957:53ff.
 55

(2) *khrag khrug > khra khrug (see s.v. stod rims) -g > Ø / _σkh-
*dgug khol > dgu khol (Or.8212.187:8-9) -g > Ø / _σkh-
(1)
*gñis bcu > ñi śu b- > Ø / -sσ_c-
assimilation: c- > ś- / -sσ_
(2)
-s > Ø / -V_σś-
CT examples:
(1) *skyin mtshe >skyin tse (see s.v. kom tse) m- > Ø / -nσ_tsh-
*chags goṅ > chag goṅ (see s.v. chags lham) -s > Ø / -g_σg-
*thel mtshe > thel tse (see s.v. kom tse) m- > Ø / -lσ_tsh-
*ldoṅ dros > ldoṅ ros (see s.v. ldoṅ prom) d- > Ø/ -ṅσ_r-
(2) chags śiṅ > phyag śiṅ (see s.v. chags lham) -s > Ø / -g_σś-

Deaspiration (18)

In the vast majority of cases deaspiration concerns the root consonant of the second syllable (Ch > C
/ -σ_)1:
*kom tshe > kom tse
*dku ’phel > dku ’pel
rgyal thag brgyad > rgyal tag brgyad
chags lham > chags lam2
*rjes ’baṅs > rje ’paṅs (Or.15000/220v:3)
*ste’u kha ma > ste’u ka ma
*thaṅ phrom > thaṅ prom
*dra chen > dra cen
*mdoṅ chod > mdor cod
*ldoṅ phrom > ldoṅ prom
snam phrag > snam prag (PT 1287:92)
*bus ’phur > bu spur
dbaṅ thaṅ > dbaṅ taṅ (PT 1042:13, ITJ 739:10r4)
*’dzaṅs khyad > ’dzaṅs kyad
*yul phyi ’brog gdaṅs > yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs
lhag chad > lhag cad (ITJ 750:226)

1
Deaspiration in second syllables is a well known phenomenon also in modern Tibetan dialects, cf.: “We know it very well
from southwestern and central dialects. It also points to the decreasing compound character of the word in the west.”
(BIELMEIER 1988a:48n19, who provides numerous examples of deaspiration in spoken Tibetan throughout his paper).
2
If we accept after HILL (2010b:118ff.) that the consonant cluster lh represented a voiceless counterpart of the voiced /l/
(written as l) then the change from chags lham to chags lam should, in all likelihood, be viewed as a case of folk
etymologisation; voicing in the second syllable after the coda -gs would be highly problemantic and otherwise unattested.
Other examples of word-internal alternation lh ~ l in OT include rtsaṅ la (PT 1060:74; PT 1285:r171) for rtsaṅ lha (ITJ
734:7r295, 298) and yar la (PT 1285:r175) for yar lha (repeatedly, see OTDO).
 56

Other OT examples:
*bag tshos > bag tsas (see s.v. ñam noṅs)
bu tsha > bu tsa (repeatedly, see OTDO)
As against this pattern, some examples of deaspiration of a word-initial consonant are found as well,
Ch > C / #_:
thaṅ khram > taṅ khram (ITJ 750:222)
phyiṅ rild > pyiṅ ril(d) (ITJ 750:209, 213-4, 216)
Though these could possibly be attributed to the unstable orthography - a fact additionally
suggested by the existence of variant spellings.

Assimilation (16)

Consonant(9)

Consonant assimilation, both progressive and regressive, may operate either word internally at the
syllable border (1) or between final consonants of the syllables (2).1 The first pattern concerns
assimilation of adjacent elements and so does not need any further discussion. In case of the second
pattern the final consonant of one syllable is completely assimilated (exception: ru yaṅ lag) to the
final consonant of the other syllable. On the basis of the collected material, one can assume that this
kind of assimilation is additionally triggered by the identity of vowels in both syllables. This process
could schematically be presented as follows:
Progressive: C1 > C2 / -V1C2σ-V1_
Regressive: C1 > C2 / -V1_σ-V1C2
Interestingly, in all OT examples of the second pattern quoted below, the consonants are assimilated
to a guttural sound of one of the syllables.2

Progressive (4)

(1) *mchog dkar > mchog gar (via *mchog kar) k- > g- / -gσg-
*ñes yo > ñe yo y- > ś- / -sσ_
elision: ś-: -s > Ø / _σś-
voicing: ś- > ź- / -Vσ_V-
f.e.: źo > yo / ~ yo ba
noṅs yo > noṅs źo (Or.15000/212:v3) y- > ź- / -sσ_
(2) ’phrog rlom > phrog rlog (ITJ 734:1r29) -m > -g / -ogσCCo_

1
Assimilation within one phrase but across word boundaries is attested mainly in texts with an unstable orthography, cf.,
for instance: sku gśem (< *gśen) mjol bon po rnams (PT 1042:47; *-n > -m / _#m-)
2
Another pattern could tentatively be included here, namely (3) listed among other OT examples of regressive
assimilation. This process would concern an epenthetic consonant -n added word-internally at the end of the first, open
syllable when followed by a syllable that begins with the prefixed m-.
An interesting, although so far isolated case, is listed among other OT examples as the pattern (4). Here, I have proposed
to interpret dra ma in dra ma draṅ(s) as a case of regressive assimilation of the original initial *r- to the onset dr- of
(’)draṅ(s). However, this reconstruction should be deemed as tentative until more substantial evidence can be presented.
 57

Other OT examples:
(1) rṅegs yul > rṅegs śul (PT 1285:r178, ITJ 734:8r328) y- > ś- / -sσ_1
*gñis bcu > ñi śu (via *gñis cu > *gñis śu > ñi śu) c- > ś / -sσ_
thams cad > thams śad (PT 1287; ITJ 734; ITJ 738) c- > ś / -sσ_
(2) *thaṅ nag > thaṅ naṅ (ITJ 731:v69; see s.v. thaṅ kar) -g > -ṅ / -aṅσ-a_
CT examples:
(1) lag stoṅ mi śa > lag gtoṅ mi śa (see s.v. thoṅ myi) s- > g- / -gσ_
(2) tshem tshe > tshem tshem (see s.v. kom tse) -Ø > -m / -mσ-_

Regressive (5)

(1) thoṅ myi > thom myig (PT 1071:r69) -ṅ > -m / _σm-
*spod slam > spos lam -d > -s / _σs-
elision: s- > Ø / -sσ_l-
*mu dmag myi > mun mag myi (via *mud mag myi; see s.v. mun mag) *-d > -n / _σm-
(2) ñin źiṅ > ñiṅ źiṅ (PT 1194:32) -n > -ṅ / -i_σ-iṅ
*lud rtug > lug rtug -d > -g / -u_σ-ug
Other OT examples:
(2) *g.yaṅ drug > g.yag drug (see s.v. sa dog) -ṅ > -g / _σ-g
*ru yan lag > ru yaṅ lag (Or.15000/497:r4, ITN 844:2; s.v. ru lag) -n > -ṅ / -a_σ-ag
(3) sku mkhar > skun (m)k(h)ar (ITJ 750:280; ITJ 1459:2; Lcaṅ 6; -V > Vn / Vσ_mC-
s.v. dku gaṅ)
*rla mkhar > rlan (m)k(h)ar (ITJ 734:69, 110; s.v. dku gaṅ) -V > Vn / Vσ_mC-2
(4) *ra ma ’draṅ > dra ma ’draṅ (see s.v. dra cen) r- > dr- / #dr-
CT examples:
(2) *skya thaṅ > rkyaṅ thaṅ (s.v. skya sa) -Ø > -ṅ / -a_σ-aṅ

Vowel (7)

The vast majority of OT examples of vowel assimilation collected to date concern complete
assimilation (the only exception: dme gos). Due to the specific syllable structure, vowel assimilation
by definition never occurs between two adjacent elements, there is always at least one consonant
separating them. I was not able to identify any general patterns governing vowel assimilation in OT.3

1
*-yul seems to have been replaced by -śul in the second syllable of compounds the first member of which ended in -s and
was a clan name; thus ‘CLAN NAME+śul’ should be interpreted as “a land of CLAN”. Other examples include dags śul (PT
1285:r23, r91, r178), mchims śul (PT 1285: r92, r179), and gnubs śul (ITJ 734:7r300; although here it occurs as a part of the
proper name yul gnubs śul kiṅ drug “a land Gnubs śul kiṅ drug”). These variants appear side by side with the correct forms,
cf.: mchims yul (PT 1285:r21-2), rṅegs yul (PT 1285:r24), dags yul (ITJ 734:8r334).
2
It seems probable that also bsen mkhar (PT 1286:2; PT 1287:216) belongs here and should be reconstructed as *bse mkhar.
3
A comprehensive list of examples of vowel assimilation taken from Old and Classical Tibetan as well as from modern
dialects is presented in MILLER 1966b. The Old Tibetan material is quoted on pp.259-60.
An important case of vowel assimilation in CT concerns the diminutive formations in which the morpheme ’u (< *bu) is
added to a nominal stem. By way of example, the following lexemes can be quoted:
 58

Progressive (4)

*stag ’breṅ > stag ’phraṅ -e- > -a- / -a-σCC_

*dog mun > dog mon -u- > -o- / -o-σC_
*zur byaṅ > zur phyuṅ -a- > -u- / -u-σCC_
*yul phyi ’brog gdaṅs > yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs -a- > -e- / -o-σCC_
Compare also OT:
ṅo len > ṅo lon (ITJ 739:6v1, 14v9; see s.v. ṅam len) -e- > -o- / -oσC_
*phyi lcogs > phyi lcigs -o- > -i- / -iσCC_
*bag tshos > bag tsas (see s.v. ñam noṅs) -o > -a / -aCσC_
*bya mdo > pya mda’ (PN; see s.v. sdiṅ po che) -o > -a / -a-σCC_
CT examples:
khri mon > khro mon (see s.v. dog mon) -i > -o / -a-σC_
*chags pheb > chags phab (see s.v. chags lham) -e > -a / -a-σC_

Regressive (3)

*rgol mkhas > rgal mkhas -o- > -a- / _Cσ-a-

*ldog ’dren > ldeg ren (pa) -o- > -e- / _Cσ-e-
*myi su > mu su -i > -u / _σ-u
Other OT examples:
*lcug zam > lcag zam -u- > -a- / _Cσ-a-
OT mye ṅam > CT mya ṅam -e > -a / _σ-a-
*dma’ gos > dme gos (PT 1134:57; see s.v. zaṅs brgya’) -a > -e / _σ-o-
*g.yaṅ druṅ > g.yuṅ druṅ -a- > -u- / _Cσ-u-
*lho rṅegs > lhe rṅegs (PT 1287:222, 415) -o- > -e- / _σ-e-

khye’u < khyo be’u < ba

rte’u < rta byi’u ~ bye’u < bya
mde’u < mda’ mi’u < mi
rde’u < rdo rtse’u < rtse
The vowels are assimilated to ’u (back/close) according to a clear pattern: o and a are replaced by more front and more
close vowels e or i (in byi’u); i and e do not assimilate because they are already front and close. No native formations with *-
u’u could be ascertained. Thus, this combination seems to have been blocked. o is not replaced by the more close u because
that would have resulted in the final *-u’u.
Another example of a systematic vowel change is encountered in numerals, namely in their abbreviated forms:
ñer ~ gñis re ~ drug
so ~ gsum don ~ bdun
źe ~ bźi gya ~ brgyad
ṅa ~ lṅa go ~ dgu
Here, we observe an opposite tendency: close vowels are replaced by more open ones: i by e and u by o or e. a remains
unchanged. As pointed out by Beyer (1992:222), the abbreviated forms represent the sequence of the respective multiple of
ten and the morpheme -rtsa; thus: bźi bcu rtsa gñis > źe gñis. I suggest that the vowel change in the abbreviated numerals
was triggered by a in rtsa causing the replacement of the vowels i and u by the more open o or e. The forms like bźi bcu źe
gñis are assumed to have come into being later when the system with abbreviated forms started to be used also in contexts
other than numbering of pages or in spoken language and a need for disambiguation arose (all abbreviated morphemes are
homonyms of other lexemes). The diachronic development of the discussed formations can be sketched as follows: bźi bcu
rtsa gñis > źe gñis > bźi bcu źe gñis.
 59

CT examples:
dkyil che > dkyel che (see s.v. dkyel mkhas) -i- > -e- / _CσCe-
khri mon > khro mon (see s.v. dog mon) -i- > -o- / _σCo-
*śa lon > śe lon (see s.v. źaṅ lon) -a > -e / _σCo-1
The most commonly known and acknowledged examples of regressive vowel assimilation in CT
include the numerals bco lṅa and bco brgyad (cf., e.g., LAUFER 1899:217, MILLER 1955, ULVING 1959 and
1972)2. Both lexemes attested also in OT sources; see OTDO.

Voicing (11)

In all noted OT cases, it is actually an aspirated consonant that is being replaced by its voiced
counterpart either between two vowels (1) or word internally between two consonants (2).3 The
third group contains examples of voicing between a voiced consonant and a vowel.
(1) *dku khaṅ > dku gaṅ kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
> sku gaṅ kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
*dku ’phel > dku’ bel (s.v. dku ’pel) ph- > b- / -Vσ_V-
*ñes yo > ñe yo assimilation: y- > ś- / -sσ_
elision: ś-: -s > Ø / _σś-
ś- > ź- / -Vσ_V-
f.e.: źo > yo / ~ yo ba
*źu phub > źu bub ph- > b- / -Vσ_V-
*sa ka > sa ga (see s.v. sa dog) k- > g- / -Vσ_V-
*lho phal > lho bal ph- > b- / -Vσ_V-
(2) *mthiṅ ’phraṅ > mthiṅ braṅ elision: ’a- > Ø / -ṅσ_CC-
ph- > b- / -ṅσ_r-
snam phrag > snam brag (PT 1052:v7) ph- > b- / -mσ_r-
(3) *mchog dkar > mchog gar elision: d- > Ø / -gσ_k-
k- > g- / -gσ_V-
dbaṅ thaṅ > dbaṅ daṅ (ITJ 739:4v6) th- > d- / -ṅσ_V-
Other OT examples:
(1) *’jaṅ rje khol > ’jaṅ rje gol (PT 1287:396) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
*rje khol > rje gol (repeatedly, see OTDO) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
*bde khams > bde gams (PT 1079:5; PT 1087:*1; PT 1120:r07) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
*mdo khams > mdo gams (PT 16:34r3) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-

1
Examples of vowel assimilation in pho > pha when followed by a name of an animal that contains the vowel a are
presented s.v. pha los.
2
Although this interpretation of the sound change has been rejected by SIMON (1971).
3
As the examples of the pattern (4) below demonstrate, the voicing could in fact occur in both patterns, (2) and (4), due to
the -r- immediately following the consonant that is being voiced.
 60

*dmu thag > dmu dag (repeatedly, see OTDO) th- > d- / -Vσ_V-
*mtsho kha > mtsho ga (PT 1287:510) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
rla khaṅ > rla gaṅ (ITJ 734:2r068, 3r116; see s.v. dku gaṅ) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
lha khaṅ > lha gaṅ (PT 1261:139; see s.v. dku gaṅ) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
(3) dmag pon dmag bon (Or.8212.187:67) p- > b- / -gσ_V-
(4) *ñi khri > ñi gri (PT 1287:199, 200) kh- > g- / -Vσ_r-
*rma khrom rma grom (repeatedly, see OTDO) kh- > g- / -Vσ_r-
CT examples:
(1) dgra khaṅ > dgra gaṅ (see s.v. dku gaṅ) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-
sro khaṅ > sro gaṅ (see s.v. dku gaṅ) kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-

Consonant migration (7)

As migration the author understands a shift of a consonant from one lexical morpheme to the other
one. Thus, in OT migration concerns a redefinition of morpheme boundaries within a compound.
Two types of migration can be encountered in OT compounds:
Rightward: -VC1σC2- > -VσC1C2-
Leftward: -VσC1C2- > -VC1σC2-
This process involves consonants that are known in Tibetan orthography as prescribed and
superscribed.1

Leftward (4)

*ko mtshe CVσC+CV > kom tse CVCσCV

*thug sñen CVCσC+CVC > thugs ñen CVCCσCVC
*mu dmag myi CVσC+CVC > mun mag myi CVCσCVC (see s.v. mun mag)
*bsa’ rṅa (ba) C+CVσC+CV > bsar ṅa (ba) C+CVCσCV2
Leftward migration of the word-internal morpheme succeeds mainly if the first syllable is an open
one and the second syllable has a prefix. However, as the example of *thug sñen demonstrates, the
leftward migration can operate also on closed syllables if the phonotactic restrictions on syllable
structure are strictly followed.
Other OT examples:
bya rliṅ tsal (Or.8212.187:7) > byar liṅs tsal (ITJ 750:149, 250, 304; see s.v. smra ’or)
CT examples:
*skyi mtshe > skyim tse (s.v. kom tse)
*gri mtshe > grim tse (s.v. kom tse)
*gru (?) mtshe > grum tse (s.v. kom tse)

1
For further examples of consonant migration as evidenced in CT texts see TERJÉK 1972:46.
2
This example additionally demonstrates the purely orthographical, devoid of phonetic value character of the letter ’a
chuṅ when written after a vowel.
 61

*ce mtshe > cem tse (s.v. kom tse)

*cha mtshe > cham tshe (s.v. kom tse)
*źa lce > źal ce
*ya mtshe > yam tshe (s.v. kom tse)

Rightward (3)

*khul ’jo CVCσC+CV > khu ljo CVσC+CV

*phal ’os CVCσCVC > pha los CVσCVC
*bus ’phur CVCσC+CVC > bu spur CVσC+CVC
It should be noted that the rightward migration concerns only codas (here: -l, -s) that are also
allowed as prefixes before the following root consonants (j-, p-). Interestingly, the structure of the
second syllable remains the same (C+CV, CVC, C+CVC) although its components have changed: *’jo >
ljo, *’os > los, *’phur > spur.

For all above cases, however, an alternative interpretation could be put forward as well:
*khul ’jo > *khul jo (elision) > *khul ljo (gemination) > khu ljo (elision)
*phal ’os > *phal os (elision) > *phal los (gemination) > pha los (elision)
*bus ’phur > *bus phur (elision) > *bus spur (gemination) > bu spur (elision)
Here, it is assumed that the coda of the first syllable would have been geminated (-C1σC2- > -C1σC1C2-)
and the first of the geminated consonants would have subsequently been elided (-VCσC(C)- > -
VσC(C)). This hypothesis may be proven weaker if we look closer at the second example. To wit, in
*phal ’os one would have to reckon with a word-internal elision of the consonant ’a between another
consonant, -l, and a vowel. This pattern, however, does not seem to be attested in OT (see the
subsection on elision). Thus, we can conclude that the understanding of the above examples as
representing a rightward migration is valid.
CT example:
OT ram ’da’ > CT ra mda’ (see s.v. ram ’da’)

Devoicing (4)

It is assumed that the process of devoicing encountered only in second syllables (C[voiced] > C[voiceless] / -
σ _) was first possible when the lexicalisation of a compound was already highly advanced and the
word-internal morpheme boundaries started to blur. This might have been accompanied by a shift
of the stress from the second to the first syllable.1
*rkaṅ ’don > rkaṅ ton
*rkaṅ bran > rkaṅ pran
rje ’baṅs > rje ’paṅs

1
Compare a similar development in modern Tibetan dialects described in BIELMEIER 1988a:49-50.
 62

*zur byaṅ > zur phyuṅ1

Other OT example:
*la byi > la pyi
CT examples:
*kha ’don > kha ton (J:35b)
*źal ’don > źal ton (TUCCI/HEISSIG 1970:132)
Modern dialects:
CT mgo ’don > Tabo ŋgo̱tø̄n, Dingri ko̱tø̄n (CDTD:1578)

Dittography (3)

Dittography concerns double writting of the same consonant. Whether it mirrors a lengthened
pronunciation of the respective consonant (in which case one would rather speak of gemination) or
is a mere scribal error remains uncertain.
kha bso > khab bso (PT 1287:67)
*khrab se > khrab bse
sa dog > sa dogs (*sa dogste > sa dogs ste; PT 1285:r105)
Other OT examples:
*g.yu > g.yus (Ø > -s / _#s- before spras; see s.v. gces spras)

Hypercorrection (2)

Hypercorrection concerns ‘correcting’ an existing form which leads to the emergence of an

incorrect form. In the first case, an erroneous reading of the original -ra- in -sram as -u- paved the
way to replacing *sum with a more ‘correct’ form of the now numeral gsum. It is assumed that in the
second example the syllable -mag has been replaced by the semantically more transparent -dmag
although the prefix d- was already present in the coda of mun (*mu dmag > *mud mag > mun mag):
gyur sram > *gyur sum > gyur gsum (ITJ 739:17v3)
mun mag > mun dmag (ITJ 740:337, 339; Or.15000/329:r1)

Nasalisation (1)

Only one OT compound from the corpus attests to a nasalisation of the prefix ’a in the second
syllable when following a vowel:
źa ’briṅ > źam ’briṅ (PT 126:153; Źol N 14; Źwa W 34) Ø > -m / -_σN-
źa ’briṅ > źam riṅ (PT 126:153; Źol N 14; Źwa W 34) Ø > -m / -_σN-
elision: ’b- > Ø / -mσ_r-
Other OT examples:
sku mkhar > skun (m)k(h)ar (ITJ 750:280; ITJ 1459:2; Lcaṅ 6; -V > Vn / Vσ_NC-

1
The devoicing of b- to aspirated ph- instead of the expected p- as in the remaining examples could have been blocked by
the presence of a sibilant z- in the first syllable. Alternatively, folk etymologisation might have occurred.
 63

s.v. dku gaṅ)

*rla mkhar > rlan (m)k(h)ar (ITJ 734:69, 110; s.v. dku gaṅ) -V > Vn / Vσ_NC-
*bse mkhar > bsen mkhar (PT 1286:2; PT 1287:216) -V > Vn / Vσ_NC-

Epenthesis (1)

The only case of epenthesis encountered in the corpus could in fact be considered as resulting from
folk etymologisation:
*mna’ tho > mna’ mtho Ø > m- ~ mtho
Other OT examples:
*ra ma ’draṅ > dra ma ’draṅ (see s.v. dra cen) Ø > d- ~ ’draṅ

Haplography (1)

Haplography is a mistake of writing once a consonant that should be written twice:

mchog gar > mcho gar (PT 1287:484)
Other OT examples:
*gos su > go su (PT 1134:199; see s.v. kom tse)
*glud dmar > glu dmar (ITJ 731:r111; s.v. mchog gar)
*phyed daṅ > phyedaṅ (PT 1078bis:16; see s.v. khram skya)
*bres#se gru bźi > bre se gru bźi (PT 1134:120; see s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad)

Alternations

In a few cases alternating variants of compounds or their constituents have been attested. Their
origins are not always clear. In some cases they might be the expression of some dialectal
differences, in other cases, however, they could have resulted from the insufficient knowledge of
orthography or be just scribal errors.

Ø ~ -d

In all three cases the variants with -d attest to the deverbative character of the second syllable that
might have sunk into obscurity as the compounds underwent lexicalisation.
ṅam len ~ ṅam lend
p(h)yiṅ ril ~ phyiṅ rild
źaṅ lon ~ źaṅ lond

Ø ~ -’a

This alternation points, in author’s opinion, to either the still unsettled orthography or limited
expertise and lack of competence of the scribe.
dku gaṅ ~ dku’ gaṅ (PT 1287:95)
dku rgyal ~ dku’ rgyal (PT 1287:196)
 64

dku ’pel ~ dku’ bel (PT 1287:201, 315)

dgra bźer ~ dgra’ bźer (PT 1287:356)

sC- ~ rC-

skya sa ~ rkya sa (ITJ 733:48)

bsnan ~ brnand (see s.v. zla dpe)
bsnan bskyed ~ brnan bskyed (Źwa W 58)
Other OT examples:
stsogs ~ rtsogs (Ldan 2:7)
stsal ~ rtsal (Ldan 2:8)

phy- ~ py-

phyiṅ ril(d) ~ pyiṅ ril(d)

Scribal errors

In a very few cases scribal errors are suspected either in the very copy that was preserved among
the Dunhuang documents or in an earlier copy that was used by the scribe of the extant manuscript.
dku rgyal > dku (PT 1287:194)
dku rgyal > bku rgyal (Ldan.2 4)
sku khaṅ (s.v. dku gaṅ) > sku (ITJ 734:2r68)
gyur sram > *gyur sum (-ra- > -u-) > gyur gsum (ITJ 739:17v3)
che phra > che phrag (PT 1088:6)
mjal dum > mjal dus (Ldan 2:8)
rje blas > rje bla (Or.8210/S.2228:B7)
stod rims > rims (PT 1042:52)
thaṅ khram > t(h)aṅ (PT 997:7, 9; PT 1079:5; Or.8212.187:9)
*thaṅ phrom thaṅ ’phrom (ITJ 739:12v5)
thoṅ myi > boṅ myi (PT 1071:r212)
*mdoṅ cod > mdor cod
’phrog rlom > phrog rlog (ITJ 734:1r29)
rtsis mgo > mgo (Or.8212.187:1)
se gru bźi > se mo kru bźi (PT 1134:10, 23, 29-30, 32, 38-9, 39, 65; PT 1285:v102)
Other OT examples:
dguṅ sṅo > dgu sṅo (PT 1287:474; see s.v. dog mon)
dgun ’dun > dgun (ITJ 750:109; see s.v. rkaṅ ton)
ṅan dgu > ṅan du (ITJ 734:1r29; see s.v. ’phrog rlom)
char > chab (PT 1287:59; see s.v. dog yab)
thaṅ khram > thaṅ (PT 997:9; PT 1079:5; see s.v. khab so)
 65

blon > blon blon (ITJ 750:181)

sbaṅ > snaṅ (PT 1287:268; see s.v. mthiṅ braṅ)
sbal > snal (PT 1287:462; see s.v. mthiṅ braṅ)
In addition, some of the above forms might have resulted from an erroneous transliteration due to
the bad condition of the manuscripts.

MORPHOLOGICAL CHANGES

In the present subsection, I shall discuss morphological processes that either are involved in
compounding or to which Tibetan compounds themselves may be exposed.

Folk etymology (22)

For the purpose of the present work folk etymologisation is defined as a process of morphological
change motivated by similarity of a respective morpheme to another, in most cases, better known
lexical unit. Folk etymology is the popular understanding of a linguistic form based on the
morphological shape that has been changed to meet the expectations of the speakers’ community.
In the vast majority of cases folk etymologisation influences only one of the constituents of a
compound adapting it to a target lexeme. Folk etymologisation may be located between
morphological processes that co-occur with compounding and other word-forming processes
imposed on compounds. On the one hand, it can be applied only to already existing compounds and
therefore is not a part of compounding. On the other hand, it does not produce new words; it serves
first and foremost to acquaint language users with the existing language material that has become
obscure to them through rendering it semantically and morphologically more transparent.

In all cases examined in the present study a lexeme to which one of the constituents of a compound
was “assimilated” belongs to a more basic vocabulary, and is furthermore a unit better attested than
the one that is being replaced. Another interesting observation concerns the fact that in the
majority of surveyed cases (14 out of 21) it is the second member of a compound that underwent
folk etymologisation. This can be juxtaposed with two other changes that occur in second syllables:
devoicing and deaspiration of the root consonant, and confirms the “weaker” status of the second
element and the significance of σ1-rule.
*dku khaṅ > sku khaṅ/gaṅ (s.v. dku gaṅ) ~ sku
*dku rgyas > dku rgyal ~ rgyal po
rkaṅ pran > rkaṅ phran (PT 1136:48) ~ phran
kha gso > kha bso ~ khab so /khabso/
*’jaṅ sdum > ’jaṅ dum ~ dum in: mjal dum
1
*ñes yo > ñe yo assimilation y- > ś- / -sσ_
2
elision: ś-: -s > Ø / _σś-
3
voicing: ś- > ź- / -Vσ_V-
 66

~ yo ba
*stag ’breṅ > stag (’)phraṅ ~ (’)phraṅ
> stag ’phreṅ (s.v. stag ’phraṅ) ~ ’phreṅ
*thug sñen > thugs ñen ~ thugs
*thoṅ myi > thom myig (PT 1071:r69) ~ thoṅ myig
*thoṅ dmyigs > thoṅ myig ~ myig
*mda’ lcags > mdo lcags ~ mdo in: mdo smad / mdo ~ mda’
*noṅs dmyigs > noṅs myig (via *noṅs myigs) ~ myig
*mna’ tho > mna’ mtho ~ mtho
pur myi > phur myi (Or.15000/150:r7, r16; Or.15000/183:v5; ITN 2285:r2)
~ phur pa/bu (?)
dbuṅ mtha’ > dbus mtha’ (PT 1287:375) ~ dbus
źaṅ lon > źaṅ blon (Or.15000/150:r1, PT 1071:r5, r27, r423)
~ blon
*zaṅs rgya ma > zaṅs brgya’ ma ~ brgya
*riṅs zlugs > riṅ lugs ~ lugs
se gru bźi > se ’brum bźi (PT 1068:115, 121; PT 1134:56-7) ~ ’brum bźi
> se mo gru/kru bźi (PT 1134:10, 23, 29-30, 32, 38-9, 39, 65; PT 1285:v102)
~ se mo
Other OT examples:
*klum kluṅ (see s.v. gyur sram) ~ luṅ
*rgya rgyal (see s.v. rgyad thag brgyad) ~ rgyal po
brgya khram (see s.v. zaṅs brgya’) ~ brgya
*thaṅ yag thaṅ g.yag (see s.v. thaṅ prom) ~ g.yag
thoṅ stoṅ (see s.v. thoṅ myig) ~ stoṅ
dbyal źal (see s.v. rje dbyal) ~ źal
ra sa lha sa ~ lha
*gśor śor (PT 1287:304; see s.v. khyim graṅs) ~ śor
CT examples:
OT dku rgyal CT sku rgyal (s.v. dku rgyal) ~ sku
*skya thaṅ CT rkyaṅ thaṅ (s.v. skya sa) ~ rkyaṅ
OT khu ljo CT khul źo ~ źo
*rgya khram brgya khram (see s.v. zaṅs brgya’) ~ brgya
OT rṅo ’thon CT ṅo mthon (see s.v. rṅo thog) ~ ṅo
OT ta źig CT stag gzig ~ stag / gzig
OT bla skyes CT gla skyes ~ gla
OT zaṅ yag CT zaṅs yag ~ zaṅs
 67

OT ram ’da’ CT ra mda’ ~ ra / ~ mda’

lw. sa heb sa yab ~ yab
OT so nam CT bsod nams (see s.v. so nam)
MT examples:
*ta rgya Nubri tāpca (see s.v. zaṅs brgya’) ~ brgya

Clipping (5)

Clipping provides truncated forms of originally disyllabic (but not compounded) lexical units as
illustrated by the examples below.1 As opposed to clipping that may be applied to compounds (see
the section Word-forming processes on compounds), the process described here should be
understood as a part of compounding. All listed formations have been grouped according to one of
the patterns of clipping (O = onset; R = rime) identified so far:
(1) (C)C1V1 + C2V2 > (C)C1V1C2 [open syllable + open syllable]2
(2) O1R1+O2R2 > O1R2 [open syllable + closed syllable]
(3) O1R1+O2R2 > O1R2 [closed syllable + closed syllable]

(1) *khu lu CVσCV > *khul CVC in: khu ljo

*sna ma/mo CCVσCV > snam CCVC in: snam phrag
*yi ge CVσCV > yig CVC in: khyim yig
*ra ma CVσCV > ram CVC in: ram ’da’
A special case of clipping of a loanword (< Skt. puruṣa) can be demonstrated in the following:
*pu ru ṣa CVσCVσCV > pur CVC in: pur myi
Other OT examples:
(1) khra ma CCVσCV > khram CCVC
*dru gu CCVσCV > drug CCVC in: rgya drug
chu ṅu CVσCV > chuṅ CVC
(3) ṅam lam CVCσCVC > ṅam CVC (clan name)
CT examples:
(1) sgo ṅa CCVσCV > sgoṅ CCVC
cho lo CVσCV > chol CVC
dra ma CCVσCV > ’dram CCCVC in: ’dram po (see s.v. dra cen)
rna ba/bo CCVσCV > rnab CCVC (see s.v. snam phrag)
phru gu CCVσCV > phrug CCVC
(2) gre mog CCVσCVC > grog (ma) CCVC
*ṅa ñid CVσCVC > ṅed CVC3

1
For some further CT examples see BEYER 1992:93.
2
This pattern is followed also by the case particle of terminative (ru > -r) after vowel finals.
3
On the origins of the form ṅed see s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ.
 68

*ma yod CVσCVC > med CVC1

mi yin CVσCVC > min CVC
sa bon CVσCVC > son CVC
Modern Tibetan dialects:
(1) ta ba CVσCV tab CVC in: tab rgya (see s.v. zaṅs brgya’)

Suffix -s (3)

In analysing the morphology of OT compounds it is crucial to distinguish between the final -s that
belongs to the stem and the derivative -s attached to the compound as a whole.2 In those of the
examined compounds where -s is assumed to be a suffix the following functions could be discerned:

Collective (2)3

It was possible to ascribe the collective function to the suffix -s of the two compounds from the
corpus:
*rkaṅ ’gro > [rkaṅσ’gro]+-s
*stod rim > [stod rim]+-s
Other OT examples:
*sku sruṅ > [sku sruṅ]+s

Past tense (1)

In the analysed corpus of OT compounds only one deverbative formation is attested in two flectional
forms. It is evident that the past tense suffix -s is added to the whole compound and not only to -
thog, since the verb underlying the second element does not possess V2 *thogs. The compound,
however, being an adjective, may be added the suffix -s when functioning as a predicate.
rṅo thog rṅo thogs

-s with attributive compounds

There is a relatively large group of compounds attested in OT sources that share a few
characteristics as concerns their morphology:
- they are attributive compounds of the underlying structure [N+A];
- they end with -s in OT but, if extant, have in most cases lost this suffix in CT;
- their second member ends in the consonant cluster -ṅs;
- their second member is one of the following syllables: chuṅs, maṅs, bzaṅs, riṅs.1

1
The form *mod might have been blocked by the existence of the verb mod.
2
As opposed to UEBACH/ZEISLER (2008:310-8), I do not consider the final -s in, e.g., rje blas and pha los as a suffix (for details
see s.vv.).
It should be stressed that the author does not deem the suffix -s to necessarily represent historically one morpheme.
Actually, the opposite seems to be more probable although we still lack comprehensive studies in derivative morphology
of Tibetan languages.
The suffix -s has been given a lot of attention by scholars, cf. SIMON 1940:385-9, DENWOOD 1986, UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008.
3
For more details on the collective function of the suffix -s and examples from CT see DENWOOD 1986.
 69

However, examples of compounds can be quoted from OT sources that possess an analogous
structure but still do not have the -s suffix, cf. graṅs ñuṅ (but graṅs maṅs), dmyig ñuṅ (but dmyig maṅs),
ru thuṅ (but ru riṅs), lam thuṅ (but lam riṅs).2 Furthermore, the juxtaposition of these compounds with
some analogous phrases in which the second member, an adjective, is used as a predicate proves
that the suffix -s in the compounds cannot be meaningfully traced back to the -s as a marker of
resultative3:
yar mo ni chu thuṅs kyis // “Because the rivers of Yar mo were short,
mdo nas ni rtsaṅ du / (267) bsriṅ / [they] were extended from Mdo to Rtsaṅ.
yar mo ni źeṅ chuṅs kyis / Because the fields of Yar mo were small,
lho nas ni byaṅ du bskyed // (PT 1287:266-7) [they] were enlarged from south to north.”
The forms thuṅs and chuṅs might be interpreted here as expressing simple past tense, but surely not
resultative since the passage describes an existing condition and not a state resulting from some
kind of activity or a past process. A resultative interpretation would also be hardly comprehensible
in case of compounds ending in -bzaṅs.

On the other hand, the compounds under discussion differ considerably from other attributive
compounds the second member of which is a deverbative, cf.:
phyiṅ rild “bundle piled up together” < *phyiṅ pa rild pa rild = V2 < ’drilTR
myi rlag “lost man” < *myi rlag pa rlag = V2 < *rlogINTR
To wit, these presume some kind of action in which an object expressed by the head of the
compound is involved. According to these patterns, the compound luṅ chuṅs would have to be
understood as *“a valley that was (sic!) small” - an interpretation that does not make much sense.

Without being able to determine the one and only reason behind marking compounds, that possess
one of the four above mentioned syllables as their second member, with the suffix -s, I would like to
tentatively discern between the following functions of the suffix in a few concrete cases:

Possessive

Although the OT compounds listed below are without a doubt exocentric possessive compounds we
do not have any evidence that the suffix -s marks their headlessness (for more examples of
exocentric compounds see the subsection Classification/Semantics/Exocentric). This group should
in all probability be included as a subgroup of compounds with -s in a lexicalising function.
sñiṅ riṅs (N) “a disloyal person; betrayer”, lit. *”(one) possessing a distant heart”

1
For a comprehensive list of old, classical, as well as modern compounds ending in -maṅs, -bzaṅs, and -riṅs see
UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:321ff.
2
As opposed to these examples, the earlier listed morphemes (except for -chuṅs) belong to “positive adjectives”, i.e. first
adjectives from the pairs: many-few, good-bad, long-short. -chuṅs might have been added to the list on account of the fact
that its positive equivalent, chen, does not fulfil the requirement of the -ṅ coda. This would also suggest that this -s suffix is
distinct from the suffix -s with the allomorph -d since otherwise the variant *chend could have been used in analogous
formations.
3
On -s interpreted as a resultative suffix see UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:310. Neither can it be equated with the suffix -s as “the
root final -s of intransitive verbs showing the process in the past” (BIELMEIER 1988b:25n16).
 70

dmyig maṅs (N) “a kind of board-game”, lit. “(one) possessing many eyes”
luṅ chuṅs (N) “(a region) possessing small valley(s)”1

Lexicalising

The suffix -s might have been used to mark off a sequence of two syllables [N+A] as a lexical unit
with a meaning more specialised than the simple connection of these would let one assume, cf.:
rdo riṅs (N) “a(n inscribed) stone pillar” not just *”a long(ish) stone”

These obviously do not exhaust all the functions of the suffix -s in analogous formations. A more
careful analysis including contexts in which these compounds occur is certainly needed. The lack of
any representative of this group of compounds in the corpus forces the author to desist from
further speculations on the nature of the suffix until more basic research is done.2

Linking elements (2)

-b-: Ø > b / -V_σC-

*rje las > rje blas

*spo leg > spo bleg
Other OT examples:
*sku lha > sku bla3
*kha zas > kha bzas (PT 239:r6.3)
*myi las > myi blas (Or.8212.194a:2; after TAKEUCHI 1995:277)
*ri sul > ri bsul (ITJ 739:5v8; = CT ri sul)
*śi dur > śi bdur (PT 986:154: after COBLIN 1991a:310b)
CT examples:
*dka’ las > dka’ blas4
*mgo (?) lon > gob lon (see s.v. źaṅ lon)
*me so > me bso (J:578a, s.v. so)
Modern dialects:

1
One could include here also lag riṅs, rkaṅ riṅs, and gzaṅ riṅs for which see UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:324ff.
2
It is likely that the primarily more frequent occurrence of the suffix -s in one particular (most probably the lexicalising)
function with a group of compounds in -chuṅs, -maṅs, -bzaṅs, and -riṅs has led to the generalisation of its application and
has subsequently been also extended by analogy to other formations. This would to some extent explain why compounds
in -ñuṅ or -thuṅ never acquire -s in OT.
Another hint confirming the discussed hypothesis is provided by the OT rkaṅ riṅ (sic!) that is attested as a part of the
compound rkaṅ riṅ myi in ITJ 740:105. As against, e.g., lag riṅs (ITJ 734:5r192; PT 1136:4) that is used attributively, rkaṅ riṅ
determines myi in the compound of which the underlying structure could be reconstructed as *rkaṅ pa riṅ ba’i myi “a man
of long legs”.
3
Plenty of compounds could be quoted from OT sources in which the second constituent -lha has been replaced by -bla
after the final vowel of the first syllable, cf. skyi bla < *skyi lha, dgra bla < *dgra lha, rgya bla < *rgya lha, dbye bla < *dbye lha, ya
bla < *ya lha, sa bla < *sa lha, etc. As examples like rkoṅ lha, rṅegs lha, mchims lha, yar lha etc. demonstrate, this change was
blocked after closed syllables.
4
For modern dialectal pronunciations with the word-internal -b- see CDTD:103. The linking element is attested in almost
all WAT dialects (exception: Leh), all WIT, two CT (Ruthok, Gar), and in most AT dialects (exception: Bayan,
Mdzorganrabar). It is not found in KT, and in almost none of CT dialects (exception: Ruthok, Gar).
 71

*rṅo che > Ladakhi ṅób c̀e (J:134b, s.v. rṅo ba)
WT mchu tho > Nubri tɕhīpto (CDTD:2704)
WT ño cha > Tabo, Kyirong, Shigatse ɲo̱ptɕā, Yolmo ɲo̖ptɕe (CDTD:3007)
WT ño tshoṅ > Dzongkha ɲo̱ptsho (CDTD:3009), Ladakhi ñoptshoŋ (ZEISLER 2009b:88)1
WT rta ra > Southern Mustang tāpra (CDTD:3276)
WT mthe rgan > Chabcha thepgən (CDTD:3672)2
spyi so > spyi bso (Gs:667a)
WT rtswa las > Kyirong tsāblɛ̀ː (CDTD:6701)3
*za thuṅ > Western Tibetan zapthuŋ (ZEISLER 2009a:90)4
*śa tshoṅ > Western Tibetan šaptshoŋ (ZEISLER 2009a:90)
*lha tshas > lhab tshas (FRANCKE 1905/41:317)
Since in the examples listed above the word-internal -b- cannot be explained by referring to the
known functions of the prefix b- a new hypothesis must be put forward. To wit, I argue that -b-
constitutes a linking element. The existence of linking elements (“material appearing between
word-formation constituents”, KÜRSCHNER/SZCZEPANIAK 2013:1) in compounds has been reported for
many languages of the world.5 However, as far as I am aware, their occurrence in Tibetan languages
has so far remained unnoticed.

1
ZEISLER (2009b) lists numerous compounds with the word-internal -b- from spoken Ladakhi dialects distinguishing
between “lexicalised labial prefix” and “morphologically relevant labial prefix” (ibid., pp.87-90). Unfortunately, she
overlooks the fact that her second group includes formations with the word-internal -b- that goes back to at least two
different morphemes. For instance, ño tshoṅ (ibid., p.88) is pronounced by most of the cited informants with the aspirated
tsh- in the second syllable, which alone clearly points to the non-phonological character of -b- (the connection of b and tsh
is not allowed). Three informants (out of ten) provide the unaspirated ts- which may be easily explained as resulting from
deaspiration in the second syllable of the compound (for more examples see above). The pronunciation of this compound
should be juxtaposed with the given pronunciation of the WT rṅa btsa’ where the second syllable begins either with s- or
with ts- (ibid., p.87). The same ambivalence may be observed between quoted *rdo chod (reconstruction mine; ZEISLER: *rdo
bchot ~ rdo bcot, p.88-9; *bcod, to my knowledge, is not attested as a verbal stem) and rdo bcags (ibid., p.88). The latter is
always pronounced with the unaspirated c- in the second syllable whereas the former with either ch- (3 cases) or c- (4; one
informant gave both pronunciations). Other similar examples of the word-internal -b- from ZEISLER’s list that should be
treated separately due to their various origins include (the enumeration contains only contrastive examples):
-b- = verbal prefix:
WT sna bcad (p.89);
WT śa btsos (p.90);
-b- = linking element:
WT za thuṅ (p.89; pronounced by nine Ladakhi informants with th- and by one with t-);
WT *’o tshags (p.90, reconstructed by ZEISLER as ’o btsags; pronounced by one informant with tsh- and by nine with ts-);
WT śa tshoṅ (pa) (p.90; pronounced by four informants with tsh- and by eleven with ts-).
2
The linking element -b- occurs in modern dialects following mthe also in mthe chuṅ (CDTD:3674), mthe chuṅ ba
(CDTD:3675), mthe mo (CDTD:3681), *mthe chuṅ ma/mo (CDTD:3682), *mthe chuṅ mo (CDTD:3683), and *mthe chen (CDTD:3684;
asterisks preceding the latter three lexemes mark my WT reconstruction instead of CDTD’s reconstructed *mtheb). Besides,
CDTD reconstructs also Bayan theʈʂək as mthe phrug ~ mtheb phrug (3677). The latter reconstruction appears to have no
foundation in the presented material.
3
A regular survey of CDTD and other sources on Tibetan dialects would probably provide much more examples of the
linking element -b- in modern dialects.
4
The phonetic transliteration here and in the example below is taken over from ZEISLER (2009a:90) without, however,
markings of the syllable boundaries. My interpretation differs considerably from the one proposed by ZEISLER who traces
the word internal -b- in these compounds back to the prefix b- of the II stem of causative verbs (ibid.).
According to CDTD:7321 that reconstructs the compound under consideration as za btuṅ ~ bza’ btuṅ, the linking element -
b- is attested also in Tabo si̱ptūŋ, Nubri sa̱ptuŋ, and Yolmo sa̱ptuŋ.
5
According to BAUER (2009:346), “[m]any languages have some kind of linking element between the two parts of a
compound. Typically, whatever its etymological source, this element is semantically empty.” Cf. also
 72

It is perplexing that there seem to be only two non-syllabic morphemes consistently appearing
word-internally in Tibetan across the centuries that, in many cases, escape any attempt of
etymologisation. Those are -b- and -l- restricted to formations the first constituent of which is
etymologically an open syllable. Curiously enough the occurrence of the latter consonant was
noticed already by CSOMA DE KŐRÖS (281b) in the case of the alternating pags ~ lpags but obviously did
not attract any interest of later generations of scholars. The only attempt at explaining some of the
occurrences of the word-internal -b- known to the author is ZEISLER 2009a and 2009b in which
publications the author identifies it invariably with the prefix b- of the verbal flection.1 Although
this hypothesis could function in case of compounds with deverbal second constituents it is more
than questionable in lexemes like, for instance, sku bla, ri bsul or me bso (see above).

As much more advanced studies of compounds and thus of linking elements in other languages
(mainly European) have demonstrated, the origins of Tibetan -b- and -l- might remain forever
unknown. Nevertheless, an hypothesis is ventured that the epenthetic -b- could be a remnant of an
old genitive bi attested in Old as well as Classical Tibetan only in three formations, ya bi, ma bi, and
pha bi2 occasionally written in OT texts also with -byi.3 We observe, namely, that all the lexemes cited
from the Old and the Classical language as well as most of the modern examples can be classified as
determinative compounds the constituents of which are connected with each other in the
underlying structure by a genitive particle.4 This usage of the linking element -b- might have

KÜRSCHNER/SZCZEPANIAK 2013 for a general overview and special studies by LABRUNE 2013 (on Basque), HANSSEN 2011,
BANGA/HANSSEN/NEIJT/SCHREUDER 2013, HANSSEN 2013 (Dutch), NEEF 2009:390-3, NÜBLING/SZCZEPANIAK 2013 (German), RALLI
2009:454ff. (Greek), SZYMANEK 2009:466ff. (Polish).
1
Compare also a short footnote by VOLLMANN: “The -b- (and -n-) is an interfix in compounds; it reflects diachronically lost
sounds, but is inserted also in new compounds.” (2009:121n8). Unfortunately, VOLLMANN does not cite any examples with
the infix -n-.
2
Brda gsar rñiṅ gi rnam par dbye ba of Dbus pa blo gsal lists additionally phyi bi glossed with phyi rol; cf. MIMAKI 1992:487.
3
Although it could also be argued that b- in -bi is a linking element (in an extended usage, see below) and the words
should in fact be read as ya-, ma-, pha- +’iGEN. This hypothesis is less plausible in so far as one would expect more analogous
cases of epenthetic -b- inserted between a stem (an open syllable) and a genitive particle ’i in textual corpus. The highly
restricted occurrence of -bi/-byi points to these rather as archaisms; all the more so because they are used generally in
metrical parts of OT texts. For instance, ma bi and ya bi occur in the OTC as attributes in the following phrases:
dog mon [...] ma bi (PT 1287:475), lit. “the dark earth of below”;
byaṅ ’brog [...] ya bi na (PT 1287:412), lit. “in the northern pastures of above”;
dgu sṅo [...] ya bi (PT 1287:474), lit. “the blue sky of above”.
Their position in the clauses is exceptional and could be ascribed to the metrical character of the passages. It is assumed
that ma, ya, and pha were originally substantives. One can cite in this context THOMAS’ remark on a special function of
genitive in OT: “[a] loose use, practically temporal”, for which he gives two examples: dguṅ gyi “of (= at) night” and dṅos
g(y)i “at present” (1957:*74). A similar usage of genitive to “form” adjectives is known from its application to nouns
denoting substances, cf.: gser “gold” but gser gyi khri (PT 1068:18) “golden throne”, etc. Compare hereto also modern usage
of genitive in Central Tibetan in sentences like śog bu ’di ṅa’i yin “This sheet of paper is mine.”
As regards the fate of the genitive particle bi, it could have been abandoned as forms with guttural onset were gaining
more recognition; being restricted to determinative phrases of the kind ‘NGEN+N’ it underwent a reduction to -b- in
compounds, only to become a marker of word-internal syllable boundary.
Curiously enough, bi is reported to have been a genitive particle in Źaṅ źuṅ language (HAARH 1968:20, MARTIN 2010:150a-
b). Whether it is just another Tibetan morpheme found in the so-called “Źaṅ źuṅ vocabulary” or a true Źaṅ źuṅ morpheme
remains to be clarified but see MARTIN’s remark: “This particular genitive ending, finding its basis in more than one level of
misreading and misspelling, may not be said to exist in any meaningful sense of the word. It can be eliminated, with
certainty, from future discussions.” (2010:16).
4
As OLSEN writes “Linking morphemes are remnants of earlier inflectional suffixes that have survived in certain groups of
formally similar lexicalized complex words. The lexicalized patterns establish certain productive preferences for
modifying the first constituent of new compounds via the process of analogy” (2001:292). A detailed analysis of the origins
 73

subsequently been generalised and spread also over other types of compounds.1 Whether it remains
productive in modern dialects must be left unanswered here.

Modern dialectal data cited by ZEISLER (2009b:87-90), if approached from the position proposed in
the present work, provide another hint supporting the argued etymology of the linking element -b-.
To wit, words like ño tshoṅ, *rdo chod, za thuṅ, ’o tshags, and śa tshoṅ may apparently be pronounced in
Western Tibetan dialects either with an aspirated or with an unaspirated consonant in the second
syllable. The unaspirated pronunciation may be easily accounted for as resulting from the
commonly occurring deaspiration in the second syllable. The aspirated pronunciation, however, can
only be explained if one assumes that the word internal -b- belongs prosodically (rtswa las /tsābσlɛ̀ː)
as well as morphologically (rtswa+bσlas) to the first syllable, since clusters of the type *b+Ch- are not
allowed in Tibetan. Consequently, the suffix -b could have resulted from clipping of the original
genitive bi according to the pattern [C1V1σC2V2]# > C1V1C2 (cf. CV+ruTERM > CVr; for more details on
clipping see the subsection Form changes/Morphological changes/Clipping) which, apart from
having an equivalent in the CT terminative particle ru, is also plausible since a case particle always
forms one word in text with the preceding lexical unit. Thus:
[CVσbi#CV(C)]NP > [CV+bσCVC]#

The last question that remains to be addressed here is: if the linking element -b- should in fact be
treated as a part of the first syllable of a compound why is it consistently written as a prefix of the
second syllable? This orthographical custom might have been established in order to avoid the
danger of confusing the linking element with the final consonant -b that may belong to the stem.
Since linking elements by definition are used in Tibetan only after open syllables, writing -b- with
the first syllable would cause serious problems in interpreting the respective compound.2 After all,
however, linking elements in Tibetan seem to belong to the sphere of spoken language and have
rather seldom found their representation in the script.3

of linking elements in German is provided in NÜBLING/SZCZEPANIAK 2013:68ff. Depending on the language, a linking element
could have originated from thematic vowels (Modern Greek -o-, RALLI 2009:454; Old High German -a-, -i-, -o-,
NÜBLING/SZCZEPANIAK 2013:69-70), case markers (mainly genitive), plural markers, or coordinators (see WÄLCHLI 2005:264ff.,
KÜRSCHNER/SZCZEPANIAK 2013:2).
1
ZEISLER (2009a:90) quotes Western Tibetan mapsot (WT ma sod; I cite it without syllable boundaries) as an example of the
prefix b- between a negation and a verbal stem which is attested in the written language without b-. However, according to
another paper of hers (2009b:92), this very pronunciation has been recorded only among bilingual Dards of Dah when
speaking Ciktan Purik dialect which is their second language (ibid., p.93). For this very reason it should not be overstated;
hypercorrection and the influence of another, non-Tibetan language, may have played a role in bringing about this form.
Compare hereto also the following statement: “In the course of the dissociation from their sources, linking elements
develop their own distributional regularities, i.e. they gradually detach themselves from the original assignment rules.”
(KÜRSCHNER/SZCZEPANIAK 2013:2).
2
See, however, WT rjib las glossed in JÄSCHKE with a question mark for spoken Western Tibetan *źib-las” - an equivalent of
OT rje blas (see s.v.).
3
The seemingly more frequent occurrence of linking elements in Old Tibetan over Classical Tibetan could be attributed,
among others, to the (yet) unsettled orthography and the intermingling of spoken and written language. On the other
hand, it seems that forms of some CT lexemes have resulted from a back formation displaying regularly in CT b- or l- as
their prefixes, cf. bza’ “lady” < OT za “id.” and lpags “skin” < pags “id.”.
 74

-l-: Ø > l / -V_σC-

The linking element -l- is assumed to have originated as an alloform of the linking element -b-. Its
occurrence before labial root consonants can be attributed to the dissimilation of the original -b-.
The sole occurrence of -l- in OT before a guttural k- in śa lko, although not sufficient for
generalisation, could be explained as resulting from the need to minimise the distance between the
two extreme places of articulation, guttural k- and labial -b-.
*śa ko > śa lko
CT examples:
*pags pa > -lpags (J:329a)1
Modern dialectal data:
khyi ra pa > Nubri cīralpaʔ (CDTD:849)
bya’u pa > Wanla tʃilpa (CDTD:5655)

Inflection (2)2

The following examples prove that compounds in OT could be inflected. The two cases presented
below attest, however, to two different kinds of inflection. In bsnan bskyed both elements are
inflected according to the pattern of conjugation of their underlying verbs, snon ~ V2 bsnan, skyed ~
V2 bskyed. In case of rṅo thog, it is the whole compound, adjective functioning as a predicate in a text,

that acquires the past tense suffix -s which is not attested in the conjugation of the verb thog when
occurring independently.
*snon skyed > bsnan bskyed
rṅo thog > rṅo thogs

Paraphrase (2)

In the following examples, one part of a compound is replaced by its more elaborate version without
there being any change in meaning. The second example is more transparent: the diminutive *’u,
present in the underlying structure of the compound (*se’u gru bźi, lit. “a small spot of four
corners”), has been replaced by a morpheme of a closely related meaning which occurs also in the
surface representation:
sa dog sa ga dog (PT 1038:13-4)
se gru bźi > se cuṅ gru bźi (PT 1194:3)

1
I assume that lpags emerged as an allomorph of pags in second syllables of compounds after the final vowel of the first
syllable (as in all OT examples, see OTDO) but, due to the unusual unaspirated onset of pags, it subsequently came to be
treated as an unbound morpheme and used in all other types of compounds as well. A different view on the origin of the
form pags is given by BIELMEIER, cf.: “We may derive the plain voiceless initial from an earlier initial consonant cluster
which still exists in compound.” (1988b:16n1).
2
Compare the following statement on inflection in compounds across languages by BAUER (2009:346): “[...] in languages
with inflection, there is always the possibility that one or more of the elements of a compound will contain its own
inflection, independent of the inflection which is added to the compound as a whole to indicate its function in its matrix
sentence.”
 75

WORD-FORMING PROCESSES ON COMPOUNDS

Old Tibetan compounds may be subjected to further word-forming processes, including
compounding, truncation, derivation, clipping, as well as reduplication.

COMPOUNDING (19)

Compounding in OT is recursive, i.e. compounds can be used to form other compounds.1 The
examined corpus contains 2 metacompounds (źal ce gra, yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs), 16 recursive compounds
(rkaṅ ’gros, khu ljo, dgra thabs, dgra bźer, ṅam len, mṅa’ dbaṅ, chu rlag, stag ’phraṅ, thoṅ myi, dog mon, dog
yab, dog srin, mun mag, rtsis mgo, zaṅs brgya’, ru lag), and 1 compound formed from a clipped form of
another compound (rjes ’baṅs). For more details on the process see the section Compound and
compounding as well as the subsection Classification/Syntax/Metacompounds.

TRUNCATION (7)

Compounds may undergo truncation either due to expedient metrical needs (1) or in order to
conform to the rule of disyllableness prevailing in Tibetan languages (2; for details see the section
Compound and compounding). The first pattern could be called metrical truncation. The second
pattern concerns compounds that are attested in two variants: as an original trisyllabic formation
and as a shortened, disyllabic version of the latter. Cf.:
(1) doṅ ral > ral (PT 1287:480)
gtsug lag > gtsug (PT 1287:354, 358; Khri 3)
’dzaṅs kyad > ’dzaṅs (PT 1287:74, 75)
yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs > pyi ’brog gdeṅs
sa dog > dog (PT 1287:236, 422)
(2) mun mag myi > mun mag
ru yaṅ lag > ru lag
Other OT examples:
(1) ’od zer > ’od (ITJ 738:3v56; s.v. lhun stug)
(2) sa dog rum > dog rum (see s.v. sa dog)

DERIVATION (4)

A compound might acquire an additional nominal particle and become a derived formation with the
meaning changed according to the semantic features of the particle applied.

1
This feature of compounds is attested also in Germanic languages (BAUER 2009:350) as well as in, e.g., Mandarin Chinese
(CECCAGNO/BASCIANO 2009:487ff.).
 76

Nominal particle -pa (3)

In the first two examples quoted below the particle -pa is used to express affiliation1; thus the form
‘X+pa’ may be paraphrased as “one that belongs to X”. In bsar ṅa ba, -ba could be interpreted as
having a possessive function.2
*ñes yo > ñe yo ba
*ldog ’dren > ldeg ren pa
*bsa’ rṅa > bsar ṅa ba
Other OT examples:
dku rgyal > dku rgyal pa (see s.v. dku rgyal)
khab so > khab so pa/ba (see s.v. khab so)
rṅo thog > rṅo thog pa (see s.v. rṅo thog)

Nominal particle -ma (1)

I propose to interpret -ma in both examples below as a “matrix particle”. Under this term I
understand a function of turning a common noun into a generic term which can also be observed in
the usage of -ma in titles of Tibetan works.3 Thus, *ste’u kha, lit. “the edge of a small axe”, in the right
context like, e.g. *mdo lcags ste’u kha “iron arrowheads having an axe-blade[-shape]”, may function
as an attribute, and thus automatically acquire the status of an exocentric possessive compound.
The particle -ma, however, turns it into a technical term for a very concrete group of arrowheads,
which, to our knowledge, were classified in the Tibetan weaponry tradition according to their shape
(see s.v. ste’u ka ma).
*ste’u kha > ste’u ka ma
Other OT examples:
*glaṅ mchin > glaṅ mchin ma (PT 1285:r147-8, r150, r154)

CLIPPING (1)

Tibetan compounds can undergo clipping. In the examined corpus it was possible to identify one
compound of which one constituent was a clipped form of another compound, cf.:

1
On this function in CT see HAHN 1996:33, § 5.6.d.
2
On the possessive function of -pa see HAHN 1996:33, § 5.6.e. Although the latter author remarks that the particle, when
used in this function, never assimilates. Thus, whether -ba in bsar ṅa ba should be explained as a possessive particle or
recognised as a scribal error for -pa remains to be clarified.
3
Cf. hereto TAUBE 1970 who notices (p.116) that the usage of -ma with titles resembles to some extent the meaning and
function of Skt. ādi “beginning, commencement; a firstling, first-fruits” (MW:136c) and could suggest that -ma in this
function is derived from ma “1mother; 2frq. used metonymically, e.g. capital [...]; original text, copy to write after, pattern”
(J:408a). This would confirm my hypothesis about the “matrix” function of -ma in forming generic terms; compare also the
information by TAUBE (ibid., p.107) that -ma is used in plant names, cf. glaṅ ma, lcaṅ ma, spa ma, spru ma etc. As TAUBE puts it,
“Der Grund für die Anführung des Textanfanges (+ -ma) anstelle des üblichen Titels liegt häufig darin, daß ein vom Autor
festgelegter Titel nicht existiert.“ (ibid., p.116). Thus, -ma is used in the discussed cases to mark a sequence of syllables as
referring to a greater, more basic unit that the very phrase is a part of. It seems, however, that one should recognise two
distinct semantic relations that the suffix can activate in these cases:
1
Hyperonymy: plant names and generic names;
2
Holonymy: titles.
 77

(1) rje sa CCVσCV > rjes CCVC in: rjes ’baṅs

But at least one further example could be cited from OT sources:
(2) bu lon CVσCVC > bun CVC in: bun skyed1
On the basis of these two examples it seems reasonable to assume that clipping of a compound was
chosen over truncation of this very compound in situations in which the latter process might have
led to ambiguity in interpreting the morphology and semantics of the resulting formation, cf.:
*rje sa’i ’baṅs > *1rje ’baṅs = *rje’i ’baṅs “lord’s subjects”
> *2sa ’baṅs = *sa’i ’baṅs “place’s subjects”
*bu lon gyi skyed > *1bu skyed = *bu’i skyed “growth of child(ren)”
> *2lon skyed = *lon pa daṅ skyed pa “taking and producing”
If this was the case, each of these hypothetical solutions would be susceptible to misinterpretations
causing serious problems in communication. Thus, although not unambiguous and also difficult to
interpret clipping was the ‘lesser evil’ chosen in critical and, in the end, infrequent situations that
involved mainly, we may assume, specialised vocabulary concerning important public domains. It is
equally important to highlight the additional difficulties this very process poses to analysing
Tibetan compounds in general; Tibetan compounds may be formed not only from other partially
truncated compounds but also from clipped forms of compounds!

REDUPLICATION

In the corpus of the analysed OT compounds no examples of reduplicated compounds are found.
However, as the most commonly occurring in the OT sources, one should mention here:
nam nam źa źa < nam źa
tshe tshe rabs rabs < tshe rabs2
Reduplication of compounds can be juxtaposed with two other groups of word formation. On the
one hand, with the WT quadrisyllabic reduplications like, for instance, za ri zi ri3; and, on the other
hand, with a figure of speech called hyperbaton, frequently encountered in OT texts, e.g. than mchis
phrin mchis (PT 1285:r120) < *than phrin mchis or chu dgum sri dgum (PT 1287:5) < *chu sri dgum4.
Similarly to the latter case, reduplication of compounds seems to have required splitting up of the

1
It is possible that the predicted form *bon was blocked by the existence of an important homonym bon. For the proposed
patterns of clipping see the subsection Form changes/Morphological changes/Clipping. Some of the CT examples cited in
BEYER 1992:93 that at first glance seem to contradict the proposed patterns go back most probably to the abbreviations in
script for which Tibetan writing system is well known, cf. rdor < rdo rje, śer < śes rab, etc., and are not true clippings.
To the examples listed above one can also add a well-known CT lexeme:
(2) sa bon CVσCVC son CVC in: son ’bru / son rtsa etc.
2
Cf. also four modern examples cited in VOLLMANN (2009:120-1): ṅam ṅam śugs śugs “spontaneously” < ṅam śugs
“reluctantly”; yam yam śig śig tu g.yo “swirl”; che che sñan sñan “great & famous”; bde bde ldan ldan “sure, certain” (< bde ldan,
lit. “luck-possess”). Although the word *yam śig does not seem to be attested in lexicographical sources, we find yam yom
“tottering, not steady” (J:507b) reduplicated from yom “to swing, totter, tremble, to be unsteady” (J:516a). śig śig is found
with the meaning “moving over” (Gs:1096a). The compound *che sñan (< *che la sñan pa) does not seem to be attested
either.
3
For more examples see URAY 1954a:231ff. An attempt at a linguistic analysis of reduplication in Tibetan languages was
undertaken in VOLLMANN 2009.
4
Cf. ZEISLER 2004a:417-8.
 78

original word into two syllables, reduplicating each syllable independently, and joining the doubled
formations to create one word according to the following pattern:
[σ1σ2]# > *[σ1σ1]#[σ2σ2]# > [σ1σ1σ2σ2]#
The same process of disconnecting syllables of a word can be observed in hyperbaton:
[σ1σ2]#1#2 > [σ1#2]#3[σ2#2]#4
The formal status of reduplicated compounds, however, is not clear. Morphologically, they consist
of two originally independent lexical units (e.g., tshe and rabs) but it is difficult to decide which
constituent is their head (tshe tshe rabs rabs, tshe tshe rabs rabs or perhaps tshe tshe rabs rabs?) or
whether they have a head at all, and what is their underlying structure.
 79

OT COMPOUNDS. LEXICOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

“[...] it is necessary to realise that words do not exist in isolation. The figment of a dictionary is as
dangerous theoretically as it is useful practically.” (MALINOWSKI 1935.2:22)
 80

1 kom tse
CT kom rtse
DSM:9b: ko ba’i khug ma (s.v. kom rtse).
BDN:368n24: khrab (s.v. kom rtse); BTK:73n9: ko khug (s.v. kom rtse); BNY:140n57: ko khug (s.v. kom rtse); STK:153n43: ko
khug.
DTH:143: le tanneur; la fourrure; DOTSON.2013a:283: armor.

[E] *ko ba mtshe “rawhide [that is like one’s own] twin”

[M] (N) armour (made of rawhide)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive/appositional/comparative; STRC[N+N]
[A] Few other compounds are attested in lexicographic sources that share some morphological
traits with kom tse; namely, their second member consists of the syllable -ts(h)e and the final
consonant of the first constituent is -m, cf.:
skyim tse “scissors” (Gs:71c) < *skyi mtshe1
grim tse “scissors” (J:77a) < *gri mtshe (gri “knife”, J:76b)
grum tse “a thick woolen blanket” (J:78a) < *gru (?) mtshe
cem tse “scissors” (J:142a) < *ce mtshe (ce- ~ lce “2blade”, J:150a)
cham tshe “cloak” (Gs:358a) < *cha mtshe *”a thing [that is like] a twin”
jem tse “scissors” (Gs:391a) < cem tse
phyam tse “(rñiṅ) gos kyi bye brag zla gam” (BTC:1738a)2
tsem tse “sm. jem tse” (Gs:846c)
tshem tshe “go khrab” (DSM:725b) < *tshem (< *tshem bu) mtshe3
yam tshe (PT 1285:v136) “companion” (?) < *ya mtshe4
Apart from the morphological parallels, all the compounds listed above reveal some similarity with
regard to their semantics. To wit, they denote objects that either consist of two identical parts (like
scissors, tweezers, etc.) or are perceived as a kind of substitute made from material that is referred
to by the first member of the compound (“armour” < lit. “hide-twin”; “cloak” < lit. “fabric-twin”,
etc.). The underlying phrases are reconstructed in both cases as appositional, however, with
diverging semantic interpretations: 1”X [that are] twins” (proper appositional) vs. 2”X [that is like its
own] twin” (comparative appositional) respectively.

1
For *skyi- compare khi’u “a cutting-out knife” (J:40b).
2
phyam tse could be a modern hypercorrected variant of cham tshe (< *cha mtshe).
3
The word tshem bu, CT “what has been stitched, darned, quilted” (J:451a), is attested in PT 1134 in the following clause:
go (read: gos) su tshem bu gyond (l.199)
“[One] put on a stitched thing as a garment.”
The variant tshem tshem “khrab” (DSM:725b; < *tshem tshe) resulted from the assimilation of the rime of the second syllable,
*-e, to the rime of the first sylleble, -em.
4
There is still another group of compounds the second member of which can be reconstructued as mtshe but their first
syllable, not being etymologically open, ends with a consonant other than -m; cf.: rkyoṅ tse “lamp, candle” (J:18b; glossed in
CDTD:477 as skyoṅ tse); skab tse “tweezers; cf. ’jab tse, ska ba, skam pa” (CDTD:304; ska ba Balti “tongs (used by the blacksmith
to hold the hot iron)”, CDTD:288; skam pa “II.2a pair of tongs”, J:20a, seems to have resulted from a back-formation: *ska
mtshe > *skam tshe); skyin tse Tshangra “temporary small bridge (in winter, removed during summer)” (CDTD:434; < *skyin
po mtshe, lit. “a replacement [that is like] a twin”; cf. skyin po Derge, Kardze, Bathang, Lithang “replacement”,
CDTD:432); ’jab tse “nippers, tweezers” (J:174b); thel tse “seal, stamp” (Gs:502a; attested variant forms: the tse (CDTD:3590),
thel se (J:236a); < *mthe mtshe (?) “a thumb [which is like] a twin”).
 81

Thus, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound in question as *ko ba mtshe
“rawhide (i.e. untanned skin) [that is like one’s own] twin”. The following morphonological
processes are assumed to have taken place: *ko ba mtshe > *ko mtshe (compounding) > *kom tshe
(leftward migration) > kom tse (deaspiration).

In the ensuing process of back-formation, kom has been re-analysed as an independent morpheme
and used as a stem for the following lexemes: kom pa “to tan (skin)” (D:37a); kom po “skin which has
been made soft and pliable by tanning; leather” (D:37a); kom bu “Kalbshaut, -fell” (WTS.2:127a); kom
gdan “a seat made of tanned skin” (D:37a; cf.: ko gdan “a piece of leather put under the saddle”, J:5b).1

As opposed to khrab bse (see s.v.), kom tse is assumed to have referred to an armour made from
untanned leather. Lamellae of unlacquered and untanned leather were found at Niya by Marc Aurel
STEIN2.

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa // “A year ago, two years ago, formerly,
pho ma ʼi ni ʼbroṅ bkum ba / an immature wild yak that [one] killed -
lho śiṅ ni (241) smyug mo rgyal // the tree of the south, bamboo, was victorious
[against it].
lcags kyis ni ma dral na // If [one] did not tear [it] open with an iron [tool],
smyug gis ni re myi pugs // the bamboo would not pierce anything.
rgod kyis ni (242) ma bsgron na / If [one] did not cover [it] with [feathers of] a bird
of prey,
ʼbroṅ la ni re myi ʼjen // [it] would never reach the wild yak.
ṅas po ni ra yul gyi / Regarding the armour from Ṅas po, the country of
Ra sa3,
kom tse ni gzig mo (243) rgyal // porcupine is victorious [in fight against it].
khab kyis ni ma pug na / If [one] did not pierce [it] with a needle [at first],
rgyus kyis ni re myi pugs / [it] could never be pierced with a thread.
rgyus kyis ni ma (244) draṅs na / If [one] did not draw [it] tight with the thread,
kom tse ni ñid myi ʼjo (PT 1287:240-4) the armour could not be accomplished by itself.”

2 dku gaṅ
[V] dku’ gaṅ (PT 1287:95)
sku khaṅ (ITJ 734:4r168; folk etymologisation)
sku gaṅ (ITJ 734:3r116; folk etymologisation; voicing)
sku (ITJ 734:2r68; scribal error)
BYD:15b: g.yo sgyu khram gsum.
WTS.3:173a: Hinterhalt.

1
Moreover, the morpheme has been borrowed into other languages as well; cf. Lepcha kom-bo and kom-t’un “leather
(untanned), hide” (MG:27b), CM köm “rawhide, depilated skin; blackened and smoked cow-hide; parchment” (Less:487a).
2
Cf. MAS.567 (http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=4025613236;recnum=76902;index=1; 16.10.2014) and
MAS.526 (http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=4026344029;recnum=115440;index=3; 16.10.2014). Both objects
were described for the first time in STEIN.MA 1921.1:236. Similar armours of rawhide lamellae were still in use in China in
the 14th century; cf. ROBINSON 2002:142-3.
3
Although all previous scholars understood ra yul literally as “a land of goats” (cf.: DTH:143: pays de chèvres; STEIN.RA
1972:257: “country of goats”; DOTSON 2013a:283: “the land of goats”), the interpretation proposed here, namely to read ra
yul as going back to the NP *ra sa’i yul, is deemed more appropriate.
 82

DTH:148: piège; THOMAS.1957:79: noble’s mansion (for sku gaṅ - JB); DENWOOD.1991:135: treason; p.136: trap. Tibetan authors
explain dku as either sgyu or g.yo and gaṅ as an interrogative/correlative pronoun, ci/ji; ZEISLER.2004:312: ambush;
DOTSON.2013a:272: a house of treachery.

[E] *dku’i khaṅ “a house [intended] for a deceit”

[M] (N) 1ambush; 2house of deceit
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPURP+N]
[A] The compound dku gaṅ is known in OT sources from two different contexts. First and foremost,
it occurs twice in PT 1287 (ll.95 & 322) in what appears to have been its original usage. Secondly, we
encounter it, in a distorted form, in a narration from ITJ 734 where it is used as a rather formulaic
religious expression. In all its attestations, however, it functions as an object of one and the same
verb pub, also in the form dbub. The phrase dku gaṅ pub is glossed in BYD with lkog g.yo ’char gźi bkod
pa, “to plan a plot” (15b). Its negative connotation can additionally be inferred from the fact that in
the OTC Khyuṅ po spuṅ sad zu tse commits suicide after his plans concerning dku gaṅ were revealed.

pub is attested in OT documents as a form of two different verbs:

1. ”to turn upside down” (~ CT ’bub)1
2. ”to roof over, to cover; to build (a house)” (variants: phub, bub; ~ CT ’bubs, V3 dbub)2
dbub occurring in ITJ 734 is the V3 stem of the second verb. Besides, we find the second verb in the
following OT phrases: sdum pa pub “to build a house”3; khaṅ pub “id.”4; khyim phub “ein Haus bauen,
beziehen; heiraten” (WTS.8:85b)5; gur kar phub (PT 1289:v3.6) “to pitch a white tent”; rtsaṅ pyed pub
(PT 1287:261-2) “to spread a rtsaṅ pyed”; źu pub (PT 1287:272, 441) “to spread a źu-cover” (for details
see s.v. źu bub); zaṅs bu glad la phub (PT 1287:54-5) “to put a kettle on [one’s] head”.6 The common
meaning of pub in all these phrases seems to have been *“to spread sth. over, to roof over”7. The first
three phrases listed above have also the metaphoric meaning “to start a family, to live in a separate
family” (cf. RICHARDSON 1998b:138n14).

For dku gaṅ reconstructed as *dku khaṅ (word internal voicing between vowels: kh- > g- / -Vσ_V-), lit.
“a dku-house”, compare the alternations in OT texts: sku khaṅ (ITJ 734:4r168) ~ sku gaṅ (ITJ 734:3r116;
see the Text section) and rla khaṅ (ITJ 734:4r169) ~ rla gaṅ (ITJ 734:2r068, 3r116). Besides, we find the
following pairs of variant readings in other sources as well: dgra khaṅ (D:277b) ~ dgra gaṅ (D:277b); sro
khaṅ (BYD:581b) ~ sro gaṅ (BYD:582a); lha khaṅ (J:599b) ~ lha gaṅ (PT 1261:1398; ITJ 754, cf.

1
This verb occurs in the following forms: pubs (PT 1134:290), pub (PT 1134:291), bub (PT 1043:28), and ’bub (ITJ 739:4r7).
phub in PT 1289:1r12 is a variant of phug (CT ’bigs ~ ’bugs).
2
This verb shows also some alternation in final position, cf. khaṅ phug (PT 1290:r9, v10).
3
With variant forms of the verb (phub/bub) four times in each of the texts: PT 1071, PT 1072, and PT 1073 (see OTDO).
4
Cf. khaṅ dbub (PT 1051:53; PT 1052:r126; ITJ 734:2r68; ITJ 738:1v70, 3v32); khaṅ phub (PT 1067:4); khaṅ pub (ITJ 734:4r169);
khaṅ myi ’bub (ITJ 740:19); khaṅ phug (sic! PT 1290:r9, v10).
5
Cf. khyim ma phub (PT 1071:r382; PT 1072:110).
6
In addition, the reconstruction of the phrase *-khaṅ ’bubs can be supported by the analogous phrase -khyim rtsigs that co-
occurs with it in ITJ 743:4r168; see the Text section below.
7
For further details concerning the verb see s.v. źu bub.
8
According to LI (1961:320), it corresponds here to Ch. tian si 天寺. The variant lha gaṅ seems to be attested also in
Or.15000/82:14; cf. TAKEUCHI 1998.1:48, text 144. Furthermore, ju gaṅ “pha ma’i rigs rus” (DSM:193b) < *ju khaṅ could
theoretically belong here too. Compare hereto cu gaṅ “gñen nam ñe ’brel” and ju gaṅ “id.” (LZB:60, 69) < ju “byuṅ ba; to be
 83

MAYER/CANTWELL 1993:6 and p.13n10). All these examples attest to the voicing of the consonant kh-
of -khaṅ in the word internal position between two vowels.1

-khaṅ ~ -gaṅ as a second member of a compound can receive, in Classical as well as in Old Tibetan,
one of the following meanings:
“room/house where an animated being is staying” (e.g., klu khaṅ, rta khaṅ, rla khaṅ);
“house made of sth.” (e.g., rtswa khaṅ, śiṅ khaṅ);
“room/house where sth. is placed” (e.g., dṅul khaṅ, thab khaṅ, spur khaṅ, riṅ khaṅ);
“room/house where sth. is done” (e.g., khrus khaṅ, dpe gzigs khaṅ, slob khaṅ);
“room/house placed in” (e.g., groṅ khaṅ, bar khaṅ);
“room/house for sth.” (e.g., dgun khaṅ, mgron khaṅ).
Now, we can infer that the negative connotations of dku gaṅ noticed above come from dku-. Thus, it
becomes crucial for the proper understanding of the compound to elucidate the meaning of its first
member. A thorough analysis of all OT occurrences of the morpheme dku has been undertaken in
my paper Side, stench, remnant, plot, oath, and craftiness - the “semantic capacity” of OT dku.2 The survey
has yielded that dku in dku gaṅ is a derived from the verb *dku “to bend, to make crooked”;
conseqeuntly the meaning *“trickery, deceit” could be put forward for dku as a noun. Hence, the
following reconstruction of the underlying structure of dku gaṅ could be proposed: *dku’i khaṅ, lit.
*“a house of deceit”.

We can learn more about the referent of the compound *dku khaṅ by comparing the contexts in
which it occurs with the following clause:
g.yo’ sgyu’i khuṅ ni bsubs (PT 16:26r3)
“[One] covered the trap (lit. trickery-hole).”
One can speculate that *dku khaṅ denoted at first a ground-room with a kind of trap-mechanism
built in that allowed one to incarcerate men or big game. Later, the term, instead of being used to
denote a place, has been generalised to refer to “an ambush” as such. For the semantic development
of dku gaṅ pub (*“to build a house of deceit” > “to prepare, set up an ambush”) compare the
metaphorisation of the phrase khaṅ pub from “to build a house” to “to start a new family”
mentioned above.

The compound sku gaṅ/khaṅ that we encounter in ITJ 734, apart from being a result of folk
etymologisation3, is assumed to have already undergone semantic specialisation from denoting a
common object to a religious term. Since it came into being through folk etymologisation and
contexts in which it occurs are highly obscure, one could even suggest that it lost its meaning and

arisen, to be born from, to have coming out, to have appeared from, derived from” (ibid., p.69). Cf. further cu guṅ (< *cu gaṅ
through vowel assimilation) and ju gaṅ in MARTIN 2010:75, 79. The lemma in DSM is cited after two Bon dictionaries. Thus,
ju gaṅ could theoretically be a compound of Źaṅ źuṅ origin.
1
For more OT examples of word-internal voicing see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.
2
Cf. BIALEK (forthcoming b).
3
The replacement of dku- by sku- in consequence of folk etymologisation is also attested in the history of dku rgyal, see s.v.
 84

became a purely formulaic and ritualistic expression.1 And yet, by juxtaposing it with other similar
formations from the same text we can draw some conclusions concerning its connotations. First, we
observe that sku khaṅ occurs together with rla khaṅ and ñan khaṅ. Furthermore, rla alternates with
bla in compound rla/bla mtshe and with lha in rla/lha lam. The latter formation is also paralleled by
srin lam and myi lam. To these we could add rla(n) (m)k(h)ar and ñan kar from *bla mkhar and (g)ñan
mkhar respectively.2 To sum up, it seems plausible that the once technical term dku- shifted its
domain after it had ceased to be understood and was employed in religious context like many other
OT technical terms. I translate it literally as “a house of deceit” in the Text section assuming that
this very sense, if at all known to the contemporaries, is secondary and developed first after the
technical meaning “ambush” had fallen into oblivion. Alternatively, one could propose the
translation *”a house of deceit[ful beings]” by analogy with the above mentioned religious terms.
The exact meaning can be ascertained first after the meanings of the remaining terms have been
clarified.3

[T] 1 khri boms (95) dkuʼ gaṅ pub nas / btsan po sroṅ brtsan ston mo gsol bar byas te // glo ba riṅs pa /
mgar yul źuṅ (96) gis tshor nas / raṅ gi mgo bchad de gum mo // (PT 1287:94-6)
“[He] prepared an ambush at Khri boms. Thereafter, having arranged to hold (lit. give) a feast for
btsan po Sroṅ brtsan, the one who had been disloyal4 died having cut off his own head after [he] had
been noticed by Mgar yul źuṅ.”
yul zuṅ khri boms su mchis te / brtags na // dku gaṅ pub par yul zuṅ gis tshor nas // (PT 1287:322)
“When [Mgar] yul zuṅ, having gone to Khri boms, examined [the place], he (lit. Yul zuṅ)5 noticed
that [one] had prepared an ambush [there].”
2
sku (read: sku khaṅ)6 rla gaṅ ñan khaṅ dbub du yaṅ / mtshe his po his bdag ma mchis / (2r69) rla mtshe
srad pho ma mchis // (ITJ 734:2r68-9)
“There was no Mtshe his po his bdag (“the twin His po his, the lord”?) to build a house of deceit, a
house of rla, [and] a house of ñan. Srad pho, the twin of rla was not there.”
khaṅ sku gaṅ ñan khaṅ rla gaṅ dbub du yaṅ sib bse goṅ gar be ne tshog po ma mchis / (ITJ 734:3r116)
“There was no Sib bse goṅ gar be ne tshog po to build a house, a house of deceit, a house of ñan,
[and] a house of rla.”
rlan [---] steṅ ni rtsigs / rla khyim sgyugs ra ni rtsigs / rla lam sgya sgyo ni ?bgyis? / khaṅ sku khaṅ (4r169)
rla khaṅ ñan khaṅ [ni] pub // (ITJ 734:4r168-9)
“[One] erected Steṅ steṅ, a castle of rla1. [One] erected Sgyugs ra, a house of rla. [One] made Sgya
sgyo, a road of rla. [One] built a house, a house of deceit, a house of rla, a house of ñan.”

1
For some further examples of analogous semantic changes see s.v. khrab bse as well as my paper Erneuerbare Wörter:
Alttibetischer Wortschatz im neuen kulturellen Umfeld. Sprachwandel durch Übersetzungskultur (forthcoming a).
2
See also a similar fate dku has “suffered” becoming one of the evils or demons (rku < *dku, sdaṅ, dgra, g.yag, dug, byad
stems, sri, gdon) that disturbed Gña’ khri btsan po according to Bon sources; cf. HAARH 1969:320-1 and BIALEK (forthcoming
b).
3
One could consider whether the compound khram gaṅ (cf. khram “lying, deceiving”, Gs:141b) could be treated as formed
analogously to the discussed dku gaṅ. The aforesaid formation is attested as a part of a proper name khram gaṅ gi rgyal po
explained as “rgyal po pe har gyi ’khor du yod pa’i sruṅ ma źig gi miṅ” (DUṄDKAR:341b).
4
For a thorough analysis of the phrase glo ba riṅ see LI 1959.
5
yul zuṅ is repeated because the clause dku gaṅ pub par brings another agent in the discourse.
6
I amend the text to read *sku khaṅ instead of the attested sku by analogy with the remaining two quotations from ITJ 734.
 85

3 dku ’gel
DSM:17b: lhag ʼphro.
BDN:30n11: bya dga’. dga’ rtags.
DTH:134: basse œuvre; MACDONALD.1971:234: récompense de [sa] trahison; DENWOOD.1991:136: reward for rebellion,
punishment for opposition; DOTSON.2013a:275: lot for intrigue.
1
[E] *dku ba’i ’gel “a charge that exceeds”
2
”a charge for what exceeds; a charge for exceeding one”
[M] (N) extra addition
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[VNV1+N]
[R] dku rgyal / dku ’pel
[A] As is obvious from the context of the story related in PT 1287:129-136, Mñan ’dzi zuṅ obtained
the fortress Sdur ba and the lower part of three Klum ya as his share for rebelling agaist Ziṅ po rje
stag skya bo. dku ’gel appears only once in OT documents, namely, in the phrase dku ’gel du [...] bchad
de.

’gel as a noun and independent morpheme is found in OT texts only in the following sentence:
slar ’thol te / sladu pul na (v45) ’thold pa’i ’gel du / dkor ji ños pa’i khrin las gnaṅ ’o /// (ITJ 753:v44-5)
“Having later acknowledged [that he had bought the items from a thief], if afterwards [he] gave
[them] back, [one] granted [him] a khrin-work for (lit. of) whatever riches [he] had bought as a
’gel for what he had acknowledged.”
Even though the sentence remains obscure as concerns some semantic details, we notice certain
structural similarity between the two analysed phrases: dku ’gel du bchad and ’gel du gnaṅ, which
allows us to hypothesise that -’gel is the head of the compound dku ’gel. Besides, we can infer that a
person who had acknowledged buying stolen goods was given a kind of work (khrin las) for the
purchased goods. This could be either a work through which he should work out the value of the
stolen goods or a work that would compensate for the loss of his money and purchase. Since the
first part of the sentence states that the person acknowledged the purchase and gave it back, only
the second alternative seems plausible. In addition, we read that he was allowed (gnaṅ) a work and
not forced to do one. Thus, we can surmise that such a person was given a work with which he could
earn the sum of money he had paid for the stolen goods. Furthermore, he was offered the work as a
’gel for admitting that he had bought stolen goods. To conclude, I propose to interpret ’gel in the
above passage as *“compensation” or *“addition” from the etymological *”a charge”; cf. CT ’gel “1to
load, to lay on a burden; to commission, to charge with, to make, appoint, constitute; 2to put, to
place on or over” (J:94b-5a) and Ger. Aufschlag.2

1
By comparison with other similar passages (cf. OTDO), I reconstruct the first part of the clause as *rla mkhar steṅ steṅ ni.
The attested variant form rlan mkhar resulted from the assimilation of *rla to the onset of the following syllable mkhar; cf.,
e.g., skun mkhar < *sku mkhar.
2
For ’gel as a second member of compounds compare the following examples: skyon ’gel “to blame” (Gs:79c); *dgra ’gel
(Nubra: ɖa kal; Trangtse: ʈā kāl) “to fine” (CDTD.V:232); chad ’gel “to fine” (Gs:355a); ñes ’gel “to accuse, blame” (Gs:422a);
 86

Now, with regard to dku ’gel, in my paper1 I have proposed to connect dku- to the reconstructed verb
*dku “to rise, ascend, go beyond; to exceed”.2 The compound could be juxtaposed with CT ’phar ’gel
“making an extra tax levy” (JV)3 < ’phar “1vi. to increase, to rise; 2vi. to be promoted; 4vi. to bounce
up, to fly up, to beat, throb” (Gs:703c). To this one could add compounds *dku rgyas (see s.v. dku
rgyal), dku dar, and *dku ’phel (see s.v. dku ’pel) in which the first constituent is interpreted as going
back to the above mentioned verbal stem dku. It is important to notice in this context that the verb
’phar is glossed as a synonym of rgyas pa and dar ba, among others, in D:848a, whereas, according to
the English index of CDTD, it shares some senses with rgya (“to increase”) and ’phel (“to increase”,
“to rise”).

As I tried to demonstrate in my paper4, the anaphoric pronoun de that preceded dku ’gel in PT
1287:135 must refer to the land of Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo that was joined by Ziṅ po rje khri paṅ sum.
I suggest to interpret the relevant passage in the following way: Ziṅ po rje khri paṅ sum split (bchad,
lit. “cut”) the land of Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo so that the castle Sdur ba, first, constituted a kind of
demarcation (mkhar sdur bas, lit. “by means of the castle Sdur ba), and, secondly, was allotted to
Mñan ’dzi zuṅ nag po as an addition to the land of Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo. We possess no reliable
information that the castle Sdur ba belonged to Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo. We know, however, that Ziṅ
po rje khri paṅ sum was residing in Yu sna of Sdur ba. Thus, it is even more probable that Sdur ba
either belonged or was under control of Ziṅ po rje khri paṅ sum rather than Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo
and could be offered by the former as an addition, or a kind of compensation, to Mñan ’dzi zuṅ nag
po.

The underlying structure of the compound, being reconstructed as *dku ba’i ’gel, could be
interpreted in two ways:
1. “a charge that exceeds”;
2. “a charge for what exceeds” or “a charge for exceeding one”.

*sñad ’gel (Leh: ɲat kal) “to accuse, to blame”, CDTD.V:232); *mna’ ’gel (Nurla, Leh, Nubra: na kal; Trangtse: nā kāl) “to put sb.
on oath” (CDTD.V:232); blo ’gel “trust, reliance, confidence” (Gs:746a), “hoffen, erwarten” (Sch:383a, s.v. blo gel; Southern
Mustang lō kāl “jmdm. etwas (ganz und gar) anvertrauen”; Kyirong lø̀: kɛ̄j “to trust”, CDTD.V:232); btsan ’gel “to impose,
force” (Gs:850b).
The cognates of ’gel include skal ba “1portion, share; 2in a special sense: the portion of good or bad fortune that falls to a
man’s lot, as a consequence of his former actions, lot, fate, destiny” (J:21a; *“what is put on sb. [as his/her share]”), cf. Balti
“share, apportionment, limit, confines, enclosure, compound, close, precincts” (CDTD:323); khal “1burden, load; 2bushel”
(J:40a); ’khel “1to put on, to load, to pack on” (J:56b); gal “I.1importance; 2constraint, compulsion; īīto force, to press
something on a person” (J:68a, J:68b); gel po “fat, obese, portly” (Gs:185b); sgal “load of a beast of burden” (J:114a).
Moreover, it is possible that ’o skol “we” is a further derivative of the same stem; < *’o skal (vowel assimilation). Its
etymological meaning could be proposed as either 1*”this share; [those of] this share, [those of] the [same] share” (< ’o
“that”, CDTD:7582), or 2*”our share; we [of common] share” (< ’o “we”, CDTD:7581). For the construction ‘PRN+N’ compare
the idiomatic expressions ’di/de skad.
1
Cf. BIALEK (forthcoming b).
2
This dku belongs to a different etymon than dku analysed s.v. dku gaṅ; for details see my paper BIALEK (forthcoming b).
3
Compare hereto JÄSCHKE’s *ṅúl-la p’ar kál-c̀e* “to impose, demand interest” quoted from Western dialects s.v. pharI
“interest” (341a).
4
Cf. BIALEK (forthcoming b).
 87

The second interpretation could be juxtaposed with the phrase ’thold pa’i ’gel from the above cited
passage. In both cases the overall translation can be proposed as “an extra addition, supplement”.

[T] de ʼi dkuʼ ʼgel du mkhar (136) sdur bas bchad de / klum ya sum gyi smad // mñan ʼdzi zuṅ gi bran du
dṅar to // (PT 1287:135-6)
“Having split (lit. cut off) [the land of Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo] with the castle Sdur ba as an extra
addition to the [land] (lit. of it), [Ziṅ po rje khri paṅ sum] attached the lower part of Klum ya sum as
serfs of Mñan ’dzi zuṅ.”1

4 dku rgyal
[V] dku’ rgyal (PT 1287:196)
bku rgyal (Ldan.2 4; scribal error2)
dku (PT 1287:194; scribal error)
DSM:17b: mna’ ’brel.
BDN:43n10: mna’ daṅ dam tshig bźag pa las rgyal ba sogs kyi don (s.v. dku’ rgyal ba) ; BNY:57n1: mna’ ’brel.
WTS.3:173a: Bez. eines hohen Privilegs, das mit einer erblichen Würde verbunden ist.
DTH:139: prince; RICHARDSON.1952:29: exaltation; RÓNA-TAS.1955:264: side of the king, courtier; p.268: the general term
denoting ministers; belonging to the royal court; RICHARDSON.1985:17: ennoblement; p.160: promotion; LI/COBLIN:174: LI:
probably a title of high rank, conferred together with a silver certificate; DENWOOD.1991:133: an official rank or title which
could be conferred by kings as a reward for political services; p.134: lit. overcomer of intrigue; HELLER.1994:13: level (for bku
rgyal - JB); DOTSON.2009:63: aristocracy; p.257: landed gentry; WALTER.2009:63n62: (inner) comitatus; DOTSON.2013a:279:
aristocracy; p.333n16: [...] the aristocracy (dku rgyal) are the “best of the plotters”. Incidentally, this etymology is not so far
removed from “aristocrat”, where the Greek aristos means “best of”.

[S] *dku źiṅ rgyas “to spread (INTR) while exceeding”

[E] *dku źiṅ rgyas pa “spreading while exceeding”
[M] (N) nobility
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[R] dku ’gel / dku ’pel
[A] dku rgyal is attested, on the one hand, as an independent lexeme and, on the other hand, as a
part of another compound (dku rgyal gtsigs) as well as of a derivative (dku rgyal pa).

In OT documents, among the compounds with the second member -rgyal those denoting a local clan-
ruler constitue the most numerous group (e.g., rṅegs rgyal, dags rgyal). The remaning ones can be
divided in two further groups: “ruler, lord of sth.” (e.g., spyir rgyal <*spyi+rgyal, TLTD.1:103n7) and
“the best of/among” (e.g. chu rgyal, lha rgyal). However, none of the meanings reconstructed for dku,
I
”a bending, crooking; trickery“, II”to rise, ascend, go beyong; to exceed”3, seems to be matching the
requirements of being a determinative of -rgyal in a compound. It is important to note that the

1
One may, however, consider whether the grammar of the sentence is not somehow distorted, since, in the second part,
we read that the lower part of Klum ya sum was given as bondservants of Mñan ’dzi zuṅ. Now, the land (smad) and
bondservants (bran) belong to two different semantic domains, GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION and HUMAN BEINGS, respectively, which
cannot be joined in a construction of the type ‘A is given as B’ that requires both A and B to belong to one semantic class.
Alternatively, one could read *smad myi instead of smad.
2
As already the short passage quoted in the Text section demonstrates, the text of the Ldan ma inscription contains many
deviations from the standard orthography.
3
For details on the reconstructed meanings see BIALEK (forthcoming b).
 88

meaning “to be victorious” for -rgyal does not seem to be documented in OT non-Buddhist sources.
These facts call into question the morphological form of the compound as attested in OT records.

As I was arguing in my paper on dku1, the form dku rgyal came into being as a result of folk
etymologisation of the original *dku rgyas.2 The latter compound morphologically resembles two
other lexemes, namely dku dar and *dku ’phel (see s.v. dku ’pel). We can also quote other formations of
a similar morphological structure: dar rgyas “development, progress” (Gs:528a), “development”
(CDTD:3789); dar spel “the act of spreading, promoting, popularizing (an idea, method, etc.),
development, promotion” (Gs:528b); dar ’phel “sm. dar spel” (Gs:528c); ’phel rgyas “development,
growth, progress, expansion” (Gs:705a); yar rgyas “progress, development, improvement” (Gs:992b),
Kargil, Tabo “development” (CDTD:7705). dar rgyas can be juxtaposed with the phrase dard ciṅ rgyas
*“increasing while spreading” attested in ITJ 751:36v13 whereas yar rgyas can be compared with yar
skyes (pa) glossed already in Mahāvyutpatti as “utkarṣaḥ” (8288; “superior, eminent; much, excessive;
exaggerated, boastful; attractive; pulling upwards, drawing, pulling; elevation, increase, rising to
something better, prosperity; excellence, eminence”, MW:176b). yar “up, upward” (J:507b) as well as
dar “II.1to be diffused, to spread, of influence, power, opinions, diseases” (J:251a) semantically closely
resemble the expression dku ste glossed as “lhag ste” (see BIALEK, forthcoming b) and the
reconstructed meanings of dku *”to rise, ascend, go beyong; to exceed”. In addition, one should
mention here also the OT phrase rgyas la ’phel (PT 1290:r1).

To sum up, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound in question as *dku
źiṅ rgyas, lit. “to spread while exceeding”.

In the context of the OT passages cited below, we can state that the compound was used to denote
persons of special merits who deserved credits and recognition from authorities. The account of PT
1287 seems to recall the period of formation of the nobility in early Tibetan society where the first
privileges were not hereditary yet but bestowed by the authority on single persons. Thus, the
semantic development of *dku rgyas is assumed to have proceeded along the following lines:
*“spreading while exceeding” > *“outstanding (ones)” > *“nobility”.4

It seems probable that the compound under consideration has later undergone a twofold
development. On the one hand, we find it as sku rgyal rendered as “Belohnung” (LIN 2005:244)5 - a

1
See BIALEK (forthcoming b).
2
The replacement of *-rgyas through -rgyal in the process of folk etymologisation can be explained by the esteem the
latter morpheme enjoyed in Tibetan society in connection with the newly introduced religion of Buddha. For further
examples of similar process see s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad and the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan, section Folk
etymology.
3
For a translation of the respective sentence see s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ.
4
Compare hereto also the etymology of Eng. noble “fr[om] L[atin] nóbilis, ‘well-known, famous, celebrated, renowned; of
noble birth; excellent, superior’” (KLEIN 1966:1051a).
5
In: ban de byad ma de la sku rgyal gyi tshul du phul te / che ge mo khyod la sku rgyal du bźes spro daṅ / rta glaṅ mdzo drel sogs rnam
pa maṅ po’i dkor cha ’di ’bul gyis / da ni bdag cag la byad kha’i bu lon med pas mthu bsdus śig (’Ju mi pham rnam rgyal Gto
sgrom ’bum tig gi dgoṅs don lag len khyer bder bkod pa’i gto yi cho ga bkra śis ’dod ’jo; trslr. after LIN 2005:244, 10-13) “Having
given [them] to the byad ma-monk as a kind of a sku rgyal: Because [we] are giving you, such and such (che ge mo), these
 89

form that attests to the folk etymologisation of the first syllable: a doubtful dku- has been replaced
by the well known sku.1 On the other hand, however, one encounters sku rgyas pa glossed already in
Mvy:297 with unnatagātra as one of eighty secondary tokens of a buddha. unnata is otherwise
explained in Mahāvyutpatti as “mtho ba; mthon po” (1884), “pho che ba ’am kheṅs pa; pho kheṅs pa”
(2452), and “sgaṅ ṅam mtho ba” (5275). All these can, in fact, be deemed synonyms or near-
synonyms of the reconstructed dku *”to rise, ascend, go beyong; to exceed”. I hypothesise that the
OT *dku rgyas and *dku rgyas pa, once technical terms tightly bound to the social system of the
Empire, had lost their original meanings *“nobility” and *“nobleman” respectively, and started to
be used in a more general way to refer to people of fine personal qualities or high moral principles
just as Eng. noble or Ger. edel did. This change has paved the way for the next step in the semantic
development which was the usage of the terms with reference to appearance (“of imposing size” as
for one of eighty tokens of a buddha) or quality (“of great value” as for offerings), accompanied by
the replacement of dku- by sku. Hence, the once converbial compound with the underlying structure
*dku źiṅ rgyas has become an attributive phrase sku rgyas pa.2 The process may be another example of
the influence the Buddhist thought might have held with the OT language.

[T] myaṅ tseṅ cuṅ daṅ / pha spun po mu gseṅ gñis ni dku (read: dku rgyal)3 la // (195) gthogs ste / dku
rgyal pa ʼi naṅ du yaṅ gthogs so // (PT 1287:194-5)
“Both, Myaṅ tseṅ cuṅ and [his] paternal cousin [Myaṅ] mu gseṅ, belonging to the nobility, belonged
to (lit. into the middle of) noblemen.”
dbaʼs dbyi tshab kyi tsha bo // stag po rje myes snaṅ daṅ / maṅ po (196) rje pu tshab gñis dkuʼ rgyal la gthogs
so // (PT 1287:195-6)
“Both grandsons of Dba’s dbyi tshab, [Dba’s] stag po rje myes snaṅ and [Dba’s] maṅ po rje pu tshab,
belonged to the nobility.”
tshes poṅ nag seṅ gi nu bo na gu dkuʼ rgyal la gthogs soʼ // (PT 1287:196)
“Na gu, the younger brother of Tshes poṅ nag seṅ, belonged to the nobility.”
blon stag sgra klu khoṅ / (32) gi bu tsha rgyud peld / dku rgyal gyi yi ge’ (33) lag na ’chaṅ ’chaṅ ba źig rabs
chad (34) dam bkyon bab na yaṅ / dṅul gyi yi ge (35) blar myi bźes par / blon stag sgra klu khoṅ / (36) daṅ /
zla goṅ gi bu tsha rgyud gaṅ ñe ba gcig (37) dṅul gyi yi ge chen po g.yuṅ druṅ du stsald (38) par gnaṅ ṅo //
(Źol N 31-8)
“Even if descendants of councillor Stag sgra klu khoṅ, who hold in [their] hands the letter of
nobility, become extinct or bkyon fall [on them], it is granted that a great silver letter is given in
perpetuity to the descendant of councillor Stag sgra klu khoṅ and Zla goṅ, who is [their] relative, so
that the silver letter is not taken back to the authorities.”
spre’u gi lo’i dbyar / (2) mtsan (read: btsan) po khri sde sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ la / (3) dg’e (sic!) sloṅ chos daṅ
chab srid kyi bka’ chen po la btags ste / (4) gser gyi bku rgyal man cad kyi thabs rtsal (read: stsal) / (5) jo mo

goods of many cakes, horses, oxen, mdzos, mules, and so on, as a sku rgyal, unite [your] magical power since we do not have
any debt of byad kha now!”. It seems that sku rgyal in this meaning is found also in the following gloss: sku rgyal gyi bźi zur
gcig gi babs “de sṅon bod sa gnas srid gźuṅ gi khrims khaṅ du kha mchu źu gtugs byas rjes śor mkhan gyis thob mkhan la
slog cha sprod dgos pa’i bsdoms ’bor gyi bźi cha gcig khrims khaṅ la sprod dgos pa de yin” (DUṄDKAR:228b).
1
The replacement of dku- by sku- in consequence of folk etymologisation is attested also in case of dku gaṅ, see s.v.
2
The form -rgyas- in sku rgyas pa supports also the proposed reconstruction *dku rgyas (pa).
3
For this reconstruction see BIALEK (forthcoming b).
 90

mchims lta (read: (b)za?) legs mo brtsan la rtsogs (read: stsogs) pa / (6) rjes ’baṅs maṅ mo źig thar par bkyel
(read: bskyel?) (Ldan.2 1-6; trslr. after HELLER 1994:13)
“In the summer of the monkey year, during the life of btsan po Khri sde sroṅ brtsan, many courtiers,
monks who, having engaged in great decisions concerning (lit. of) religion and the state, were given
ranks up to nobility of golden [letter] [and] the queen Legs mo brtsan, a lady from Mchims[-clan],
among others, were brought to deliverance.”

5 dku ’pel
[V] dku’ bel (PT 1287:201, 315; voicing)
DSM:18a: g.yo sgyu’i lkog mna’ ther ’don byas pa’i don te (s.vv. dku bel ba, dku ’bel); BYD:15a: lkog g.yo ther ʼdon (s.v. dku
’pel); p.15b: g.yo sgyu yis gnod pa daṅ gźan ñes goṅ źu (s.v. dku’ bel).
BDN:43n13: mna’ daṅ dam tshig bźag pa’i gsaṅ brtol pa’i don (s.v. dku ’bel); BTK:113n12: g.yo sgyu ther ʼdon daṅ dmar rjen
du bton pa’i don no (s.v. dku ’bel); BNY:138n15: g.yo sgyu ther ʼdon byas pa (s.v. dku ’bel); STK:151n12: dku’ ni mna’ daṅ dam
tshig gi don daṅ bel ni bkog pa’am ʼdon pa’i don te. gsaṅ ba brtol ba’am gsaṅ ba’i ʼchar jus ther ʼdon byas pa’i don (s.v. dku
’bel).
DTH:190: nuire par artifice, dénoncer (s.v. dku ’bel); TLTD.3:113b: outwit; DOTSON.2013a:280: to reveal a plot.

[E] *dku źiṅ ’phel “to spread (INTR) while exceeding”

[M] (V) to be revealed
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[R] dku ’gel / dku rgyal
[A] In a paper devoted to the elucidation of the OT lexeme dku1, I have proposed to analyse dku ’pel
as an intransitive verbal compound formed analogously to CT dku dar and OT dku rgyal (see s.v.).
Besides, I have demonstrated that the verbs ’phel, dar, and rgyas, i.e. the reconstructed second
members of the compounds, are near-synonyms.2 Nevertheless, some important semantic
differences could be discovered with regard to subjects that these verbs took in OT. To wit, as
concerns ’phel, we find it with, for instance, rta “horses” (PT 1286:37), phyugs “cattle” (PT 1046b:28;
ITJ 740:168), phyugs zan “cattle and food” (PT 1052:r65-6), be’u lug “calves and lambs” (ITJ 740:31), myi
daṅ phyugs “men and cattle” (PT 1047:246), yon “gift” (PT 1290:r1), and gsaṅ “what is hidden” (PT
1047:364). It is, however, most commonly encountered in the compound bu tsha (rgyud) ’phel (for
variant readings see OTDO) “descendants, progeny”. To sum up, we observe that one group of its
subjects contains terms that either denote collectives (phyugs, zan) or are understood in their
contexts as plural nouns. The other group, which is much more significant for our analysis, consists
of only one member, i.e. gsaṅ. In order to throw more light on the issue, I should cite the respective
passage:
rkun pho maṅ mo źig gyis chig chig brkus pa las / gsaṅ / (365) / pheld (PT 1047:364-5)
“Upon many thieves had stolen some things, the hidden objects came to light.”
gsaṅ is a noun here and denotes things that had been stolen and hidden but then came again to light.
As I have argued in my paper (BIALEK, forthcoming b), it is the glo ba riṅs pa that functions as the

1
See BIALEK (forthcoming b).
2
For details see BIALEK (forthcoming b) and the present work s.v. dku rgyal.
 91

subject of the verb dku(’) ’pel/bel in all three quotations below. Both, gsaṅ and glo ba riṅs pa, share one
semantic trait: they refer to things that should remain secret but were obviously disclosed.

In conclusion, the underlying structure of the compound may be reconstructed as *dku źiṅ ’phel “to
spread while exceeding” with the specialised meaning *“to come to light, to be disclosed/revealed”.1

[T] ʼuṅ gi ʼog du // (201) btsan po mched gñis la // moṅ sṅon po glo ba riṅs pa / zu tse glo ba ñe bas dkuʼ bel
nas // btsan po mched (202) gñis kyi sku la ma dar par // moṅ sṅon po bkum ste // zu tse glo ba ñe ʼo // (PT
1287:200-2)
“Thereafter, the disloyalty of Moṅ sṅon po to both, btsan po [Slon mtshan and his] brother [Slon kol],
was revealed by the loyal Zu tse. Then, having killed Moṅ sṅon po so that [he] could not triumph
over any of the brothers, Zu tse was loyal.”2
(315) // ʼuṅ gi ʼi ʼog du // khyuṅ po spuṅ sad zu tses // myaṅ źaṅ snaṅ btsan po la glo ba riṅs pa // zu tses
dkuʼ bel te // źaṅ snaṅ bkum ste // zu tse (316) glo ba ñe ʼo // (PT 1287:315-6)
“Therafter, Khyuṅ po spuṅ sad zu tse, having revealed the disloyalty [of] Myaṅ źaṅ snaṅ towards the
btsan po, killed Źaṅ snaṅ. Zu tse was loyal.”
’uṅ gi ’og du // btsan po [khri?] sroṅ rtsan gyi riṅ la / (r2) myaṅ źaṅ snaṅ glo ba riṅs pa zu tses dku ’pel te //
btsan po’i sñan du gsol te / źaṅ snaṅ bkum nas zu tse (r3) glo ba ñe’o // (ITJ 1375:r1-3)
“Thereafter, during the lifetime of btsan po Khri sroṅ rtsan, the disloyalty [of] Myaṅ źaṅ snaṅ was
revealed by Zu tse. Having reported [it] to the btsan po, [Zu tse] killed Źaṅ snaṅ. Then, Zu tse was
loyal.”

6 dkyel mkhas
DTH:151: sagace; DOTSON.2013a:310: vast and skilled.

[E] *dkyel ba la mkhas pa “exprienced in overthrowing”

[M] (A) experienced in overthrowing
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTincorporating; adjectival; STRC[VNV1+A]
[R] rgal mkhas
[A] dkyel mkhas is a hapax legomenon documented only in the OTC. The argument structure of -mkhas
does not allow for dkyel- to have here its lexicographically attested meaning “the compass, extent,
bulk of any thing” (Cs:67a) since that would yield !”experienced/skilled in extent”. In the dictionary
of TSHE RIṄ DBAṄ RGYAL, the expression buddhi-prīthu is glossed with “dkyel che ba” (5v2) and for dkyel
po che we find ”blo rgya che po, blo khog yaṅs pa” (BTC:65b) or “weiträumig; großmütig”
(WTS.3:182b).3 Thus, one could understand dkyel in these expressions as “mental capacity”, i.e.

1
I assume that ’bel- occurring in CT always in contexts of speech is a back formation from the discussed *dku ’phel (>
*dku ’bel through word-internal voicing between two vowels); compare hereto: ’bel dkon “abundance and scarcity,
availability” (Gs:765a); ’bel mchid “1talking freely and frankly; 2a letter” (Gs:765a); ’bel gtam “or ’bel ba’i gtam = yaṅ dag pa’i
gtam saṃkathyam (sic!) holy discourse, sermon, a speech on some sacred subject” (D:921b); ’bel po “abundant, plentiful”
(Gs:765a); ’bel ba “Unterredung, Rede; reden” (Sch:393a). In all these cases the meaning of ’bel could be easily traced back to
the verb ’phel “1to increase, augment, multiply, enlarge; 2to improve, to grow better” (J:357a). Subsequently, the
morpheme ’bel- has been interpreted as an independent morpheme and used to form further lexemes, like, for
instance, ’bel dkon or ’bel po.
2
For the reading “triumph over” of the verb dar see BIALEK, forthcoming b. The paper contains also a more thorough
analysis of the syntaxt of the passages quoted here in the Text section.
3
dkyel in this meaning may just be a variant or a specialised reading of dkyil “the middle” (J:11a). This hypothesis is
additionally supported by the phrase dkyil che ba “with wide base, spacious interior, comprehensive understanding, quick
 92

“intelligence”. However, this meaning is difficult to reconcile with -mkhas as well,

!”experienced/skilled in intelligence”.

The morpheme -mkhas occurs in OT documents in formations like, e.g., dgra thabs mkhas
“experienced in military tactics” (ITJ 751:38r3; Źol S 28-9); rgal mkhas “experienced in fighting” (see
s.v.); thags mkhas “learned in fabrics” (ITJ 739:9r11); thabs mkhas “experienced in means” (PT
1283:426; < thabs la mkhas, cf. PT 16:32v3; PT 239:r17-1); sraṅ mkhas “learned in weights” (ITJ 739:5v9).
Compare hereto also phrases like: OT ’dul ba la mkhas pa (PT 16:23r4) and CT gdul bya dkri la mkhas
(WTS.9:133b, metr.), gźan gyi ’khos ’diṅs pa la mkhas pa (WTS.9:133b), bźen (read: gźen) skul ’debs mkhas
(WTS.9:133a, metr.), slob ma skyoṅ ba la mkhas pa (J:54a). To conclude, as concerns its complements,
mkhas pa can be used exclusively with nouns and if those are deverbals, they must be derived from
controllable verbs. This is also the logical consequence of the semantics of the lexeme: one may be
skilled or experienced only in something over which one has control.

In PT 1287:355-6, [Kag] la boṅ is given the attributes blo che, dkyel mkhas, rgal mkhas, and khoṅ dpa’ ba.
Hence, it seems reasonable to interpret dkyel- as a verb or a deverbative analogous to rgal- in rgal
mkhas (see s.v.). The latter verb is glossed unanimously as controllable in modern dialects (see
CDTD.V:269).

In my paper (BIALEK, forthcoming b), I put forward an hypothesis that some transitive c-verbs with
the onset dk- have been derived by means of the prefix d- from their intransitive counterparts. Now,
as concerns dkyel-, I propose to interpret it as a TR, c-verb derived from ’khyel “L[a]d[akh] to hit, to
strike” (J:60b). Although GOLDSTEIN classifies the latter as an active, i.e. c-verb (Gs:167a), it is obvious
that he does it only on the basis of the English renderings given by JÄSCHKE. The Tibetan-German
dictionary of the latter glosses ’khyel, namely with “treffen” (Jä:62a), which points rather to an nc-
verb. JÄSCHKE’s English gloss is repeated by RERICH (R.1:366a) but the verb is marked by the latter as
an archaism. I assume that dkyel and ’khyel are cognate to CT ’gyel “to fall, to tumble” (J:98a) and sgyel
“to throw down, to overthrow, overturn; to lay or put down; to thwart; to kill (horses)” (J:119a).

Similarly as in case of dku (see s.v. dku gaṅ and BIALEK, forthcoming b), lexicographical sources attest
to a verb with a voiced stem consonant that, on the one hand, possesses grammatical categories
predicted previously for dkyel and, on the other hand, matches the semantic requirements of a
transitive counterpart of ’khyel. This is dgyel glossed with “unaγaqu” (SR.1:383.2; unaγa- “v[erb]
t[ransitive] to throw off or down, overthrow; to drop”, Less:875b; “bsgyel ba, ltuṅ bar byed pa; faire
tomber, laisser tomber, jeter par terre, précipiter”, Kow.1:340b), “umwerfen, über den Haufen
werfen” (Sch:86b), or “sgyel ba’i don du snaṅ” (GC:150b, s.v. dgyel bya). I presume that dgyel is a
reflex of an archaic stem dkyel *“to overthrow” that underwent folk etymologisation to resemble

comprehension” (JW; ~ dkyel che ba) > dkyil che “delger aγuu; sanaγ-a talbiqu aγuu; dotur-a delger aγuǰim” (SR.1:61.6). The
change from dkyil to dkyel in dkyel che (ba) could in fact be a case of regressive vowel assimilation: -i- > -e- / _CσCe-.
 93

verbs of comparable meanings, i.e. ’gyel and sgyel. The latter two might have replaced dkyel and ’khyel
as the causative derivation by means of the prefix s- became prevalent over the prefix d- derivation.

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa / “Formerly, last year, two years ago,
chab (355) chab ni ma gźug nas // from the lower end of the river,
la boṅ ni rje daṅ skol / [Kag] la boṅ, the lord and [his] subjects,
blo che ni dkyel mkhas la // of broad mind, experienced in overthrowing and
rgal mkhas ni / (356) khoṅ dpaʼ bas // experienced in fighting, of brave ?heart?,
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ la / who commited a battle at a fortified encampment
dgraʼ bźer ni g.yul sprad ciṅ / against the Chinese ruler, Bsam laṅ, and
dgra zin ni gsar (357) spaṅs pas // who renounced anew [his] enemies and allies,
srid kyi ni mgo bzuṅ źiṅ / tried to obtain from (lit. upon) the divine son, the
btsan po,
pha skyabs ni sdug btsal paʼ // the head of the dominion that he had held and
lha sras ni btsan la / (358) btsal // (PT 1287:354-8) the agreeableness under the protection of the
father (i.e. the btsan po) he was looking for.”1

7 rkaṅ ’gros
Negi.1:135a: = rkaṅ dmag padagaḥ.
Sch:15b: Vieh, Hausthiere; das Gehen zu Fusse (s.v. rkaṅ ’bros); J:16a: or -’bros: 1walking on foot; 2domestic cattle; breeding
cattle; p.103a: 1a going or travelling on foot, a march; 2breeding cattle (s.v. ’gros); R.1:130a: 1хождение пешком; walking on
foot; 2 перен. ломашний скот животное; met[aphorical] domestic cattle; animal; WTS.4:228b: 1Vieh, Lasttiere; 2eine
Gangart, das Zu-Fuß-Gehen; 3Transportdienst.
LALOU.1952:356: le bétail; TLTD.3:114a: foot-messenger; RICHARDSON.1985:160: animal; LI/COBLIN:374: domestic cattle;
COBLIN.1991b:523b: domestic cattle, livestock; RICHARDSON.1992:106: cattle; TAKEUCHI.1994:857n5: corvée service;
DOTSON.2007b:37: animals; UEBACH.2010:317-20: 1transport corvée; 2a group of mounts, pack animals and cattle going on
foot; 3domestic cattle.

[S] *rkaṅ thaṅ du ’gro “to go on foot”

[E] *[rkaṅ thaṅ du ’gro ba]+-s “those going on foot”
[M] (N) herded grazer/livestock
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTAd-incorporating; STRC[[N+N]+VV1]
[R] rkaṅ ton / rkaṅ pran
[A] OT records attest to rkaṅ ’gros as denoting animals from livestock of Tibetan herdsmen. In the
passages quoted below, rkaṅ ’gros is mentioned in connection with serfs, fields, pastures, sacred
utensils, valuable objects (Lcaṅ), people, ?yaks? and horses (ITJ 740). From this we can infer that rkaṅ
’gros formed part of one’s property.2 Moreover, from the fact that ITJ 740 separately lists ?yaks? and
horses (gnag rta), we can infer that they were not necessarily inluded in rkaṅ ’gros, but see below. The
passage in ITJ 730 makes it clear that rkaṅ ’gros were grazing animals feeding in summer on grass
from grazing lands. ITJ 1368:20 mentions six kinds of rkaṅ ’gros. Unfortunately, the text is too
damaged to be properly interpreted3. Grazing animals of greatest importance for Tibetan herding, as

1
Some of the expressions used in this fragment are explained s.v. dgra bźer.
2
In PT 997 (ll.3, 18, 23) we find the appositional phrase dkor rkaṅ ’gros, lit. “property [that is] rkaṅ ’gros”.
3
In connection with this passage, UEBACH (2010:318) mentions six groups of beings that are still used in transport corvée:
men, horses, mules, donkeys, yaks and mdzo. This interpretation assumes the meaning “transport corvée” for rkaṅ ’gros – a
meaning that is not otherwise attested in OT sources.
 94

described in OT documents, were, apart from yaks and horses, sheep and goats. Besides, some
sources refer also to cows that, however, constituted a marginal part of Tibetan livestock. A
fragment from PT 997 (ll.23-5) speaks of the following groups of animals as belonging to rkaṅ ’gros:
?yaks? (gnag sdiṅ)1, [yak-]cows (ba śad)2, wethers3, the very male and female sheep4, three years old
sheep5, male and female lambs (lu gu pho mo), gelded he-goats6, the very male and female goats, he-
goats of two to three years7, male and female kids8. Thus, according to this document, gnag sdiṅ were
included in rkaṅ ’gros whereas ITJ 740 mentions gnag rta separately (see the Text section). This
inconsistency may have resulted from a rather vaguely defined meaning of the compound under
discussion that could have been applied differently among herders and in settled communities
(differences in time and location may obviously have played a role as well).

The evidence that we have at our disposal does not allow us to speculate about other meanings of
rkaṅ ’gros that are attested in later lexicographic works. It is, however, likely that they came into
being as a result, on the one hand, of generalisation of the primary meaning and, on the other hand,
of confusion with another compound, rkaṅ ’gro “a vassal or subject paying his duty by serving as a
messenger or porter” (J:15b-6a)9 that was formed probably independently and later than rkaṅ ’gros
since the former seems to be unknown in OT texts.

1
Cf. g.yag sdiṅ in Or.15000/426:3.
2
The compound is glossed in CDTD:5424 with data from WAT and WIT dialects. By analogy with the remaining terms from
the list (for the discussion see below), gnag sdiṅ could denote a yak bull whereas ba śad a yak cow.
3
śa bzan “a castrated sheep” (Gs:1091c), Themchen “wether” (CDTD:8479).
4
The meaning of the phrase pho sñid mo sñid remains dubious. It is repeated below as an attribute of ra. IW glosses lug sñid
as “wether”. This is the only case known to me from later lexicographic sources where the syllable sñid occurs in one
context with animals and not as a kinship term. Juxtaposing the phrases śa bzan daṅ pho sñid mo sñid and ra skyes daṅ ra pho
sñi mo sñid we observe some parallelism in their structure:
śa bzan : pho sñid mo sñid ~ ra skyes : ra pho sñi mo sñid
If śa bzan denotes a wether, ra skyes a castrated he-goat and the latter compound is followed by an expression that
obviously refers to goats (ra pho sñi mo sñid), we can gather that pho sñid mo sñid referred to a kind of sheep and should be
reconstructed as *lug pho sñid mo sñid. I propose to understand the phrases pho sñid and mo sñid as referring to male and
female animals, respectively.
There is another parallelism hidden in the list. To wit, we have two groups of expressions, each containing four terms
referring to sheep and goats respectively, cf.:
śa bzan ~ *lug pho sñid mo sñid ~ thoṅ tsher ~ lu gu pho mo
ra skyes ~ ra pho sñi mo sñid ~ ra thoṅ ~ re’u mo
The terms in the first column refer to castrated animals, the third ones, to two/three years old sheep and goats (see
below), whereas the last ones to youngs. What is logically missing from the lists are terms referring to reproductive
capacities of the animals. Thus, I propose to understand *lug pho sñid mo sñid and ra pho sñi mo sñid as denoting male and
female sheep and goats that have reached sexual maturity. The morpheme -sñid is interpreted here as a cognate of CT ñid
“1self, same” (J:187b) with the reconstructed meaning *“the very”; thus, pho sñid *“the very male” and mo sñid *“the very
female”. Compare also the phrase pho sñid mo sñid with pho mo qualifying lu gu “lamb”. In this case, pho mo describes the sex
of the animals, yet the missing element -sñid demonstrates the difference between youngs and mature animals with regard
to their sexual capacities.
re’u mo should, in all probability, be read *re’u pho mo forming the analogue of lu gu pho mo.
5
thoṅ tsher “three year old sheep or goat” (Gs:504c).
6
ra skyes “a gelded he-goat” (J:521a).
7
ra thoṅ “1a he-goat of two years; 2a gelded he-goat” (J:521a), “three year old goat” (Gs:1017b), Leh “male goat”, Nubra
“male goat of two to three years” (CDTD:7898).
8
For the reconstructed *re’u pho mo see previous comments. For differing interpretations and translations of some of the
terms see RICHARDSON 1992:108.
9
JÄSCHKE gives the dictionary of CSOMA as the source for the gloss but I was unable to find this entry in the latter work.
 95

For the proposed reconstruction of rkaṅ ’gros as *[rkaṅ thaṅ du ’gro ba]+-s, lit. “those going on foot”,
compare: rkaṅ thaṅ “on foot” (J:16a); rkaṅ thaṅ ’gro or °rgyu “pedibus ire; aller à pied” (Desg:37a); rkaṅ
thaṅ du grul ba “to walk, to go on foot” (J:16a); rkaṅ thaṅ la ’gro ba “идти пешном; to go on foot”
(R.1:131a).1 The collective meaning of the compound is indicated by the suffix –s: [rkaṅσ’gro]+-s.2

rkaṅ ’gros seems to have been a technical term with a specialised meaning “herded
grazer/livestock”. I propose to add the attribute “herded” since the meaning of the English term
livestock (including also cats, dogs, etc.) is much broader than that of rkaṅ ’gros. Animals listed among
rkaṅ ’gros in OT documents are all grazing ones, thus the alternative rendering “grazer” for which
compare Ger. Weidegänger; -gänger ~ -’gros.

[T] rkaṅ ’gros gsol pas ni ’gro ba maṅ po (31r3) sbyoṅ bar gyur te saṅs rgyas kyi źiṅ gcig nas gcig tu rgyu ba’i
rdzu ’phruld kyi rkaṅ pha daṅ ldan bar śog śig // (PT 16:31r2-3)
“By way of donation of herded livestock, may many living beings, having become purified, proceed
being endowed with the feet of magical power that move from one buddha field to another!”
sku gśem (read: gśen) mjol bon po rnams / (48) kyis // do ma la stsogs te rkaṅ ʼgros kyi rnams gśog yugs kyis
gdab (PT 1042:47-8)
“Herded livestock [like] do ma, among others, was struck with gśog yugs by sku gśen, the bon po of
mjol.”
rkaṅ / (91) ʼgros kyi rnams kyaṅ / sṅa slad khram btab ste // myi ʼchugs par bgyi // (PT 1042:90-1)
“The herded livestock, before and after [one] tallied [it] (lit. casted a tally), was prepared without
being mistaken.”
rkaṅ ʼgros mjol du ruṅ ṅo (PT 1042:95)
“It is right to ?measure? herded livestock.”
’brog rtsa bzaṅ (46) yaṅ / rkaṅ ’gros dbyar rjud do (ITJ 730:45-6)
“Although the grass of grazing lands is good, herded livestock is getting weak in summer.”
myi3 daṅ rkaṅ ’gros daṅ nor rdzas gnag rta lastsogs pa / (265) btams pa las / bka’ śogdu blaṅs (ITJ 740:264-5)
“Upon pledging [those] gathered from among men, herded livestock, valuable objects, ?yaks? and
horses, [one] included (lit. taken) [them] in the official document.”
rkyen kyi (19) bran daṅ / źiṅ ’brog daṅ / lha cha daṅ / nor rdzas (20) daṅ / rkaṅ ’gros las stsogs pa / tshaṅ
bar (21) bcad de btsan po khri gtsug lde brtsan (22) gyi sku yon rgyun myi ’chad par byed do // (Lcaṅ 18-22)
“Having allotted as a whole (tshaṅ bar), among others, serfs, fields and summer pastures, sacral
utensils, valuable objects and herded livestock of the assets, [he] took care (lit. made) that the
stream of gifts for (lit. of) btsan po Khri gtsug lde brtsan [never] ceases.”

1
rkaṅ taṅ is attested in OT sources in figurative meaning, cf.: rkya gsum daṅ rkaṅ taṅ gcig mchis pas (Or.15000/91:r2; trslr.
after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:51, text 153) “Because three horsemen and one pedestrian came [...].” Compare hereto rkaṅ thaṅ pa
“pedestrian, foot-soldier” (J:16a).
2
On the collective function of –s compare UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:309 & 327.
3
OTDO: mya; http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/archives.cgi?p=ITJ_0740; 10.05.2014.
 96

8 rkaṅ ton
DSM:29a: rkaṅ ’gro lag ’don nam. dmag khral.
WTS.4:230a: (zw[eifelhaft]) eine Art Steuer.
DTH:191: = rkaṅ thon, aller; TLTD.2:11.20: review; p.16: certainly some performance connected with military exercises;
TLTD.3:23: may mean “issue of bundles”; SANGYAY.1986:41: rkaṅ ’gro or rkaṅ ’don is the planting capacity of all lands;
DOTSON.2009:90: a selection of soldiers; p.257: to select, conscript or levy; HILL.2011:30: a selection.

[S] *rkaṅ nas ’don “to take out from a rkaṅ[-unit]”

[E] *rkaṅ nas ’don pa “a taking out from a rkaṅ[-unit]”
[M] (N) rkaṅ-conscription; rkaṅ ton bgyid “to prepare a rkaṅ-conscription”
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTAd-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[R] rkaṅ ’gros / rkaṅ pran
[A] In order to elucidate thoroughly the meaning and the range of the usage of rkaṅ ton, I have
abstracted all relevant administrative and military events that are mentioned in the OTA in the
years immediately preceding and following the preparation of rkaṅ ton:
ll.52-65
671/2 672/3 673/4 674/5 675/6
’brog mkhos bgyis źugs loṅ brtsis mkhos bgyis
rkaṅ ton bgyis ltaṅ yor mchis
pha los bkug
ll.102-115
689/90 690/1 691/2 692/3 693/4
rtsis mgo bgyis phyiṅ rild bgyis mṅan du bskos lṅa brgya bskos
khram btab rtsis bgyis khram btab ’brog bskos
phyiṅ ril btab rkaṅ ton bgyis śo tshigs bzuṅ
ll.265-278
733/4 734/5 735/6 736/7 737/8
rabs chad brtsis pha los bgyis chibs sde bźi brims dru gu yul du draṅs bru źa yul du draṅs
khyi śa can phab rkaṅ ton bgyis

The above table demonstrates clearly that rkaṅ ton was one of measures taken to administrate the
country. This observation is confirmed by ITJ 1368:20 where rkaṅ ton is being made together with
rtsis ched po “great calculation” (see the Text section). The only military events mentioned in the
respective years in the OTA are destroying of Khyi śa can and marching towards the lands of Dru gu
and Bru źa. However, none of them falls exactly on the year of preparing rkaṅ ton.

We know that in later times rkaṅ constituted the basic unit of land measurement on Central Tibetan
governmental estates that were the base for levying taxes (SURKHANG 1966:15; BTC:87b); compare
hereto rkaṅ pa “base, foundation” (J:15b).1 Its equivalent on religious and aristocratic estates was
’don consisting of two rkaṅ (SURKHANG 1966:15; BTC:1420b-1a). The compound rkaṅ ’don is likewise
glossed in modern dictionaries, namely, as “two kinds of land measurement units: rkaṅ and ’don (one
’don = two rkaṅ)” (Gs:38a) and “sṅar khral ’khri’i sa rten brtsi staṅs rkaṅ źes pa daṅ ’don źes pa gñis
kyi miṅ” (BTC:90b).

1
Cf. in this context the Khotanese term of measurement chā “a foot” < Chin. chi 尺; SKJÆRVØ 2004:42n13. Besides, one could
mention a similar semantic development in other languages: Ger. Zinsfuß, Pol. stopa opodatkowania, stopa procentowa, stopa
bezrobocia, etc.
Other modern Tibetan compounds containing rkaṅ in this meaning are: rkaṅ chen “a large taxpayer family with many
fields” (Gs:37c); rkaṅ tho “a tax list of rkaṅ” (Gs:38a); rkaṅ ’bor “the amount of land (in rkaṅ units)” (Gs:39b).
 97

Later lexicographic sources gloss a few other compounds of similar morphology, i.e. containing the
morpheme -ton as their second constituent, cf.: kha ton “das vernehmliche Lesen od[er] Sprechen”
(Sch:39b), “saying, reciting prayers” (Gs:95b; < ’don “to say, repeat”); rtsa ton “uprooting” (EMMERICK
1967:147a)1; źal ton “h. of kha ton” (Gs:925c; TUCCI/HEISSIG 1970:132: źal ton ~ źal ’don); and perhaps also
*mgo ton (Tabo ŋgo̱tø̄n; Dingri ko̱tø̄n) “helper” (reconstructed in CDTD:1578, however, as mgo bton and
equated with mgo ’don from J:91b). The sound change *-’don > *-don (the loss of ’a chuṅ between two
voiced consonants -ṅ and d-) > -ton is assumed to be a case of devoicing in the second syllable; see
the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.

Although a coordinate compound rkaṅ ’don (< *rkaṅ daṅ ’don) is attested in later sources, I propose to
reconstruct the underlying structure of rkaṅ ton as going back to the verbal phrase *rkaṅ nas ’don, lit.
“to take out from a rkaṅ[-unit]”, for which compare the above cited lexeme rtsa ton. An additional
argument supporting this hypothesis is provided by the phonetic form of the compound. To wit, the
above mentioned shift from ’d- to t- in the second syllable would be much less probable if it
concerned a coordinate compound both members of which are expected to be of equal significance
for the whole formation. Furthermore, the examples with the second member -ton cited earlier all
go back to verbal phrases.

In consequence of further semantic development, rkaṅ ton might have started to refer to a kind of
tax that was imposed or collected from rkaṅ land units; *rkaṅ nas ’don “to take out from a rkaṅ[-unit]”
> *rkaṅ ’don “a taking out from a rkaṅ[-unit]” > rkaṅ ton “levying rkaṅ[-tax]”.2 It seems probable that
in the very context of the OTA, where the compound is further qualified by terms related to the
military, a tax consisting in supplying soldiers from a rkaṅ-land unit was intended by the term,
hence the proposed translation “rkaṅ-conscription”. Compare hereto the modern compound ’don
dmag “soldiers recruited as a tax from a ’don of land” (Gs:590c) as well as the following OT passage:
na niṅ slad kyis rgya śa cu pa rgod du bton nas (PT 1089:r9)
“Later last year, [one] selected Chinese inhabitants [of] Śa cu as warriors.”

rkaṅ ton determined by mun magi and źugs loṅ dmar poe in the first two passages from ITJ 750 is
understood as referring to rkaṅ-conscription conducted for the respective military units, border
guards and red źugs loṅ.

[T] ʼdun ma duṅs (59) gyi stag tsal du bsduste / mun magi rkaṅ ton bgyis / (ITJ 750:58-9)
“Having convened the council at Stag tsal of Duṅs, [one] prepared rkaṅ-conscription for (lit. of)
border guards.”

1
EMMERICK remarks additionally “Not found in dictionaries, but cf. rtsa ba nas ’don pa (pf. bton) ‘to exterminate (root and
branch)’ Jä[schke], s.v. rtsa ba.” (ibid.).
2
Further formations with the preserved second member -’don and relating to taxes could be cited in addition: ’gag ’don
“the amount of grain, meat, butter, salt, wool etc. or a fixed amount of money to be given to the government as tax”
(SANGYAY 1986:41); lag ’don “a tax in kind or money” (SURKHANG 1966:23).
 98

dgun (read: dgun ’dun) skyi bra ma taṅ du ʼduste / (110) źugs loṅ dmar poe rkaṅ ton bgyis (ITJ 750:109-10)
“The winter council, having gathered at Bra ma taṅ of Skyi, prepared rkaṅ-conscription for (lit. of)
red źugs loṅ.”
ʼo yug du chibs sde bźi btsan poe (272) spyan sṅa brimste / rkaṅ ton bgyis (ITJ 750:271-2)
“Having disbanded at ’O yug four cavalry regiments in the presence of btsan po, [one] prepared rkaṅ-
conscription.”
rkaṅ ton daṅ rtsis ched po bgyi1 (ITJ 1368:20)
“rkaṅ-conscription and great calculation were prepared.”

9 rkaṅ pran
[V] rkaṅ phran (PT 1136:48; folk etymology)
WTS.4:234a: 1ein Abhängiger, der zur Transportdiensten od. zur Soldatensteuer verpflichtet ist, kleiner Dienstpflichtiger
(?) (s.v. rkaṅ phran).
DTH:156: esclave; URAY.1972a:10: a legendary Źaṅ źuṅ ruler, Gu ge Rkaṅ pran/phran; BELLEZZA.2008:528n608: (constituent
feet) apparently denotes the people, subjects or tribal constituents of Gu ge. Alternatively, Gu ge rkaṅ phran could refer to
the name of the country, but this is less likely; DOTSON.2013a:292: Gu ge rkaṅ pran (a PN - JB).

[E] *rkaṅ gi bran “serf from a rkaṅ[-land unit]”

[M] (N) rkaṅ-serf2
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPART+N]
[R] rkaṅ ’gros / rkaṅ ton
[A] The juxtaposition of the following verses from the OTC should allow us to set the right context
for the analysis of the compound rkaṅ pran:
l.409: bran gyi ni skal pog pa // gu ge ni rkaṅ pran źig /
l.410: zas kyi ni skal pog pa / ña daṅ ni gro mchis te /
l.411: pyugs kyi ni skal pog pa / śa daṅ ni rkyaṅ mchis ste //
l.529: [rje] ʼi ni skal pog pa rgya rje ni bsam laṅ źig /
We notice an analogous structure in all four couplets: the first verse contains a lexeme that belongs
to a more general semantic category (hypernym) than the lexeme(s) occurring in the second verse -
its hyponym(s):
bran ~ [gu ge] rkaṅ pran
zas ~ ña / gro
pyugs ~ śa / rkyaṅ
rje ~ rgya rje [bsam laṅ]
From these we can infer that rkaṅ pran referred to a kind of serf (bran). Compare also in this context
the modern compound źiṅ bran “agricultural serf” (Gs:929b), “serf” (CDTD:6862)3. Another modern
compound that resembles semantically and morphologically rkaṅ pran is ’don dmag glossed with

1
OTDO omits the last syllable that was interpreted by THOMAS as bgyi (TLTD.2:9.20);
http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/archives.cgi?p=ITJ_1368; 11.05.2014.
2
For the meaning of rkaṅ- here see s.v. rkaṅ ton.
3
The lemma źiṅ bran, although included in the earlier version of the dictionary (September 2008), has been omitted from
the latest version of CDTD (July 2013).
 99

“soldiers recruited as a tax from a ’don of land” (Gs:590c). These facts taken together allow one to
reconstruct the underlying structure of rkaṅ pran as *rkaṅ gi bran1 with the etymological meaning
*“serf [taken as a tax] from (lit. of) a rkaṅ[-land unit]”. The term denoted a serf, levied from a rkaṅ,
that was obliged to work on lord’s estates (either royal, aristocratic, or, later, monastic) or to carry
out various duties (rje blas).2

Interestingly, rkaṅ pran is mentioned in OT texts exclusively in the context of Gu ge. The association
of the compound with one particular cultural context, namely that of Źaṅ źuṅ3, and the respective
narrowing of its meaning might have constituted the first step towards re-interpreting rkaṅ pran as
a proper name for which compare ITJ 734 and PT 1136:
yul gnubs śul kiṅ drug na / rje gnubs rje sribs pa bźugs / srin gnubs (read: srin gnubs srin) / ni / (7r301)
rkaṅ pran // kyis srin yul mye myi dgu chu myi rlaṅ kyi yul du bkri źes bgyis na’ / (7r302) roṅ po lde khar
gyis / srin gan du glud bor na gnubs srin rkaṅ pran gyi gan du [glud] bor / (ITJ 734:7r300-2)
“In the land Kiṅ drug, the land of Gnubs, resided lord Sribs pa, the lord of Gnubs. When the srin
Rkaṅ pran, a srin of Gnubs, said: ‘[You] will be led to the land of srin, [to] the land where fire does
not rise and water does not evaporate.’ [and] when Roṅ po lde khar threw a ransom towards the
srin, [he] threw the ransom towards Rkaṅ pran, a srin of Gnubs.”4

’o na lcam lho rgyal byaṅ mo tsun źig // yul chab kyi ya bgor / rje gu ge rkaṅ phran daṅ gñen (47) daṅ
gdamdu5 bgyiste / rje gu ge rkaṅ phran gyi gñe bo myi brgya rkya brgya źig yas se byuṅ na // lcam lho
rgyal byaṅ mo tsun gyi mchid nas // (PT 1136:46-7)
“Now, as for sister Lho rgyal byaṅ mo tsun, having acted as a kin and choice6 with lord Gu ge rkaṅ
phran at the upper reaches of the country rivers, when courtiers of lord Gu ge rkaṅ phran,
hundred men, hundred horsemen, appeared from above, sister Lho rgyal byaṅ mo tsun said.”
In the first passage, rkaṅ pran is a proper name of a srin of Gnubs. In PT 1136, however, the phrase gu
ge rkaṅ phran has received an additional element, namely, rje that now precedes it. This happened
probably by analogy with the well known OT type of construction: rje X rje PN “lord PN, the lord of
X”, where X may be either a place or a clan name. However, in our case the second rje was omitted.

1
For other examples of devoicing in the second syllable see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.
2
Cf. GOLDSTEIN (1971:523ff.) for a detailed study of a traditional social system and its relation to estate divisions, especially
to demesne areas.
The compound rkaṅ pran/phran (< *rkaṅ bran) should be treated separately from the compound rkaṅ phran (< *rkaṅ ’gros
phran) that can be found in some modern dictionaries glossed with “eine Art Tier” (WTS.4:234a), “boγ” (SR.1:79; “small
cattle”, Less:110b).
3
It seems that after Tibetans had subdued Źaṅ źuṅ, gu ge became in OT a synonym for a serf. Hence, the name was so
tightly associated with the term rkaṅ pran. Besides, we encounter it also with the term khol, CT khol po “servant, man-
servant” (J:44b), in the following passage:
yul chab gyi ya bgo / mkhar khyuṅ luṅ rṅul mkhar / (64) gyi naṅ na rgyal po lig sña śur / blon po ni khyuṅ po daṅ ra stsaṅ rje / khol
gu ge daṅ gug lchog (PT 1060:63-4)
“[At] the upper reaches of the country rivers: in the castle Khyuṅ luṅ, the castle of Rṅul - the king Lig sña śur, the
councillors Khyuṅ po and Ra stsaṅ rje, the servants Gu ge and Gug lchog.”
4
For the explanation of the phrase mye myi dgu chu myi rlaṅ see BIALEK, forthcoming b.
5
OTDO: gdumdu; http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/archives.cgi?p=Pt_1136&k=gdum; 14.05.2014.
6
Cf. gdam bya ”nominee” (Gs:558a).
 100

This usage of rkaṅ pran is another example of obsolete or forgotten administrative terminology that
has found a new application in the language of myth and ritual (for further examples of this process
see s.vv. rgyal thag brgyad and se gru bźi).

[T] źaṅ źuṅ gu ge rkaṅ phran ni ’dris śiṅ sdaṅ (PT 1136:48)
“As for rkaṅ-serfs of Gu ge [in] Źaṅ źuṅ, [they] are wrathful when acquainted [with].”
bran gyi ni skal pog pa // “The share of serfs allotted to me,
gu ge ni rkaṅ pran źig / the rkaṅ-serfs [of] Gu ge,
(410) ʼkhol du ni ma tho ʼam // were [they] not good to use [them] as servants?
gu ge ni bdris śiṅ sdaṅ (PT 1287:409-10) Gu ge is wrathful when acquainted [with].”

10 rkyen ris
BTC:101b: cha rkyen; DSM:31a: ’tsho ba’i mthun rkyen; BYD:27b: cha rkyen daṅ sa gźis.
DUṄDKAR:206a: mthun rkyen daṅ lha ris gtan ’khel bzos pa źes pa’i brda rñiṅ ste. lha khaṅ daṅ dgon pa la chos kyi byed sgo
spel bar dgos pa’i sa źiṅ daṅ. nor phyugs. ñer mkho’i yo byad gźan dag bcas mthun rkyen. sa źiṅ daṅ. nor phyugs bdag gñer
gso tshags kyi las ka byed mkhan bran g.yog rnams ni lha ris sam lha ’baṅs yin (s.v. rkyen ris bcad).
Gs:44b: sm. cha rkyen (cha rkyen “conditions, circumstances, factors, facilities”, Gs:349a); WTS.4:249a: Bereich zum Bereich
(sic!) bzw. Anteil zum Unterhalt.
DTH:191: = rkaṅ thon aller; TLTD.3:114b: estate (boundary) (?); RICHARDSON.1985:43: an estate for monastic support;
LI/COBLIN:374: the extent or bounds of property, estate (i.e. one’s lawful interest in property); KARMAY.2007:7: provisions for
the livelihood of Bsam yas monastery; p.244: reserved provision.

[E] *rkyen gyi ris “division for maintenance”

[M] (N) assets
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NBEN+N]
[A] I propose to relate 1ris “part, section, division, region” (Cs:235a; < *”a portion by taking away of
which sth. is diminished”) to CT ’bri “to lessen, decrease, diminish” (J:400b), ’phri “to lessen,
diminish; take away from” (J:360a), and ’brid “2minus (in math.), 3to cut, take away, deduct a small
portion or amount” (Gs:770c; cf. also CDTD.V:918) as against 2ris “figure, form” (J:530b), a cognate of
’bri “to write”. Other compounds formed with the same second morpheme include: mkhar ris “mkhar
rdzoṅ gi khoṅs gtogs” (BYD:65a); mṅa’ ris *“share of power”; cho ris “descent, extraction” (D:427a);
mtho ris “heaven, abode of gods, paradise, Elysium” (J:242a; *”a region of the heights”); spu ris gcod pa
“dbye ba gcod pa’am ’byed pa” (BTC:1657b; cf. Eng. to split hairs, Pol. dzielić włos na czworo); spu ris
’byed pa “bden rdzun bzaṅ ṅan gyi dbye ba ’byed pa” (DSM:455b); spu ris med pa “unterschiedslos”
(CÜPPERS 2004:65)1; phyag ris “byas rjes” (DSM:493b); byug ris “gral lam go rim” (BYD:358b); dbaṅ ris
*“share of power”; sa ris “territory” (< *”a division of the earth”); sag bdag ris “the smaller species of
cardamon” (D:1264b); lha ris *“monastic estate”.

For rkyen as *“maintenance” < *“basis, support” compare, for example, the passage from the Lcaṅ
inscription (ll.18-22) cited s.v. rkaṅ ’gros.

1
Although it is obvious that the original meaning of spu ris in the quoted phrases must have been *“division of hair” (cf.
“hairline”, JV), the compound is found glossed actually with “spu’i ri mo’am spu mdog” (BTC:1657b) and “the color or
design of an animal’s hair, fur” (Gs:657b). These meanings came into being, in all probability, in consequence of a false
semantic analysis of the compound that connected -ris to ris2 “figure, form” instead of to ris1 “part, section, division,
region”.
 101

[T] (32) gtsug lag khaṅ ’di’i rkyen ris bsṅo źiṅ (33) spyad pa yaṅ // źaṅ ña stos / ji ltar byas śiṅ / (34) bsṅos
pa bźin brtsan bar // bka’s gnaṅo (Lcaṅ 32-4)
“It is granted by the [btsan po’s] order that also the assets of this temple, which are dedicated [to]
and used [by it], shall be fixed like Źaṅ ña sto has prepared and dedicated [them].”1

11 skya sa
[V] rkya sa (ITJ 733:48)
BTC:714b: dbyar sa dgun sa (s.v. sṅo sa skya sa); BYD:32a: rkya sa; p.26b: skya sa ste. dgun sa (s.v. rkya sa).
Gs:324c: sm. dbyar sa dgun sa (s.v. sṅo sa skya sa; dbyar sa “summer dwelling place”, Gs:757a; dgun sa “winter residence,
winter site”, Gs:221a); WTS.7:12b: das bleiche Land [d.h. Ackerland] (s.v. kha bstan).
DTH:43: les terres arides; TLTD.3:115a: crop land; DOTSON.2009:108: the winter lands.

[E] *skya’i sa “land of tawnies”

[M] (N) land/place with ripe (sunburnt) crops
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NLOC+N]
[R] khram skya / sṅo sa / rje sa / rjes ’baṅs / dog mon / dog yab / dog srin / sa dog
[A] The meaning proposed for skya- is corroborated by the following phrases: skya rgyas “to have a
good livelihood, economy (usu[ally] because of a good harvest)” (Gs:65c); skya ṅo ~ skya sṅo
“economy, livelihood” (Gs:65c)2; skya źiṅ “crop field” (TAKEUCHI 1995:209)3; yul dus skya pham “a bad
year for crops” (Gs:1004a; lit. “at time and place crops became worse”); lo skya ~ lo legs “bumper
harvest” (Gs:1086b); skya sar bab “sm. grwa pa log” (Gs:67b; lit. “appeared on a crop-field”, referring
probably to returning home from monastery in order to work as a peasant; grwa pa log “to lose one’s
celibacy (for a monk)”, Gs:208b); skya zad sṅo gtugs “1the most difficult time of the year subsistence-
wise (i.e., the end of spring when the senescent grass is exhausted and the new grass hasn’t
appeared yet); 2a crisis caused by using up what is at hand and not having new ones to replace
them” (Gs:66c; lit. “[last year] crops exhausted, green (i.e. unripe) seedlings [still] to come”).4

In ITJ 750 (l.189), skya sa is juxtaposed with sṅo sa.5 In both cases the heads of the phrases, -sa, are
qualified by the terms primarily denoting colours.6 I propose to interpret the former as denoting
places with ripe crops on fields as opposed to sṅo sa - places with (still) unripe crops (see s.v. sṅo sa).7
This interpretation is supported by the fact that both compounds are mentioned in connection with

1
Besides, rkyen ris is amply attested in the canonical literature, cf. RKTS.
2
GOLDSTEIN gives the following example: ’di lo skya ṅo rgyas po ’dug “This year (we) have a good economy (usu[ally] means a
good crop)”, ibid.
3
Cf. hereto rkya źiṅ “gsar sbol sa źiṅ” (DSM:30b).
4
Moreover, I propose to include here also the compound rkyaṅ thaṅ “kham ser sa thaṅ” (GC:36a), “a wide or flat ground,
field, a plain, grassland area” (Gs:42c-43a) which I reconstruct as *skya thaṅ: > *skyaṅ thaṅ (assimilation of rime) > rkyaṅ thaṅ
(folk etymology; ~ rkyaṅ “wild ass” that is living on plains).
5
I treat the two as distinct compounds on account of the fact that skya sa occurs also separately in OT documents.
6
We find another compound of a similar structure in ITJ 730:47, i.e. kham sa, translated by THOMAS as “clay” (1957:111); cf.
BTC:223a: “sa mdog dmar smug tshi can źig”.
7
That sa could, in certain contexts, be a synonym of źiṅ is demonstrated by the modern compound sa ma ’brog
“seminomad, agropastoral (engaging in both agriculture and pastoral)” (Gs:1118a), “mi-agriculteur, mi-éleveur”
(TOURNADRE 2003:465a).
 102

summer council, i.e. should be relevant for that season. The assumed semantic development for
*skya- would be: “tawny” > “colour of sunburnt (i.e. ripe) crops” > “(ripe) crop”1.

The phrase sṅo sa skya sa kha bstand as attested in ITJ 750 could be an idiomatic expression meaning
*“to regard livelihood” as crop fields constituted the basis of peasants’ economy. For this
interpretation compare also the modern compound skya (s)ṅo glossed above.

THOMAS (TLDT.2:342) reads also skya sa in ITN 547:1 but the text is too corrupt to be evaluated. Apart
from these two attested occurrences of skya sa, we find also its variant rkya sa in ITJ 733:49 (see
below) erroneously read by THOMAS as rgya sa (1957:48).2

[T] rgyal po de’i (48) tshe lo drug cu ’da’s nas // bug chor gyi rkya sa ’dam ba’i khuṅs3 nas byuṅ ste / myiṅ ni
drug chen po źes bya ba’s // (49) rgya’i rgyal po gdoṅ nag po daṅ / bug chor gyi rgyal po gñis / myed par byas
te rgya daṅ bug chor gñis / ’baṅs rgyal po (50) des bkol źiṅ dphya’ ’jal bar ’oṅ ṅo (ITJ 733:47-50)
“As sixty years of that king have passed, the so called Great Turk, having appeared from the land of
origins (lit. source) of ’dam pa places with sunburnt crops of Bug chor, annihilated both, the Chinese
king of black countenance and the king of Bug chor; both, Chinese and Bug chor [peoples], were to
become subjected by that king [and] imposed taxes [upon].”
ʼbon da rgyal daṅ blon chen pho (189) khri gzigs gyis / dbyar ʼdun zu spugi rkyaṅ bu tsal du bsduste / lṅa
brgya bskos / sṅo sa skya sa / kha bstand (ITJ 750:188-9)
“’bon da rgyal and grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen]4, having summoned the summer
council at Rkyaṅ bu tsal of Zu spug, nominated [heads] of five hundred [districts and] regarded5
lands with unripe and sunburnt crops.”

1
Cf. skya “1crop; the produce of a year” (D:96b); skya ~ rkya “crop” (TLTD.3:115a). IWAO equates rkya with skya in his
translation of a fragment from M.I.xxviii.1 (2007:215; not documented on IDP) tracing both back to rkya which he explains
as “a unit for tax levy and a unit for measuring land area” (ibid., p.218) and “a kind of unit of land” that “functioned as a
unit of taxation” (2009:89 and 101). I assume that skya and rkya are orthographical variants of one lexeme, i.e. skya,
although, in my opinion, its usage in connection with tax measures related to crop fields was secondary and originated
from the metonymy; crop fields and crops were the main points of reference in tax and agrarian policy as applied to
peasants.
On account of the fact that the form rkya is more commonly encountered in administrative texts written in Central
Asiatic Oases one could presume that the variant spelling developed in a dialect in which prefix s- had already been
replaced by r-. An analogous change can be observed, for instance, in Arik, an Amdo dialect (cf. CDTD). The alternation skya
~ rkya could have been enhanced additionally by the co-occurrence of another widespread OT lexeme, rkya “horse”.
2
Compare hereto also the alternation rkya źiṅ (Or.8212/194.a:r1; Or.8210/S.2228:a1) ~ skya źiṅ (PT 1115:r1).
3
I read khuṅs instead of THOMAS’ khuṅ bu (1957:48) basing my interpretation on similar phrases that occur also in PT 1134,
268, 271, 277-8.
4
In quoting full names of persons mentioned in the OTA, I follow the reconstructions proposed in DOTSON 2009.
5
kha bstan pa is glossed in BTC as the second meaning of the verb gtod (1050b) which is exemplified by, e.g., mda’ ’ben la
gtad nas ’phen pa. In WTS.7:12b we find the following meanings for kha bstan “1(zw[eifelhaft]) festlegen; 2Vorderseite richten
auf, weisen, gerichtet sein”. BYD, however, glosses it as “khas len byas pa” (43b). Besides, we find the phrase attested in
modern dialects, cf.: Southern Mustang “Gesicht zuwenden, Gesicht zeigen; to show one’s face” (CDTD.V:535). TAKEUCHI
(1995:261) explains the phrase with respect to OT documents as “to receive, accept”. In fact, two distinct patterns
concerning kha bstan are documented in OT sources:
1
XABS kha bstan “to regard X”:
rin kha bstan te // [[rgya stoṅ sar stoṅ sde gcig la] // (r9) [rkya ñis brgya’ sum cu rtsa phyed daṅ gsum] mchis pa la] phab pa (PT
1120:r8-9)
“Having regarded the value, what was imposed on one thousand district of the Chinese Stoṅ sar that had two hundred
and thirty two and a half (232,5) rkya[-land units]:”
gyab lha ston gyi glaṅ (r2) gchig // myes bo (TLTD.2:444: bo[r]) (r3) daṅ/ myes mthoṅ (v1) la kha bstan (ITN 295)
“[One] regarded one ox of gyab Lha ston for Myes bo and Myes mthoṅ.”
2
XTERM kha bstan “to turn ones’ face towards X; to inspect”:
 103

12 kha sprod
D Ladakhi “face to face” (NH:13; LEU:20)
BTC:201a: thad kar gcig la gcig kha gtad nas yod pa (s.v. kha sprod); 1phan tshun ṅo śes byed ’jug pa; 2kha daṅ kha gtugs pa
(s.v. kha sprod pa).
J:34a: = kha gtad pa: to bring together personally, to confront (s.v. kha sprad pa); Schr:378b: the face (s.v. źal sprod); R.1:246a:
см. ṅo sprod (ṅo sprod “aдоказательство, свидетельское показание; подтверждение; спознание, установление
личности; proof; verification; identification; bрекомендация; ознакомление; разъяснение; recommendation;
acquaintance; explanation” (r.2:358b-9a); Gs:101b: face-to-face, facing; WTS.7:18a: fut. und pf. zu kha sprad
aufeinanderfügen.
DTH:124: enfermé; TLTD.3:17: mouth-join; p.116: confront or with mouth closed (?); STEINRA.1984:265: [lion] à gueule (?);
HILL.2006:92: closed; ZEISLER.2011:105: juxtaposed; DOTSON.2013a:267: interlocking.

[E] *kha sprod pa “a delivered orifice/mouth”

[M] (A) with open orifice; open
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; FORM[N+VAV2]
[A] sprod- as a second member of a compound seems to refer to an action of delivering, handing
over, or presenting sth.1; cf. mkho sprod “sm. mkho ’don” (Gs:156b; mkho ’don “supplies, supplying”,
Gs:156b); ṅo sprod “introducing, acquainting” (Gs:305b); ’jal sprod “repayment, repaying” (Gs:395c);
ltag sprod “steṅ nas sam rgyab logs nas sprod” (GC:349a), “back to back” (Gs:465c); bdag sprod
“Besitznahme, Übernahme, Verwaltung, Verwahrung, Besorgung” (CÜPPERS 2004:60), “taking care
of, looking after, keeping, paying attention” (Gs:562c); brda sprod “1grammar; 2conveying,
transmitting, communicating” (Gs:597c; cf. brda sprod/’phrod/sbyor/’grol “to explain, describe,

rta daṅ lugi lo la śa cu’i gtsug lag khaṅ nas / [[[sku yon nar ma daṅ bla skyesu mdzad pa’i rgyur kha bstan pa / daṅ] / [śa (7) cu
phyogs na dge ’dun yul zar ’tshal ba’i ’tshal ma daṅ / gsol chaṅ du god pa daṅ] / [sde rjes skyin bar kha bstan pa]] la stsogste (8) god
do ’tshal gyi sdom]TOP / [gro nas khal stoṅ ñis brgya’ drug cu rtsa gchig daṅ / bre gaṅ]O phul do (PT 1111:6-8)
“In the horse and sheep years, from the temple of Śa cu, [as for] the summary of whatever loss [there may be
concerning] the inspection of the arrangements made as continuous offering and baksheesh, the loss of offering beer
and provisions that were wished as food [in] the abode of the monastic community in the region of Śa cu, [and] the
inspection of loans [made] by the lord of the district, among others, [one] gave thousand two hundred sixty one (1261)
khal and a full bre of wheat and barley.”
[li (2) kaṅ tses]A [gro khal phye daṅ gñyis daṅ bre bźi źig sṅa g.yar du mnos pa]O1 // phag gi lo’i dpyid (3) zla ’briṅ po tshes bcu gsum
la // ban de thub brtan gyi nod du kha bstan pa’i tshe / [byis (4) brtsan la]O2 phul (ITJ 914:r1-4)
“Li kaṅ tse gave to Byis brtsan one and a half khal and four bre of wheat, that [he] had received earlier as a loan, on the
thirteenth day of the middle spring month of the boar year, at the time when [one] inspected a ?reception? for (lit. of)
ban de Thub brtan.”
[b]rtan gyi nod du kha bstan no (ITJ 1379:r3; the text is only fragmentarily preserved)
“[One] inspected a ?reception? for [Thub b]rtan.”
ze da’i lug rin du kha bstan pa (ITN 172:r1)
“the inspection of the sheep-price of ze da”
For the origins and etymological meaning of kha bstan compare:
ʼuṅ nas rta rdzi ʼi mchid nas / dbuʼ ʼbreṅ zaṅ yag kyaṅ (15) gchad du gsol / dbuʼ skas sten dguʼ yaṅ kha thur du bstan du gsol nas /
(PT 1287:14-5)
“Thereafter, the horse herdsman said: ‘I request that the excellent head-rope be cut off [and] the nine-stepped head-
ladder be turned upside down (lit. [its] surface is shown downwards).’”
Even though there remains still some doubt about the exact interpretation of some of the passages quoted above, we can
indisputably state that kha bstan was a technical term used in connection with economy and probably also taxation. In the
second group of phrases the etymological meaning *”to show one’s face” is still tangible. The construction ‘XABS kha bstan’,
on the other hand, seems to have already undergone further lexicalisation in which kha, originally the object of the verb,
has been incorporated into the verb. Of special interest in this context are the phrases rin kha bstan (PT 1120:r8) and lug rin
du kha bstan (ITN 172:r1) which could be interpret as a proof that the change concerned mainly the valency of the verb and
not so much its semantics. Thus, the development of kha bstan could be tentatively sketched as: kha bstan “to show one’s
(sur)face” (PT 1287:15) > XTERM kha bstan “to direct one’s face towards X”, i.e. “to inspect” > XABS kha bstan “to regard X”.
1
Cf. sprod “2to deliver (a letter, a message); to set, to put, to propose; to pay” (J:337b), “v[erb] a[ctive] to give” (Gs:670c),
and the dialectal meanings glossed in CDTD.V:784.
 104

represent”, J:297b); me sprod “match” (CDTD:6335; lit. “(one) delivering fire”); rtse sprod “rtse mo gñis
sprod lta bu” (GC:683b), “1face-to-face fight/combat; 2exchanging ceremonial scarves” (Gs:862c); źal
sprod “h. of kha sprod” (Gs:926a); OT g.yul sprod, cf. Ger. Schlacht liefern, Pol. wydawać bitwę1; lag sprod
“giving by hand” (Gs:1062a); lan sprod “conversation” (CDTD:8264).

An hypothesis is put forward that this sprod, cognate to ’phrod and *’brod (cf. CDTD.V:926),
represents a verb different from sprod “to bring together, to put together, to make to meet” (J:337b),
which seems to be etymologically related to ’phrad. Their semantic distinctness can still be observed
in dialects; cf. CDTD.V:784, 823, 829, 926.

With regard to kha sprod and its literary contexts, later Tibetan sources use the phrase kha sbyar in
their description of the kind of burial depicted in PT 1287 (for a short account see, e.g., HAARH
1969:364). The latter compound can be found in dictionaries glossed with “the mouth of a vessel or
box closed or shut up” (D:132b) where sbyar (V2 & V3 < sbyor) is obviously understood as “joined
together”.2 However, one may wonder whether in this case too the meaning “prepared, made ready”
(cf. sbyor ”2to prepare, procure, to get ready”, J:406b) was not originally intended. Following this line
of argumentation, one could propose kha sbyar etymologically to have meant rather
“mouth/opening prepared/made ready [to put sth. inside]”.

An open wooden (?) box with a corpse placed

inside it can be seen on Fig. 1.3 One could presume
that this box is a functional equivalent of zaṅs
brgya’ (see s.v.) from the OTC and other analogous
objects descriptions of which can be found in later
Tibetan literature concerning funeral rituals.4

If, however, one would still like to opt for the

meaning “closed” as proposed by some scholars for
Fig. 1 An open wooden box with a corpse placed inside kha sprod (see the Lexicographic section), one
should also take the logical consequences of such an understanding into consideration and explain
how it would be possible to put anything into (naṅ du bcug) a closed vessel, as stated in PT 1287?

1
Cf. also g.yul gśam pa which is explained in BYD:520b as “g.yul sprod pa daṅ g.yul ’gyed pa’i don”.
2
Cf. also zaṅs kha sbyor (PT 983:62) translated as “a closed copper box” in DE JONG 1989:55.
3
Plate V in KVÆRNE 1985.
4
A rough description of Tibetan royal tombs as related in later Tibetan historiographic works is delivered in HAARH
1969.380ff. Worth mentioning in this context is also the gloss to the compound kha sbyar zaṅs provided by DUṄDKAR: “zaṅs
kyis bzos pa’i sgam ste. lo rgyus khag gcig naṅ gna’ rabs rgya gar du zaṅs kyis bzos pa’i sgam kha sbyor byas pa’i naṅ du
mar khu blugs. de’i naṅ du byis pa chuṅ ṅu gson por bźag thog sgam kha sbyar ba’i srubs rnams spra tshil gyis bkag te naṅ
du mkha’ rluṅ mi ’gro bar byas nas thag riṅ por bskur ba daṅ. mdzod du sbas pa sogs bya srol ’dug.” (290b-1a). The
definition attests to a certain ambivalence in understanding the syllable -sbyar. First, it is stated that mar khu was poured
into a kha sbyor chest (sgam) but then seams (srubs) of a kha sbyar ba chest are being closed. It seems that in the first case
rather the original meaning “open” was intended (one cannot pour anything into a closed container) whereas the second
occurrence would favour the sense “closed”.
 105

[T] te skyam grog kha sprod ches bya ste grog chen pho myi śord phaʼi ṅo /// (PT 1047:173)
“[It is] the side of: an open stream having been greatly made, a great stream does not flow.”1
btsan po dri gum yaṅ de ru bkroṅs nas / spur zaṅs brgyaʼ kha sprod gyi (20) naṅ du bcug ste rtsaṅ chu ʼi gźuṅ
la btaṅ ṅo (PT 1287:19-20)
“After [he] had killed there also btsan po Dri gum, having put [his] corpse into an open large copper
vessel, [he] cast [the vessel] into (lit. into the middle of) the river Rtsaṅ.”
khyod kyi jo bo (32) btsan po ni / lo ṅam rta rdzis bkroṅste / spur ni zaṅs brgyaʼ ma kha sprod kyi naṅ du bcug
ste / rtsaṅ po ʼi (33) gźuṅ la btaṅ ṅo (PT 1287:31-3)
“As regards your lord, the btsan po, Lo ṅam, the horse herdsman, having killed [him] [and] having
put [his] corpse into an open large copper vessel, cast [the vessel] into (lit. into the middle of) the
river Rtsaṅ po.”2

13 kha bso
[V] khab bso (PT 1287:67; dittography)
BDN:57n10: kha bsod de bsod nams kyi don (s.v. kha bso).
WTS.7:40a: auch kha bso, khab bso; 1wirtschaftliche Versorgung des Haushalts des btsan po (s.v. khab so).
DOTSON.2007b:5: welfare; n.2: lit. to nourish mouths; [a]lternatively, kha bso may just be an error for kha bsod, meaning ‘good
fortune’; DOTSON.2009:105n230: < kha bso lit. “feed mouths” meaning “wealfare”; DOTSON.2013a:271: welfare (for kha bso, ibid.,
p.325n1 - JB).3

[E] *kha gso ba “feeding (the mouth)”

[M] (N) prosperity
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; pleonastic; STRC[N+VNV1]
[A] In both its OT occurrences kha bso is qualified by naṅ gi “of the interior” as opposed to dgra
“enemies” and chab srid of the exterior. Furthermore, we learn that is was elevated (mtho) and grand
(lhun stug) - attributes otherwise not ascribed to human beings and thus confirming that kha bso
should be distinguished from khab so (see s.v.). On account of the fact that the second passage from
PT 1287 describes general conditions of the land as ruled by Khri sroṅ brtsan and Stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ,
we surmise that kha bso referred to a more abstract notion of what constituted the basis for the
sustenance of the society.

With regard to the underlying structure of the compound, I propose to reconstruct it as *kha gso. Its
second constituent is assumed to be identical with the CT verb gso “1to feed, nourish; to bring up,
nurse up, rear, train; 2to cure; to mend, to repair; to restore, rebuild, re-establish; to refresh,

1
This is a provisional translation. The meaning of the whole sentence remains unclear.
2
The compound in question is also attested in canonical literature; cf., e.g.:
’jig rten gyi khams kyi tshul la la ni / rin po che thams cad kyi me tog kha sprod las bsgrubs pa’i lhun can no // (Saṅs rgyas phal po
che źes bya ba śin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo, H 94, ka 158v7; trslr. after ACIP)
“Concerning some forms of worldly realms, [they] are of ?bulky mass? that was obtained from open flowers of all
jewels.”
This is another example in which the interpretation *”closed flowers” would be at least debatable.
Another context from which the compound kha sprod is known in later sources concerns the flag of the Left Horn which
was apparently featured by a lion figure qualified with the attribute kha sprod. The same attribute can be found in a proper
name of a gñan spirit, namely Bya nag kha sprod (TPS.2:721b). A lion or a raven (bya nag) with a closed mouth would not
need any further linguistic distinction whereas depicturing them with open mouths would bring up a “marked” trait
necessitating an additional linguistic expression.
3
In most of the works that mention or analyse khab so no distinction is made between our kha bso and khab so. Hence, their
glosses have been included s.v. khab so.
 106

recreate” (J:590b), cognate to ’tsho “II.1to nourish; to pasture, to feed; 2to heal, to cure” (J:460a).1 The
semantic development of the compound is assumed to have proceeded along the following lines:
*“feeding” > *“provision” > *“prosperity”.

Since I was not able to trace in any kind of sources, from OT to modern dialectal, a verbal phrase of
identical or at least similar structure to *kha so, *kha ’tsho, *kha gso or *kha bso2, as proposed in some
previous studies, I interpret the compound as pleonastic-determinative the first element of which
does not contribute to the meaning of the whole but rather disambiguates the semantic class of the
following element. The attested form kha bso /khabso/ is explained as resulting from folk etymology
(by analogy with khab so).

Reconstructing the second syllable of the compound in any other way would involve solving the
following problems:
1. *-’tsho: the change from ’tsho to bso.
2. *-so: not attested as a verbal stem.
3. *-bso: this form is not attested as a verbal stem appart from some erroneous readings for the
original gso.
The reconstruction of the first element as *khab- comes across semantic problems especially when
the second constituent is understood as related to the above mentioned word family; *khab ’tsho/gso
“to feed (royal) residence” (?). Even though analogous constructions are attested they are of much
later date and are to be interpret literally, cf. WT khyim ’tsho “1khyim tshaṅ la ’tsho skyoṅ byed pa;
2
khyim daṅ ’tsho ba’i bsdus miṅ” (BTC:262b) and khyim so “1Hausstand, Heirat” (WTS.8:87a) like in
khyim so bzuṅ “khyim pa’i chos la gnas pa’am bag mar soṅ ba” (GC:87b).

The variant reading khab bso could have resulted from either a copist’s error of dittography or folk
etymologisation by analogy with khab so (see s.v.).3

[T] de ʼi ʼog du lho thaṅ ʼbriṅ ya steṅs kyis byas te // pyi ʼi dgra thub // (67) naṅ gi khab bso mthoʼ (PT
1287:66-7)
“Thereafter, Lho thaṅ ’briṅ ya steṅs, having done [the duties of a grand councillor], controlled the
enemies of the exterior. The prosperity of the interior was splendid (lit. elevated).”

1
For more details on the whole word family as well as its possible PTB reconstruction see s.v. so nam.
2
The verb ’tsho is attested as taking the following objects in OT: phag (PT 1068), myi (ITJ 740), bya (ITJ 740), ’u bu cag (PT
1040), yul (PT 1287), ra (PT 1136, ITJ 732), lug (PT 1134, ITJ 731, ITJ 732) (after OTDO). We could extend this list by adding
some CT examples: lus, srog, phyugs, nad (J:460a, s.v. ’tsho ba). JÄSCHKE (590b) lists additionally bu, dud ’gro, nad, rma, ṅal,
khyim, sems, and thugs as attested objects of the verb gso. Thus, the reconstruction of a verbal phrase as *“to feed the
mouth” would not meet the semantic requirements of the verb.
3
Due to the semantic proximity of kha bso and so nam (see s.v.), one could also consider another reconstruction of the
underlying structure of the compound: kha bso < *kha so nam. The form *kha so might have resulted from truncation. In this
case the word-internal -b- would be a linking element. This hypothesis could additionally be supported by the textual
analysis. Namely, in PT 1287:448 (see the Text section below) kha bso is juxtaposed with chab srid whereas in ITJ 738:2v16
we find so nam daṅ chu srid and in PT 1283:457 the phrases srid gyi mchogo and so nam gyi mchogo side by side (see the Text
section s.v. so nam). However, I am not able to provide any reasonable explanation for the element kha- in the hypothetical
*kha so nam. Besides, no example of truncation of a coordinate compound (so nam > *-so) is known to me.
 107

pyi ʼi (448) chab srid ni pyogs bźir bskyed // naṅ gi kha bso ni myi ñams par lhun stug / ʼbaṅs mgo nag po yaṅ
mtho dman ni (449) bsñams / dpyaʼ sgyu ni bskyuṅs / dal du ni mchis (PT 1287:447-9)
“Concerning chab srid of the exterior, [they] extended [it] in four directions. Concerning prosperity
of the interior, [they] made [it] grand so that [it] was inalienable. [They] treated even black-headed
subjects, high and low ones, uniformly, diminished tax frauds, [and] proceeded leisurely.”

14 khab so
BTC:221b: rgyal po’i mdzod khaṅ; Negi.1:323b: kuṭumbī (s.v. khab so pa)1; BYD:47b: srid ʼdzin daṅ. rgyal po’i mdzod khaṅ
ṅam rgyal rigs daṅ rje rigs la’aṅ; p.48a: naṅ blon naṁ naṅ ʼkhor (s.v. khab bso).
DUṄDKAR:300b: de sṅon bod kyi btsan po’i dus skabs su btsan po sger gyi rgyu dṅos bdag gñer byed pa’i las khuṅs lta bu zur
du yod pa de’i miṅ (s.v. khab so chen mo).
Gs:116a: king’s treasury; WTS.7:40a: auch kha bso, khab bso; 2Steuerbeamter des btsan po, eine Amtsbezeichnung.
THOMAS.1936:284: mansion-dweller; DTH:128: gouverneur du palais (for khab bso - JB); pp.160-1: officiers royaux (for kha bso
- JB); p.191: client, courtisan (s.v. khab bso, khab so); RICHARDSON.1952:16: partisan, rival faction; p.77: may have been special
attendants on the King; TLTD.2:345: householder; TLTD.3:117a: mansion-dweller, official or grandee; URAY.1962b:354: ~
khab so pa palace guard; RICHARDSON.1972:34n72: officials of the district or provincial administration; URAY.1982:546:
purveyor to the royal house; n.3: civil servants who levied taxes for the central government; RICHARDSON.1985:5n3: revenue
officials; UEBACH.1985:23: ein Amt der Tausendschaftsorganisation; pp.29-30n108: die Funktion besteht in der Erhebung von
Steuern (khral) in den in Tausendschaftsdistrikte (stoṅ sde) eingeteilten Regionen militärischer und ziviler Verwaltung;
LI/COBLIN:124-5: officials whose primary function has been shown to have been the levying of taxes and imposts. <khab
“palace, residence of a prince, court” + so pa “guard, watchman, soldier” = “palace guards, palace officials”; p.221: treasury
or tax office; RICHARDSON.1992:107n17: The Lhasa Treaty Inscription N, l.33 shows them as being under the control of the
mṅan. [...] They were therefore financial officials [...]. Even a monk could be a khab so, perhaps similar to the present-day
spyi so, administrator of a monastery; RICHARDSON.1998a:185: revenue officer; p.187: [t]heir head was the mṅan;
DOTSON.2007b:47n64: appears to refer in general to the tax office/revenue office and its functionaries; UEBACH.2008:58: lit.
the purveyors to the bTsan po’s household; DOTSON.2009:58: revenue office/officer subordinate to the fiscal governors,
responsible for the tally and for taxation; accountant and tax collector; p.58n79: < 2-so = nominal suffix; p.105n230: the tax
office/revenue office and its functionaries. Among other things, this office took charge of property confiscated from
executed or exiled criminals; HILL.2011:14: revenue office; DOTSON.2013a:325n1: revenue officer; revenue office [...] possible
derivation from kha bso “to feed mouths”, and “welfare”.

[E] *khab kyi so pa “guard of a chamber”

[M] (N) chamberlain, steward
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] From its occurrences in OT sources, we can deduce that:
- The superior of all khab sos was mṅan pon (ST Treaty N 32-3);
- Leader of each khab so was called khab so dpon (Rkoṅ 9-10);
- khab so officials were also called khab so pa/ba;2
- khab sos were subordinate to a local mṅan and registers (khram) were issued listing probably all
the persons holding the office at the moment (ITJ 750:160-1, 241)3;
- khab sos were informed about changes in the tallies (PT 1079:4-5);
- khab sos had under their jurisdiction tax-collectors (khral pa) (ITJ 750:241);

1
Skt. kuṭumbin “1Hausherr, Familiervater; 2Glied einer Familie, Hausgenosse; 3Landmann; 4aHausfrau; bein grosser
Haushalt, eine grosse Familie” (Bö.2:315a).
2
Cf. the derived formation khab so pa/ba in the following passage:
khab so ba źig / las / dkor (v54) gyi chaldu myi źig mchis bruṅ pa len pa la myi snondu bsnado khab so pa ga’i (v55) ris las / mchis
pa’i myi ’god du yaṅ stsol cig (ITJ 753:v53-5)
“[If] a man has come from one khab so ba as a ?compensation? (chal) for wealth, [one] added the man as an acquisition
(snon) for the receiving bruṅ pa. The man who came from the domain of this very (ga) khab so pa, shall be given as a ’god.”
3
This is probably true for the areas under Tibetan influence but outside the Horns, like Źaṅ źuṅ, or for the period from
before the establishment of Four Horns.
 108

- khab sos owned or managed landed estates with populations (subjects, ’baṅs) subordinate
directly to the office (Or. 15000/337:r3);
- khab sos were responsible for supplies (see s.v. thugs ñen), the surplus of which was calculated
during a council (ITJ 750:225-6);
- khab sos were in charge of providing the sustenance (’tsho ba) for the keeping of a monastic
community. As we learn from ITN 953:v1, failing to do this duty was the reason for sending the
letter containing a request for official donations (sku yon);
- khab sos were responsible for preparing records of property of various estates (PT 997:9-10);
- Together with bruṅ pas1 they were engaged in certain legal cases that concerned theft in the
area under their jurisdiction. Namely, goods confiscated from thieves, who had been executed
or banned, were handed over to the responsible bruṅ pa or khab so (ITJ 753:v48-9, v51-2).
Moreover, it seems that a loss in property of bruṅ pa was compensated by khab so who provided
him with an extra individual as a compensation (ITJ 753:v53-5);
- Important persons could have influence on khab sos (Źol E 6-16);
- khab sos who became greedy and demanded new taxes were perceived as troubling (Rkoṅ 9-10).
When analysing the information on the social position and duties of khab so one must not forget that
it originates not only from different regions but also from different periods of time. It is obvious that
the territorial growth between the 7th and 9th centuries as well as contacts with other political
systems influenced further development of the Tibetan civil service, thus also of khab so.
Nevertheless, we can ascertain that khab so in the Tibetan Empire was a civil service burdened with
duties that encompassed providing necessary means for maintenance of different domains of state
affairs, civil, but also monastic ones, and finance management based on taxes collected by khral pas.
In all likelihood, khab so as an office evolved originally at the court of btsan po with the duty of
supervising his household and estate, hence its appellation *“chamber-guard”2.

The underlying structure of the compound khab so resembles very much the etymology of Eng.
steward, orig. “house guardian” < OEng. stig “sty, hall, house” and weard “warden, guard” (KLEIN
1966:1513b; cf. also OPol. komornik). Not only the etymology of the compound but also the scope of
duties done by khab so resemble those of a medieval steward in England or komornik in Poland.3

1
The word might be cognate to: gruṅ “wise, clever” (CDTD:1308); gruṅ ba/po “1wise, prudent; 2meek, mild, gentle” (J:77b);
druṅ po “1prudent, sensible, judicious, wise; 2sincere, candid; 3diligent?” (J:263b). The exact nature of this office remains
unknown.
2
In a much later source, namely in a fragment from La dwags rgyal rabs relating about Gña khri btsan po, we read: roṅ dor
kha ba so (read: khab so) ñi śu rtsa gñis kyis baṅ mdzod ’gyeṅs (for ’geṅs? - JB) (trslr. after FRANCKE 1972b:29:ll.7-8) “At Roṅ do,
twenty two khab so are filling the storerooms.”
3
Cf. in this context MT spyi so “= spyi bso, name of the highest economic officer/manager for a monastery as a whole (as
opposed to each college)” (Gs:667a) and a note on spyi gso in TUCCI/HEISSIG: “Generalvertreter des Klosters. [...] Er betreut
die Güter und das Vermögen, kurz die gesamte materielle Grundlage des Klosters, doch erfolgt die Verteilung der
Bedarfsgüter an die Gemeinde zu deren Unterhalt und für die rituellen Aufgaben nicht direkt durch diesen Würdenträger,
sondern durch seine Assistenten und Lagervorsteher, wobei ihm aber die Oberkontrolle vorbehalten bleibt.” (1970:156).
spyi bso is a variant of spyi so resulting from the inclusion of the linking element b-: so > bso / -Vσ_. The variant spelling -gso
came into being as a result of folk etymologisation that related the duties of the office to the verb gso “1to feed, nourish; to
 109

However, since every country has its own civil service bound by a specific political situation and
social needs, I refrain from translating the term in order to avoid ascribing to it meanings or
functions which it did not encompass.

[T] kwa cu lha ris kyi khab so / sṅon gźi ’dzin ban de man ’ju śi ris thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) btab tshun cad
// lo maṅ mo źig tu / (10) dpon sna gñen len ’byuṅ ’jug tu gyur gyis kyaṅ / ’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ lastsogs pa
thaṅ la ma brgal (PT 997:9-10; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1992:108)
“Although for many years since the khab so of the monastic estate [of] Kwa cu, the earlier resident
(gźi ’dzin) ban de Man ’ju śi ri, issued a tally of jurisdiction it came to replacing various heads holding
assistant [posts], subjects and property in grain, among others, did not contradict the record.”
źaṅ legs sum brtsan daṅ / blon rgyal bzaṅ daṅ / źaṅ legs bzaṅ gis // kwa cu khrom kyi ’dun sa / tsheg pe’ur
bsdud (5) pa’i lan gyi dgun / bde gams gyi lha ris khab so bzlug ciṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) gdab par chad
nas // (PT 1079:4-5; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184)
“In the winter, at the time when Źaṅ legs sum brtsan, councillor Rgyal bzaṅ, and Źaṅ legs bzaṅ
gathered [the council] at Tsheg pe’u, [in] the assembly hall of the khrom of Kwa cu, the monastic
estates of Bde gams were decided so that, while khab so were informed, tallies of jurisdiction were
issued.”
dbyar ʼdun lha gab du ʼbon (161) da rgyal daṅ / blon chen po khri gzigs gyis bsduste / mṅan gyi khab soe
khram spos (ITJ 750:160-1)
“’bon da rgyal and grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having summoned the summer
council at Lha gab, changed the tally of mṅan’s khab sos.”
dgun ʼdun mkhar prag du / blon chen pho khri sum rjes bsduste / khab soe thugs ñen (226) gyi lhag cad brtsis
(ITJ 750:225-6)
“Grand councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having summoned the winter council in the
castle Prag, calculated the deficiency in the khab sos’ supplies.”
dpyid blon chen po maṅ źam gyis / zlor bsduste / mṅan gyi thaṅ sbyard / khab soʼi khrald pa bskos (ITJ
750:241)
“In the spring, grand councillor [Rṅegs] maṅ źam [stag tsab], having summoned [the council] at Zlo,
fixed the jurisdiction of mṅans [and] appointed the tax-collectors for (lit. of) khab so.”
bruṅ pa ’am / khab so gaṅ gyi (v49) dkor stord pa’i ris su bźes so (ITJ 753:v48-9)
“[The property of a thief who has been killed or banned] is taken to the domain of the one, bruṅ pa
or khab so, who lost his wealth [owing to thefts committed by the thief].”
rkud phruṅ pa’am khab so’i risu blar bźes pa / rlag pa’i / chad bruṅ pa ’ja’ (v52) ’is snon myi gdabo (ITJ
753:v51-2)
“The fine (chad) for (lit. of) the loss of stolen goods (rkud), that were taken to the superiors as a
domain of khab so or phruṅ pa, shall not be added by a ?writ? (’ja’) to bruṅ pa.”
[khab] so’i ’baṅs kyi bran (Or.15000/337:r3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:144, text 438)
“serfs of khab sos’ subjects”
[d]ge ’dun [rkye]n pa’i ’tsho ba khab sos ma ’byor par gyur nas (ITN 953:v1; trslt. after TLTD.2:345)

bring up, nurse up, rear, train” (J:590b). It is highly probable that the underlying structure of spyi so should in fact be
reconstructed as *spyi khab so.
Whether chagzo “treasurer in Dege kingdom recruited from among 30 aristocratic families” in the dialect of Zilphukhog
(THARGYAL 2007:49) also belongs here remains to be clarified.
 110

“After the sustenance for (lit. of) those responsible for the maintenance [of] the saṃgha was not
prepared by khab so [...].”
deṅ saṅ (10) du khab so dpon sna dagis // khral gyi sna ’tshal te / gtses śiṅ mchis na (Rkoṅ 9-10)
“When nowadays the leaders of khab sos, desirous of [different] sorts of taxes, come hassling [...].”
mṅan pon khab so ’o chog gi bla ’bal blon (33) klu bzaṅ myes rma (ST Treaty N 32-3)
“mṅan pon, the superior of all khab sos: Klu bzaṅ myes rma, a councillor [from] ’Bal[-clan].”
bka’ luṅ daṅ ’dra (7) bar / rje blas dka[’] (8) dgu ñamsu blaṅs (9) te phyi naṅ gñis kyi (10) chab srid khab so
[la] (11) dpend pa daṅ che (12) chuṅ gñis la dra[ṅ] (13) źiṅ sñoms te / bod (14) mgo nag po’i srid (15) la phan
ba legs // (16) dgu byas so // (Źol E 6-16; reconstructed after RICHARDSON 1985:4)
“Having taken many difficult official duties to heart in accordance with orders, [Stag sgra klu khoṅ]
was helpful for khab sos [of] chab srid of both internal and external [affairs]. Being sincere and
impartial towards great and small ones, [he] provided benefits of all sorts of good deeds to the srid of
the black-headed Tibetans.”1

15 khu ljo
CT khul źo
YeŚes:57b: bu chuṅ ’jog sboṅ (s.v. khul źo)2; SR.1:182: bu chuṅ ’jog snod cig (s.v. khul źo); GC:81a: bu ’jog snod (s.v. khul źo);
BTC:236a: (rñiṅ) bu chuṅ ’jog snod cig (s.v. khul źo); DSM:56a: bu phrug ʼjog snod sle po’i miṅ ste.
BDN:22n17: khul źo daṅ don mtshuṅs te byis pa ʼjog snod. der ʼdzoṅ khug kyaṅ zer; BTK:99n1: phru gu rgyab tu khur sa’i
phyiṅ sgam mam sle bo’i miṅ ṅo; STK:128n24: khul źo daṅ don mtshuṅs te byis ba ʼjog snod daṅ bu phrug rgyab la khur
byed smyug sle lta bu’o.
Gs:124a: swaddling clothes (s.v. khul źo); WTS.7:59a: Korb, um ein Kind hineinzulegen (s.v. khul źo).
DTH:126: un arbre de paradis; n.3: nous restituons khu ljon; DIETZ.1984:477: Eimer; HILL.2006:95: crib; ZEISLER.2011:107: a
cradle; DOTSON.2013a:258, 269: crib.

[E] *khul gyi ’jo khug “a bag [made] of wool [and used] for sucking”
[M] (N) a woollen sucking-bag, i.e. a bag made from yak’s wool and worn in front to enable a child
to suckle
SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NMAT+[VNV1/PURP+N]]
[A] The following sound changes are assumed to have yielded the attested form of the compound:
*khul gyi ’jo khug3 > *khul ’jo (compounding) > *khul jo (elision) > khu ljo (consonant migration). I
consider the second element of the compound, *’jo (CT “to milk”, J:179a), to stand for *’jo khug
“sucking-bag” (lit. “a bag for sucking”) - a formation analogous to CT nu khug “sucking-bag” (J:305a).
khul is a contracted form of khu lu “the short wooly hair of the yak” (J:41a; CDTD:747) used in
compounds.4

1
One more occurrence of khab so is reported in TLTD.2:122:3-4 (Or.15000/265:v3-4; cf. also TAKEUCHI 1998.2:119) but the lieu
is too damaged to be properly evaluated.
2
sboṅ could be a scribal error for the original *snod. Compare hereto glosses from other native Tibetan dictionaries.
3
*’jo khug < *’jo ba’i khug, lit. “a bag for sucking”.
4
In the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan, section Esocentric (p.32f.), I provide the argumentation against other
theoretically possible interpretations of the underlying structure of the compound.
The CT form khul źo was in all probability formed as a folk etymology with the second constituent of the compound
intended to resemble the morpheme źo “milk” (J:478b). We observe that following the replacement of the element *’jo by
źo the original underlying structure of the compound cannot be acknowledged anymore (*khul gyi źo khug “milk-bag of
wool”?) and the formation becomes synchronically unanalysable.
DIETZ (1984:477n238) speculates whether the compound could be reconstructed as *khu le jo ba for which she cites
SUMATIRATNA’s gloss khu le (falsely given by her as khu le jo ba) “saγulγ-a; bortuγu” (SR.1:177.3; saγulγ-a “pail, bucket”,
Less:659a; bortuγu ”tub, small wooden bucket; flask made of leather; cylinder; empty cartridge, cartridge case”, Less:121a).
 111

[T] bu khu ljo na (44) ʼdug pa źig / myig bya myig daṅ mtshuṅs ʼog nas ʼgebs pa gchig ʼdug (PT 1287:43-4)
“There was a child lying in a woolen sucking-bag, one whose eyes were closing from below like
birds’ eyes.”

16 khur ra
BDN:368n19: khur ba daṅ gcig pa ʼdra; BTK:72n7: khur ru ste khres po’am khur po’o.
DTH:142: fardeau; STEINRA.1972:257: fences; DOTSON.2013a:282: Khur ra (proper name - JB).

[E] *khur daṅ ra ba “loads and fences”

[M] (N) loads and fences
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; STRC[N+N]
[A] The verses 5-6 from the passage quoted in the Text section describe the activity of Paṅ sum
’dron po which was instrumental to the development of the state. Thus, we learn that his main
contribution was the extending of lands of valleys (dog < *sa dog). This action is additionally specified
in the preceding verse that ends with the converb śiṅ. Since the fifth verse contains the word rags
“dam, mole, dike, embankment” (J:522a) we can infer that Paṅ sum ’dron po is assumed to have
increased arable land by building dykes or embankments.

By analogy with ’don, gchod, and skyed that occur in the same passage, I interpret thogs as the V1 stem
and connect it to thogs “1to bear aloft” (D:592b), “va. to take, carry” (Gs:504b), Kyirong “to hold”,
Yolmo “to carry in hands or arms, to take along (people, animals), to take (of time)” (CDTD.V:555).
This verb is given in JÄSCHKE as ’thogs “to take, to seize, to take up, esp. to carry” (J:245b) - a form not
attested in OT so far.

Now, one finds khur- in OT sources in the following collocations, e.g.: khur cen ni mdzo’is bgur (read:
bkur) (PT 1068:104) “mdzo carried great loads.”; khur togs (PT 1134:260) “to carry loads”; sga stan khur
du kyer (PT 1134:270) “[One] carried saddle and cushion as loads.”. Hence, it seems reasonable to
interpret khur ra, first, as a direct object of the verb thogs and, secondly, as a coordinate compound
both elements of which have to match the semantics of the verb.1

To conclude, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of khur ra as *khur daṅ ra ba, lit.
“loads and fences”. Thus, according to my interpretation, the verse khur ra ni rags thogs śiṅ describes
carrying loads and fences for fills and walls of dykes or levees that are built on rivers in order to
support the agriculture.

[T] skyi nas ni ña ʼdon pa / “The one who draws fish from Skyi[-chu river],
(235) dbyi tshab ni paṅs to re // Dbyi tshab paṅs to re,
klum na ni chab gchod pa / the one who divides waters in a dale2,
tseṅ sku ni smon to re / Tseṅ sku smon to re,
khur ra ni rags thogs śiṅ the one who, while carrying loads and fences [for]
dykes,
1
Alternatively, one could interpret khur ra as an attributive compound with -ra qualifying the head, i.e. khur. However,
since ra- is not attested as an adjective nor can it be treated as a deverbative, this hypothesis has to be rejected.
2
For the proposed rendering of klum as “dale” see s.v. gyur sram.
 112

(236) dog gi ni sa skyed pa // extends the lands of valleys,

paṅ sum ni ʼdron po źig / Paṅ sum ’dron po -
thaṅ la ni rtse bchad chiṅ / [they] cut off the summit [of] Thaṅ la and
śam po ni rmed duʼ / (237) bsnan // added [it] to plough Śam po.1
yu sna ʼi ni mkhar pab chiṅ [They] conquered the fort of Yu sna and
pyiṅ ba ʼi ni snon du bgyis / (PT 1287:234-7) made [it] an addition to (lit. of) Pyiṅ ba.”

17 khyim graṅs
BTC:260a: 1khyim tshaṅ maṅ ñuṅ; 2khyim bcu gñis mtshon byed kyi aṅ graṅs te thig śar na lug khyim daṅ. gcig śar na glaṅ
khyim. gźan rnams rigs ’gre.
Gs:134b: 1the number of families/households; 2members in a household.
DTH:147: foyer; DOTSON.2013a:288: a single household.

[E] *khyim gyi graṅs “number of houses”

[M] (N) number of houses/households
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] khyim rtsis / khyim yig
[A] GOLDSTEIN glosses khyim graṅs śor with “vi. to have a family, household disintegrate” (134b, s.v.
khyim graṅs). If we agree that -graṅs is the head of the compound then we need a verb the argument
structure of which allows terms expressing abstract notions as its subject/object. However, even a
cursory look at the occurrences of śor in OT documents suffices to state that the subject of the verb
in a great majority of cases denotes animated beings like, e.g., śa, ri dags, g.yag, ’bri, rkyaṅ, rgo ba, ba
śa, rte’u etc. Compounds with -graṅs, on the other hand, occur as objects of the verbs, for instance,
’jal (sraṅ graṅ(s) ’jal, PT 1071:283-4, 308), ’du (sman graṅs ’du, ITJ 739:3v7), and rtsi (mda’ graṅs brtsi, PT
1072:174), or subjects of myed (PT 239 repeatedly, ITJ 735:4). To these we can add ’debs (graṅs ’debs,
J:76a) and mchis (graṅs ma mchis, J:76a) from CT. In accordance with these observations, I propose to
identify śor in the passage below with the CT gśor “1to count, e.g. sheep, by letting them pass one by
one through one’s hands, the beads of a rosary (through one’s fingers); 2to measure; to weigh”
(J:566b) rather than śor, V2 < ’chor “I.1to escape, slip, steal away; to drop from; 2to come out, to break
out; 3to go over, to pass; II.1to pursue, chase, hunt; 2to light, kindle, set on fire” (J:170b).2 This reading
seems to have been adopted also by BACOT who translated khyim graṅs ma śor bar as “sans dénombrer
les foyers” (DTH:147). Such an understanding is additionally supported by the phrase immediately
following it, namely, yoṅs kyis. In the context of PT 1287, phrases khyim graṅs ma śor par “without
counting the number of houses” and yoṅs kyis “entirely” emphasise that the whole populace of Sum
pa was subjugated.

1
The translation of the latter couplet is only provisional. The exact denotation of thaṅ la and śam po here is uncertain. On
the one hand, śam po is known as a place name in Myaṅ ro and a part of the proper name of the deity Yar lha śam po
connected to a mountain in the valley of Yar luṅ. From the passage we can deduce that śam po was used for tillage. On the
other hand, thaṅ la, which is cited here in one context with rtse “summit, peak”, not being a place name at all in OT
documents, occurs mostly in fragments that speak about plains (thaṅ la = lit. “on/over plains”?). Thus, we have here a plain
the peak of which is being cut off and a mountain summit the tillage of which is being increased - an obvious oxymoron, or
śam po and thaṅ la were misplaced in the course of copying the text.
2
The attested śor might be either a variant reading of CT gśor or a folk etymology in which the less known word *gśor has
been interpreted as śor.
 113

[T] khyim graṅs ma śor par (305) yoṅs kyis ʼbaṅs rnal mar bkug go (PT 1287:304-5)
“[He] gathered [Sum pas] as native subjects entirely without counting the number of houses.”

18 khyim rtsis
DTH:44: le compte des maisons; DOTSON.2009:110: an account of the fiscal governors’ households (for mṅan gyi khyim rtsis -
JB).

[E] *khyim gyi rtsis “calculation of houses”

[M] (N) inventory of households
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NOBJV+N]
[R] khyim graṅs / khyim yig / rtsis gra / rtsis mgo
[A] BACOT (DTH:44) and DOTSON (2009:110) read rtsis in ITJ 750:206 as forming a verbal phrase
together with bgyis, i.e. *rtsis bgyid “fit le compte” and “made an account” respectively. It is,
however, more probable that khyim rtsis is a compound and should be read as the direct object of
bgyis; compare, e.g., rabs cad gyi rtsis bgyis (ITJ 750:109); pyiṅ rild gyi rtsis bgyis (ITJ 750:216); chad ka’i
rtsis bgyis (Or.8212.187:32). By analogy, if khyim and rtsis are to be treated separately then one would
expect the clause *mṅan gyi khyim gyi rtsis bgyis or *mṅan khyim gyi rtsis bgyis. Otherwise, the verb
bgyis would have two objects (*mṅan gyi khyim and *rtsis) since, as the above quoted passages with
rtsis bgyis prove, the expression was not an incorporation but a mere verbal phrase. On the other
hand, agreeing on the interpretation of khyim rtsis as a compound one accepts the fact that -rtsis is
the head of the compound, lit. “calculation of houses” (for other examples see below). As a
consequence, mṅan gyi must be understood as qualifying -rtsis and not khyim or else we would have
to reckon again with the structure *mṅan khyim gyi rtsis bgyis. To sum up this survey, I read the
clause as concerning a households-counting that was made by a grand councillor for or in aid of
mṅan officials (the genitive particle in mṅan gyi is understood as having the benefactive function).
This could refer to a kind of inventory of households made for each mṅan in order to specify
households that fell within the jurisdiction of respective mṅans.1

For other compounds with -rtsis as a second member compare: nor rtsis ”counting the number of yak,
livestock” (Gs:617a); phyugs rtsis “listing the births and deaths of livestock, cattle” (Gs:696c); bag rtsis
“astrological calculations for marriage” (Gs:715a); tshoṅ rtsis “calculating business profit or loss”
(Gs:888a), “inventory” (CDTD:6867); yoṅ rtsis “calculating one’s income” (Gs:1007a); sa rtsis
“Landzuteilungsliste” (CÜPPERS 2004:95); sa leb rtsis “record book (for lands)” (CÜPPERS 2004:95).

[T] blon chen pho khri gzigs (206) gyis / mdo smad gyi dgun ʼdun ryam śi gar du bsduste / mṅan gyi khyim
rtsis bgyis (ITJ 750:205-6)
“Grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having summoned the winter council of Mdo smad at
Ryam śi gar, made an inventory of households for (lit. of) mṅans.”

1
DOTSON translates the clause mṅan gyi khyim rtsis bgyis as “They made an account of the fiscal governors’ households.”
(2009:110) explaining additionally in the footnote: “This almost certainly indicates those estates for which they were held
administratively responsible, and not the fiscal governors’ own households.” (ibid., n.253).
 114

19 khyim yig
RICHARDSON.1985:161: household register; LI/COBLIN:328: household register; RICHARDSON.1998a:185: list of households;
DOTSON.2007b:49: household register; DOTSON.2009:50: household registers; p.257: register of households.1

[E] *khyim gyi yi ge “letter of household(s)“

[M] (N) households register
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] khyim graṅs / khyim rtsis
[A] As can be inferred from formations listed below, the main meaning of -yig as a second member
of a compound is “letter; written document”: khrims yig “law, legal code” (Gs:147b); gan yig “an
agreement, guarantee, contract letter” (Gs:180b); sgo yig “1edict written on paper that is stuck on a
wooden board and placed in various parts of a city; 2writing on the wooden cangue that prisoners
wear indicating their crime” (Gs:279b); gñer yig “an instruction to the gñer pa” (TAKEUCHI 1994:849);
dan yig “gros dan byed pa’i yi ge” (DSM:318b); mda’ yig “1an ‘arrow letter’; 2a message tied to an arrow
and send by shooting the arrow” (Gs:568a); brda yig “1written notice; 2commentary” (Gs:598a); gnas
yig “a traditional guidebook to a pilgrimage site or sites” (Gs:625a); byaṅ yig “1name of a deceased
person written on a piece of paper that is ritually burnt; 2business card” (Gs:732b); sman yig
“1prescription; 2medical texts” (Gs:839b); źiṅ yig OT *“field charter; a document most probably
specifying types of arable land together with its size” (PT 1078bis, ITJ 834r, ITJ 1243)2; zaṅs yig
“letters engraved on copperware” (Gs:955c); lam yig “1travel documents permitting the requisition of
corvee labor and transport animals; 2passport” (Gs:1069a).

PT 1079 refers to single persons by name stating whether they were included in a khyim yig or not.
Furthermore, the khyim yig is described as a one of a monastic estate (lha ris). From the document it
appears that serfs (bran) were included in khyim yig after their rightful master had died and they
were handed over to a monastic estate. Thus, I propose khyim yig to be understood as referring to an
official document that listed all households belonging to an estate (monastic, lord- or btsan po-
owned) and authorised their legal status.

[T] slad gyis gum kar ’bye’u tse daṅ / yam yam daṅ / lu (3) lu gsum ni / lha risu phul te / khyim yig la yaṅ
bris nas / (PT 1079:2-3; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184)
“Thereafter, upon the death [of monk Bam kim keṅ], having given the three, ’Bye’u tse, Yam yam,
and Lu lu, to the monastic estate, [one] wrote [their names] in the households register.”
’bye’u tse daṅ yam yam daṅ / lu lu smad gsum ni / lha ris kyi khyim yig la rma ba las / lu lu ni (17) gum / (PT
1079:16-7; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:185)
“With regard to the three ’Bye’u tse, Yam yam, and Lu lu with her family (?smad), upon requesting
[their names] for the households register of the monastic estate, Lu lu died.”

1
BTC glosses thaṅ khram with “(rñiṅ) lag ’dzin khyim yig” (1140b), unfortunately, as in many other cases, the dictionary
does not contain lemmata lag ’dzin khyim yig nor khyim yig.
2
For more details on this kind of document see DOTSON 2009:50.
 115

tshe’i byin smad ni ’bye’u tse’i rgyud lags kyis kyaṅ / rje bden mchis pa’i tshe na yaṅ sriṅ mo meṅ śun la stsal
te lha ris kyaṅ (read: kyi) khyim yig las kyaṅ myi rma ba (18) lags / (PT 1079:17-8; trslr. after RICHARDSON
1998a:185)
“As concerns Tshe’i byin and her family, even though she was [of] ’Bye’u tse’s lineage, already (yaṅ)
at the time when she had a rightful master, being given to [his] sister Meṅ śun, [she] was not
requested from the households register of the monastic estate.”
’bi tse daṅ / hwa ñaṅ daṅ / kim kaṅ ni [...] // lha ris gyi khyim yig daṅ gtugs pa las kyaṅ / śig za ’bye’u tse
daṅ / yam yam daṅ / lu lu gsum ’byuṅ la / tshe’i byin thog (20) ma nas lha ris gyi / khyim yig la yaṅ myi
’byuṅ / (PT 1079:18-20; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:185)
“Upon also including ’Bi tse, Hwa ñaṅ, and Kim kam [...] in the households register of the monastic
estate, the three, ’Bye’u tse (the lady from Śig[-clan]), Yam yam, and Lu lu, do occur and Tshe’i byin
does not occur, from the beginning, in the households register of the monastic estate.”
dkon mchog gsum gyi rkyen bcad pa’i rnams (50) kyaṅ ma dma’s ma źig pa’i chos su // lha ris kyi khyim yig gi
mgo nan las (51) ’byuṅ ba bźin du chis mdzad do (Skar 49-51)
“Concerning the assets allotted to the Three Jewels, [they] are managed on the authority of what
appears from the incipit of the households register of the monastic estate according to the
[established] custom [that it] must not be diminished nor destroyed.”

20 khrab bse’
CT bse khrab
DTH:144: cuirasse en cuir de rhinocéros; DOTSON.2013a:285: armor [made of] ten kinds of lamellar (for khrab bse sna bcu - JB).

[E] *khrab (b)se ba “varnished lamellar armour”

[M] (N) varnished lamellar armour, i.e. leather armour of lamellar type covered with varnish1
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[A] The fact that the Tibetan khrab means both “scale” and “coat of mail” (J:49b) points to a kind of
armour that somehow resembled fish scales; i.e. the term could have denoted either a chainmail, a
scale armour or a lamellar armour.2 Tibetan lacquered leather lamellae with engraved patterns from
Mīrān Fort (8-9th centuries) as preserved in British Museum can be seen in Fig.23. These are the
earliest known remains of Tibetan armour made of carved squares of lacquered leather that were
joined by leather (doeskin?) laces.4 A complete lamellar armour dated to the 8th-10th century and
coming probably from a treasury of a Tibetan monastery is reproduced and shortly described in
ANNINOS (2000:108b-9a; cf. Fig.3)5. The lacquer technique used in its manufacturing is comparable to

1
Regarding rawhide armours see s.v. kom tse.
2
A similar semantic development is assumed for Chinese jie 介 (Minimal Old Chinese *krê(t)s) “scale (of animals)” >
“armour”, SCHUESSLER 2007:313.
3
MAS.592; http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=399800516;recnum=76903;index=1; 30.05.2014. See also, e.g.,
MAS.621 (http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=400431528;recnum=13178;index=1; 30.05.2014) and MAS.611.b
(http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=400740636;recnum=13179;index=1; 30.05.2014). As stated already by Marc
Aurel STEIN (1921:464) and confirmed later by WHITFIELD (1985:308), the lamellae have in all probability been made from
camel skin. For a detailed description of all excavated leather lamellae see STEIN.MA 1921.1:463-5, 477 (M.I.0069, 0070,
0071), 478 (M.I.i.002, 003), 481 (M.I.ix.003, 004, 006), 482 (M.I.xiv.0074).
4
Cf. ROBINSON 2002:135, Fig.67, p.161. A schematic drawing that demonstrates the threading of laces is presented in
STEIN.MA 1907.1:xvi and NICOLLE 1997:100, picture 204A-B.
5
A similar armour consisting of a breastplate and lamellar skirt is worn by the Buddhist deity Vaiśravaṇa. The wall
painting depicting the deity (cave 25, Dunhuang) dates from the early 9th century and was made during the Tibetan
occupation of Dunhuang; HELLER 2006:36b and Fig.33.
 116

that of the lamellae discovered by Marc Aurel STEIN, but, according to ANNINOS, the armour itself
resembles more those of Yi (Lolo) (ibid.).1 ANNINOS expresses his doubts about the existence of true-
lacquer production in Tibet. Instead, he observes that, apart from the above mentioned armour and
lamellae, all the other leather or wood objects of furniture and handicraft found so far in Tibet have
proven to be covered with varnish (ibid., p.107b). For this reason, he assumes that Yi tribes (OT ’jaṅ),
inhabiting regions known for lacquer production in modern Yunnan and Sichuan and subdued by
Tibetans at the beginning of the 8th century (cf. ITJ 750:145), supplied their conquerors with
lacquered armaments (ibid., p.109a). Furthermore, gilded and varnished leather was still used for
parts of horse armour even in later times (LAROCCA 2006a:96a). The lacquerlike appearance of
Tibetan varnished handicrafts was achieved by applying shellac, gold leaf, and glaze or tung oil.2

Fig.2 Varnished lamellae

-bse. In analysing compounds one element of which is the

morpheme bse, one can distinguish between three groups
of formations according to the position and syntactic
function of bse:
1. Attribute of an object denoted by the first member of the
compound:
ko bse “piece of leather whose top side is varnished” Fig.3 Tibetan lamellar armour

(Gs:9a); pub bse *“varnished shield”; bod bse “cups and plates and buckles made of rhinoceros skin,
generally by Dokpa Tibetans” (D:879a); ras bse “varnished cloth (so the surface is shinny (sic!))”
(Gs:1032b).

1
Tibetan and Na (Mosuo; Tibeto-Burman ethnic groups inhabiting present-day Sichuan and Yunnan provinces) soldiers
wore similar lamellar armours made probably of red-laquered pigskin still at the beginning of the 20th century; ARIS 1992,
Figs. 4.1 and 4.4 (photographs made by Joseph ROCK), GUIART 1989:40, ANNINOS 2000:109n22. Another complete leather
lamellar armour from the 15th-17th century is depicted and described in LAROCCA 2006a:124-5, who comments: “Probably
originating in the southeastern Tibetan area of Kham, this armor represents a unique combination of influences from the
regions to its west and east. The shape and size of the lamellae show the influence of the classic iron lamellar armors
associated with central Tibet to the west. The material, decoration, and lacing pattern, however, show the influence of two
distinctive styles of leather lamellar armors worn by the Naxi (Moso) and the Yi (Lolo) in Yunnan and Sichuan to the east”.
2
After LAROCCA 2006a:96b, 116a, 2007a, 2007b. Apart from armours (for horse and man) and shields, also arm defenses and
quivers were made from varnished leather, cf. LAROCCA 2006a:116ff. and 187ff.
 117

2. Determiner of the object denoted by the second member of the compound:

bse ko “varnished, lacquered hide” (Gs:1167c); bse khra “leather-falcon” (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ
1956:90)1; bse khrab “1Armor made from varnished or painted leather; 2A shield made from
rhinoceros hide” (LAROCCA 2006a:271b)2; bse mkhar “leather-castle” (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:90)3;
bse sga *“varnished saddle” (PT 1287:134); bse sgam “leather-box, or a box covered with leather”
(J:593b); bse sgo “leather-door, or a door-like target made of hides” (J:593b); bse sgrogs “leather
thong or a metal chain of bse” (BELLEZZA 2008:459n338a); bse rṅa “a tanned-leather drum” (HUBER
2013:276); bse theb(s) “ras bse las bzos pa’i źwa” (BTC:3048b); bse doṅ “ko bse las bzos pa’i mda’
śubs sam mda’ doṅ” (BTC:3048b); bse mduṅ *“spear made from varnished wood”4; bse phub “shield
of rhino-leather” (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:8); bse phur *”dagger made from varnished wood”5;
bse ’bag “ras bse las bzos pa’i gdoṅ brñan ’bag” (BTC:3048b)6; bse źags *“lasso made from varnished
leather”7; bse ru *”[one having] a horn [as if] of varnished wood; varnish-horn(ed)”, “rhinoceros”
(J:593b)8; bse śiṅ “a plant like a tree used for hedges” (Cs:126b), Eastern Tibetan se çuŋ “spiny

1
Mentioned together with duṅ khra and lcags khra (ibid.).
2
This compound constitutes also part of a name of a Tibetan Buddhist protective deity Chos skyong bse khrab pa (alias
Rdo rje bse khrab), lit. “dharma-protector [wearing] a varnished lamellar armour”, which is portrayed as wearing a
lamellar armour, cf. JAMSPAL 2006:45 and Fig.41.
3
A mythical place of Lcam sriṅ. It is described as being of a purple-brown colour (ibid.).
4
For spears made partially of varnished wood see http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/2004.340a,b and
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/2001.179a,b; 25.02.2015. According to NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ (1956:15), “The
so-called bse mduṅ, verbatim “(rhino-)skin lance” or bse yi mduṅ dmar, “the red (rhino-)skin lance”, is described by the
Tibetans as a lance with a shaft protected by a covering of rhino-skin. The expression bse mduṅ, however, might also mean
a special kind of lance attributed to the bswe (sometimes written bse) demons; to the latter possibility seems to point the
term bswe mduṅ, applied in Bon works.” As my analysis demonstrates, such spears were neither made of leather nor had
anything in common with rhinoceros. This is additionally confirmed by the artifacts preserved and exhibited in
Metropolitan Museum of Art, cf. also LAROCCA 2006a:174ff.
bse mduṅ dmar po *“red spear of varnished [wood]” (“spear of red leather”, HELLER 2006:39b) is one of the attributes of Beg
tse – Tibetan Buddhist protective deity – that is described in native sources as “the youth of bse” (HELLER 2006:39a) and
depicted as wearing a lamellar armour, cf. thangka on http://www.himalayanart.org/image.cfm/50149.html; 25.02.2015.
Black and reddish brown were the most popular pigments added to varnish or lacquer (WHITFIELD 1985:308). We read
already in ITJ 734:3r94: briṅ bse bas dmar (trslr. after THOMAS 1957:64) “The middle part [was] more red than bse.” Compare
hereto also the 23rd of 32 signs (mtshan) of the Enlightened One described in Khams ’briṅ as sen mo bse’i gdog ltar dmar ” (trslr.
after: http://tibeto-logic.blogspot.com/2010/07/lord-shenrabs-bodily-marks-of.html; 25.02.2015) “Nails are red like the
colour (mdog for gdog) of varnish.”, erroneously translated as “His nails are the red of wild roses” (ibid.).
5
An attribute of Bse byin that is also called mchog phur “excellent kīla”, BOORD 1993:185. Ritual daggers (phur bu) are made
from wood or metal (bronze and iron; HUMMEL 1952:41), although HUMMEL (1952:45, 48) and GRÜNWEDEL (1900:164-5) believe
that they have originally been made exclusively from wood.
6
“Leather-mask” together with a miraculous image of a turquoise, a lion of crystal and a wooden bird are said to be kept
at the residence of Pe har at Bhata Hor (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:102; TPS.2:643a). NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ writes further: “My
informant was under the impression that the mask was made of strips of cloth, which had been covered with glue and then
pressed together, a technique sometimes applied for the manufacture of Tibetan masks. This observation stands of course
in contradiction to the statement of the written sources, which speak about a leather-mask.” (pp.103-4). However, as our
survey shows, bse ’bag did not have to be made of leather, but rather of any material (cloth, wood, leather, paper mache,
etc.) that was treated with pigmented varnish or a similar glossy substance.
7
Cf. also BELLEZZA 2008:601, text II-33:i.
8
According to LAUFER, rhinoceros horn was described in Old Chinese texts as being glossy and brilliant: “During dark
nights its horn emits a brilliant light like torch-fire” (quotation from Dengshe pian, after LAUFER 1914b:138) and “[...] the
horn imported on ships and coming from the Arabs has patterns like zhu yu flowers, is glossy and brilliant with colors,
some resembling dog-noses, as if they were glossed with fat” (ibid., pp.148-9n7). Similar attributes were applied to certain
armours as LAUFER writes: “The famous Cao Zhi (192-232) is credited with the statement that the former emperors
bestowed on officials an armor (kai) called “brilliant like ink” (mo guang) and another called “brilliant like light” (ming
guang) [...]” (p.174n1). Regarding ming jia “brilliant armor”, LAUFER states “A technical term frequently employed in the
Annals; it presumably refers to highly varnished and polished plates of iron or steel” (p.284n1), on another occasion he
defines jia as “a cuirass (i.e. a leather armour – JB) made in imitation of a coat” (p.175). These descriptions assure us that
 118

tree”, (GŌ 1954:1459), “a tree from which lacquer is produced” (Gs:1167c; cf. also se śiṅ “sm. bse
śiṅ”, Gs:1126c), “lho mon sogs nags tshal stug po’i naṅ du skyes pa’i śiṅ sdoṅ la thug reg byas na
lus la rma ’byuṅ źiṅ skraṅ ba’i dug yod pa źig” (BTC:3049b), “bhallātakaḥ” (Negi.16:7470a)1.
3. Coordinate compounds:
g.yu bse duṅ *“turquoise, varnish, shell” (PT 1040:9-10); gsar (read: gser) g.yu bse duṅ *“gold,
turquoise, varnish, shell” (PT 1042:10); bse lcags duṅ *“varnish, iron, shell”2. Moreover, the text
Phur pa drag sṅags kyi ’phrin las mentions six groups of messengers that are called duṅ, lcags, zaṅs,
g.yu, gser, bse (BOORD 1993:92n327)3. We observe that the compounds listed in this group are
formed from terms that denote natural substances.

Some other phrases containing bse are attested in Tibetan literal sources as well: lo phrom bse *“bse of
white/shiny lo” (trsl. – JB; BELLEZZA 2008:630, text III-19:iii; SNELLGROVE 1967:50, l.37)4; graṅ mo gnam
bse brtsig (PT 1287:61-2)5; sib bse (liquid varnish?) goṅ kar be ne tshog po (repeatedly in ITJ 734; seems to
be a proper name); bse’i cho rol “fence (?) [made] of bse[-plant]” (PT 1134:99, 112; PT 1136: 23, 45);
bse(’i) maṅ lag “crown6 [made] of bse[-plant]” (PT 1134:104, 106)7.

A few scholars have made attempts at examining the origins of bse. Unfortunately, all of them were
influenced too much by the commonly glossed meaning “rhinoceros” for bse (ru) (cf. Cs:127a,

rhinoceros horn and leather used for making armours were perceived as having one characteristic in common – glossy
appearance that in case of leather could only result from varnishing or lacquering.
1
Skt. bhallātakaḥ “the Acajou or cashew-nut, the marking-nut”, MW:748c. Oil (CNSL - cashew nutshell liquid) produced
from its nutshells is a natural resin used for varnishing.
One could probably add to this group of compounds also bse ro ~ sa ro “peau de chèvre teinte en rouge” (Desg:1055b; *bse
ra > bse ro (vowel assimilation) > sa ro (folk etymology?)). Furthermore, se ra “chose, objet, meuble, petite table basse”
(Desg:1021a), “thing” (CDTD:8799) could have originally denoted some lacquered or varnished objects, like furniture,
although the exact meaning of ra in this context remains unknown. It is worth considering, however, whether the two
formations should not be traced back to one compound *bse ra (< *bse ra lpags), originally *“varnished goat’s leather” that
could have developed through metonymy to *“objects covered with or made from varnished [goat’s] leather” > “objects of
furniture”; for various objects made from varnished leather (like storage chest, box, quiver, case, dish) see ANNINOS 2000,
Figs.6, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26.
2
Cf.: “After that you must practise the sādhana of the protectors of Rosewood (bse “varnish” – JB), Iron and Conch (Crystal)
for a further two months”, BOORD 1993:121. Compare also the title of the text B28, Bse lcags duṅ gsum srog gi citta, ibid., p.229.
3
Compare hereto Lacquer King and Iron Ancestor in China in LEWIS 2009:592-3 and BARBIERI-LOW 2007:106-7. According to
the beliefs of Chinese artisans, “Lacquer King was sent down to earth by the Heavenly Thearch (Tiandi) to help artisans
lacquer armor and weapons.” (BARBIERI-LOW 2007:107).
4
BELLEZZA (2008:456; reads le instead of lo) and SNELLGROVE (1967:51, 310) translate it as “white copper” and “burnished
copper, pure copper” respectively. BELLEZZA bases his interpretation on the following fragment from Rta gtad: rgyab ni lo
phrom bse bas sra / rmig pa zom śaṅ lcags las sra (trslr. after BELLEZZA 2008:630, text III-19:iii) “As for [its] back, [it] is harder
than lo phrom bse. [Its] hooves are harder than zom śaṅ lcags.” The source for SNELLGROVE’s understanding is a fragment from
Gzi brjid depicting a magical castle (sprul pa’i mkhar) in the following words: rmeṅ gźi [sic!] rin chen gser la byas / logs bźi lo
phrom bse la byas / zur bźi sṅo mñen (gñen) lcags la byas / sgo ba le duṅ la byas / kha bad mtsho ro g.yu la byas (pp.50-2). Taken
together, we have here six analogously formed phrases: lo phrom bse *“lacquer of shiny/white lo”; zom śaṅ lcags *“peak-śaṅ
(sharp? cf. śa ’bal ~ śaṅ zur in Źaṅ źuṅ, MARTIN 2010:217b, 218b) iron”; rin chen gser *“gold of great-value”; sṅo mñen lcags
*“shape-pliable iron” (cf. ṅo ge in MARTIN 2010:71a:); ba (read sa - JB) le duṅ *“lucid shell”; mtsho ro g.yu *“dark-blue-sea
turquoise”. Their last members denote substances like varnish, iron (twice), gold, shell, and turquoise whereas their
former parts (N+A) seem to determine closer the latter parts; cf. BELLEZZA 2008:456n324 and n.325 for a different
interpretation.
On phrom see s.vv. thaṅ prom and ldoṅ prom.
5
Without going into semantic details it suffices to note that its variant in PT 1286:49 is spelled graṅ mo gnam gser brtsig.
One can surmise that the already obsolete bse was replaced with another term, gser “gold”, from the same semantic class of
natural resources.
6
For more details on maṅ lag see s.v. gtsug lag.
7
Compare hereto (b)se śiṅ “a plant like a tree used for hedges” (Cs:126b) and Eastern Tibetan se çuŋ “spiny tree” (GŌ
1954:1459).
 119

Sch:618a, J:593b; D:1319b)1 and concentrated their efforts on proving the alleged relationship
between Tibetan bse and lexemes from other languages in the region, mainly Chinese, that looked
similar. LAUFER (1914b:116) was probably the first one to argue that Tibetans and Chinese were
acquainted with these animals in their common prehistory before having become divided. Similarly,
COBLIN and SCHUESSLER refer to bse as being of Sino-Tibetan origin. The former reconstructed ST form
*bsɨd “rhino” (1986:125) and the latter connected the Tibetan stem to Chinese xī11 (Later Han Chinese
sei, Minimal Old Chinese *sêi, Old Northwest Chinese sėi) < ST *səj “a large animal” (2007:523).2
WHITFIELD (1985:308) seems to be suggesting that Tibetans have taken over the term from Chinese
that was used primarily to denote “rhino-leather” (Ch. xipi), but which by the time of borrowing had
already shifted its meaning to “carved lacquer”. However, the solution is first to be sought in
Tibetan language itself.

The morphological structure of bse (*b+se) calls into question its alleged foreign origin suggesting
rather the native character of the term. As the above survey has shown, in a very few cases bse was
used as an attribute whereas in the vast majority of formations it denoted a kind of substance from
which different sorts of (mainly ritual) objects were made. Furthermore, most of the meanings listed
in lexicographic sources make reference to either tanned or varnished leather. Thus, I propose to
reconstruct the original meaning of bse in khrab bse as *“varnished”. Later on, through a metonymic
shift, the term started to denote different varnished objects and subsequently the substance that

1
Other meanings glossed for bse include: “tanned leather” (J:593b), “1zaṅs kyi miṅ; 2ri dwags bse ru’i miṅ” (DSM:1004b),
“generally means leather treated and painted a golden yellow colour, highly appreciated by Tibetans” (NORBU
1997:253n21), “a kind of white metal similar to copper” (BELLEZZA 2008:312, 330), “une pierre semi-précieuse” (STEIN.RA
1971:495n47), “rosewood” (BOORD 1993:92n327, 269a (s.v. rosewood)), “wild roses” (http://tibeto-
logic.blogspot.de/2010/07/lord-shenrabs-bodily-marks-of.html; 25.02.2015), “rhino-leather” (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:8),
“class of deities” (~ se ~ bswe, NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:310), “the name of the tribe as well as of a class of demons”
(TPS.2:714). Apart from the alternation bse ~ bswe when denoting “class of deities” (see below), all the other proposed
meanings aim at defining bse as some kind of material corresponding to iron, turquoise, etc. The rendering of the term as
“rosewood” results from confusing a species of rose (Rosa serica; Tib. se/gse/bse ba, J:575b) with a kind of wood English
designation of which contains the word “rose” but the timber is yielded from plants that are not native to Tibet.
Similarly, since rhinoceres are not indigenous on the Tibetan Plateau (in fact, by the Tang dynasty they were almost
extinct even in China apart from the most southern regions; ELVIN 2004:31-2, LAUFER 1914b:93), it is highly improbable that
one would import their hides for armours possessing already by that time iron armours of very good quality as attested by
Chinese and Arab sources (DEMIÉVILLE 1952:373, BECKWITH 1987:110, CLARKE 2006:21a). Nearly all Chinese works referred to by
LAUFER concentrate mainly on the horn of rhinoceros (1914b:89ff.). In fact, one gets the impression that it was the horn
that was well known to Chinese but not the animal itself. If that was the case, it is even more improbable that Tibetans
were ever acquainted with the animal. For these very reasons we should not expect Tibetans to have a native term
denoting rhinoceros.
Concerning the meanings “copper” and “precious stone”, neither shields, armours nor any other utensil referred to by
bse were or could have been made of these materials, mainly for practical reasons. Both materials could be used for
decoration, but not as a core substance. On the usage of turquoise, coral, and lapis lazuli for decorating armours cf.
LAROCCA 2006b:15a. According to HELLER, the definition of bse as “rhinoceros leather” could refer to the hardness and
resistance of such a leather (2006:41n14).
Although there is a possibility that the lexemes bse ~ bswe (mo) denoting certain kind of deities in Phur pa tradition are
not etymologically related to our bse, compare bswe khrab for bse khrab in the fragment cited below from CANTWELL/MAYER
2008 and messengers/protectors bse mentioned several times in BOORD 1993 (see above). Furthermore, in a more detailed
description of bse goddesses we read: “[The Master] dressed [them] all in strong coats of armour” (bswe khrab re re lus la
bkon, trslr. after CANTWELL/MAYER 2008:47 & n.33). This confirms our hypothesis that the group of deities called bse derives
its name in all probability from bse denoting a kind of substance.
For the discussion of se as an ethnonym see RAMBLE 1997.
2
Cf. also the reconstructed PTB stem *b-sey on STEDT: http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/123;
25.02.2015.
 120

was used in varnishing process. This semantic change is marked by the changed position of bse
within compounds from attributive (X-bse) to determinative (bse-X). It follows that, for syntactic
reasons, khrab bse cannot be interpreted as *”leather armour; an armour made from leather”; such a
translation would have required *bse khrab.

Unfortunately, information concerning traditional tanning in Tibet that is now at our disposal is
more than scanty. The only reference I was able to trace comes from RAMSAY’s dictionary of Ladakhi
where under the lemma tanner we read: “hlamkhan (WT *sla mkhan? – JB). The art of tanning is
unknown in Ladák, where most of the leather used is imported from India. The local mode of dealing
with a fresh hide is to wash it, dry it, again to wash it, then to rub it well with oil and to leave it to
dry. The whole operation takes about four days, and the result is a very bad leather.” (1890:156b).
This kind of tanning through rubbing fat into hide was probably referred to in CT as mñed “to rub; to
tan, curry, dress” (J:195a; cf. also dialectal meanings in CDTD.V:456).

However, bse, as attested in OT sources, had one more meaning. To wit, it denoted a kind of plant
from which horse enclosures could be made (cf. bse’i cho rol) and about which we can surmise that it
had many branches (cf. bse’i maṅ lag). Now, apart from its usually glossed meanings, we find bse
explained also as a variant form of se ba “gse ba, bse ba 1rose-bush, rose-tree; rose; 3(sic!) thorn?”
(J:575b). It seems justified to identify the CT se ba with the OT bse when referring to a plant.

To conclude, a preliminary hypothesis is put forward according to which *(b)se originally denoted a
thorn or a kind of thorny plant used in dressing hide in order to remove remaining fleshy parts from
the inward surface.1 From this usage the meaning “tanned” developed to refer to hide that
underwent the process of currying. As this was the only or the main kind of native tanning known
to Tibetans at that time, the word started to be used also to describe imported wares made from
tanned and varnished or lacquered leather. Apart from the above mentioned lacquered armours
imported from Yi, Tibetan tantric texts introduce Chinese craftsmen who are said to be responsible

1
Should the original meaning of *(b)se turn out to have been *”thorn(y)” one could deem it as a derivative from so “tooth”
through the diminutive form se’u “a little tooth” (J:577b). It seems plausible that the primary meaning of *se ba was
“toothed” (lit. “one of small teeth”; cf. Eng. fine toothed) that subsequently developed to denote various species of shrubby
plants. Beside se/gse/bse ba one could consider also mtshe “an evergreen grass which does not grow more than a cubit in
length and is burnt as incense also mixed with snuff in Tibet” (D:1040b-1a), “sm. mtshe ldum” (Gs:895c; mtshe ldum “a type
of Chinese ephedra”, Gs:895c) and tshe pad “Ephedra saxatilis, a little alpine shrub with red berries, which are said to be
roasted and pulverized, to give greater pungency to snuff” (J:450b) as further derivatives of *se “shrub”. In the context of
the hypothesised semantic development of *se and bse, worth mentioning is the Eng. word family of shrub, scrub and to
scrub. The original meaning of the latter word is assumed to have been “to clean by rubbing with a scrub” (KLEIN
1966:1404b).
As further derivatives of *se one could take into consideration the following formations: rtse (mo) “1point, top, peak,
summit; 2point, particular spot” (J:440a); gze ma “more fully gze ma ra mgo, a thorny plant, the thorn of which resembles the
horns of goats” (D:1107b); gze mo “porcupine” (Gs:972a); kha gze “sm. kha gzi = a rake” (Gs:107a), Tshangra khase “wooden
hayfork, winnowing rake”, Balti khatse “forked instrument, fork (for eating)” (CDTD.583, s.v. kha tse sic!); se bo “gray”
(J:575b; cf. hereto the etymology of Eng. tawny and tan (A) both derived from the verb to tan); sed “a file” (J:576a); gse “2to
separate, divide” (Gs:1158a); gsed “to pick, sort, assort, hair, wool; to pull or pluck in pieces” (J:590a), Jirel cEA “with go̖ or ʈā
to comb one’s own hair”, Mkharmar ncA “to get torn (e.g. of cloth), Arik “to hoe up (weeds)” (CDTD.V:1333; *”to card”?);
gses śiṅ Dzongkha “spruce” (lit. “thorned tree”; file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/28-07-GSA.html; 25.02.2015).
 121

for preparing phur bu from bse.1 Mentioning China in this context is not at all extraneous; its
lacquerwares, famous already in antiquity, were among the most important objects traded on the
Silk Road (HCCA.3:292). Chinese lacquer was produced from resin of lacquer tree - Toxicodendron
vernicifluum (formerly Rhus verniciflua; Ch. qi shu 漆树2) – and used “to beautify, waterproof, and
protect eating vessels, clothing, household objects, and weapons”3. The change from “tanned” to
“varnished” could have been additionally triggered by the Chinese language, when Tibetans came
into contact with Chinese lacquerware (xipi), and similarly sounding terms xi and/or qi4. The further
step in the semantic development of the term consisted of the shift from “lacquerwares” to
“lacquer” as one of “divine” substances listed already in OT documents along gold, turquoise, silver,
etc. The latter change is evidenced by Dzongkha bse “lacquer” (EDPD:475b). It is no wonder that
lacquer used for manufacturing lacquerware - luxury goods par excellence – and being at the same
time crucial to Tibetan weaponry, was referred to together with other valuables like gold, turquoise
or iron.

The form bse could be secondary having resulted from a back formation: *khrab se (< *khrab se ba)
“varnished lamellar armour” > khrab bse (dittography) > bse “varnished; varnish, lacquer”. The form
might have subsequently spread to replace also the original *se when denoting a plant; cf. the above
cited OT bse’i cho rol and bse(’i) maṅ lag. This process could have additionally been triggered by the
high value ascribed to bse “varnish, lacquer” mainly in ritual context.5

1
“In particular, in the country of Tibet I have had one hundred and eight iron kīlas prepared by Tibetan blacksmiths,
another one hundred eight iron kīlas crafted by the most excellent blacksmiths of Nepal, one hundred meditation kīlas of
acasia wood made by outcaste artisans amidst the terrible screams in the charnel grounds and one hundred kīlas of black
rosewood (i.e., black varnished wood – JB) fashioned by Chinese craftsmen.” (BOORD 1993:123).
“There is also a kīla which has the blessings of Krodhamañjuśrī (Yamāntaka) which was carved by Chinese experts from
black rosewood (i.e., black varnished wood – JB). It is eight of my finger-widths in length and is for use in mediatation. The
name of this kīla is *Jvalanuttara (sic!), “Supreme Radiance”, and whoever continues to hold it will very quickly see the
face of the deity Vajrakumāra.” (BOORD 1993:124). Once more we have here a clear reference to the glossy appearance of
objects made from bse (Skt. √jval “to burn brightly, blaze, glow, shine”, MW:428b); see the above discussion on the qualities
of rhinoceros horns.
2
Only the so-called “true lacquer” (also known as urushi) is derived from Toxicodendron vernicifluum which is native to
China (later replanted also in Japan, Korea, and South-East Asia) and grows at 500m (ANNINOS 2000:107b). According to
ANNINOS, its “lacquer-sap hardens upon exposure to oxygen, but only within certain ranges of temperature and humidity”
(ibid., p.101b) and what distinguishes it from varnish (shellac, tung oil, crystalline resin of pinaceous sandarac tree) is that
the latter “is more permeable than lacquer” (ibid., p.106b) and dissolves in acetone or alcohols (ibid., p.107b).
3
BARBIERI-LOW 2007:77. On Chinese lacquerwork in general see BARBIERI-LOW 2007:76-83.
For linguistic reflexes compare Lepcha gya tśo “lac-dye” (MG:61a) and gya (tśo) bik “the lac-insect, Coccus lacca” (MG:61a)
which have obviously been borrowed from Tibetan rgya tshos “Lack” (WTS.13:418a). All three compounds point clearly to
the Chinese (rgya) origin of lac production.
4
Ch. qī 漆 “lacquer; lacquer tree” (SCHUESSLER 2007:420). SCHUESSLER relates Chinese qī5 “lacquer tree, lacquer, varnish”
(Later Han Chinese tshit, Minimal Old Chinese *tshit) etymologically to Tibetan tshi ba “tough, sticky matter” and possibly
rtsi “juice, lacquer” (ibid.).
5
Alternatively, bse could be a denominal derivation by means of the prefix b-, cf.: kha “mouth” ~ bka’ “word”; khra
“piebald” ~ bkra “variegated”; zan “food” ~ bzan “fodder”; zo “figure” ~ bzo “craft”; śwa “”high water” ~ bśa’ “inundation”.
Whether it is etymologically the same morpheme which is used in conjugation to mark V2 and some V3 forms remains to
be clarified.
The presented analysis does not dismiss the possibility that there may have been in Tibet some armours made from
rhinoceros hide but the compounds khrab bse and later bse khrab in their origins did not refer to them as such. They
denoted “varnished armour” without making any reference to the origin of the hide that has been used for their
manufacturing.
 122

[T] sku rten du khrab bseʼ sna bcu daṅ / ldoṅ prom gyi ral gyi mdor cod / (263) gñis gsol to (PT 1287:262-3)
“[Dba’s dbyi tshab] offered as sku rten ten kinds of varnished lamellar armour and two sword sheaths
[made from] (lit. of) white copper.”

21 khram skya
BYD:59a: śiṅ khram skya ba.
WTS.8:102b: weißliches Kerbholzregister (s.v. khram).
DTH:52: registre gris; RÓNA-TAS.1956:166: crop-khram; n.25: skya = rkya; CHANGK.1959:136: grey register; UEBACH.2008:63: lit.
whitish/light/pale tally; written in black and white on paper; DOTSON.2009:124n318: pale tally, seems to indicate a record
kept on paper; DOTSON.2011a:91n23: “pale tally”, a tally kept on paper.

[E] *khram skya bo “a pale criss-cross [piece of wood]”

[M] (N) plain tally
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] skya sa / thaṅ khram
[A] -skya. For the proposed meaning of skya compare: skya “4plain, without distinguishing colour”
(D:96b); skya sgam “a plain wooden box (without paint or varnish)” (Gs:65c); skya źwa “a plain white
hat, cap” (Gs:66c); dpon skya “lay officials” (Gs:652b; as opposed to red-dressed monks).1 As against
this, dmar po indicates that a device called khram dmar po was dyed with a red paint. A well known
practice of not only Tibetans but also various other Central Asiatic peoples was to use colour terms
in categorisation; to cite only some OT phrases: khram dmar po, mgo nag, dkar cag, kha mar, myig mar,
etc. According to Tibetan concepts, skya- does not denote any colour and so was not used in this
way. In consequence, we cannot juxtapose khram skya with khram dmar po when discussing their
functions in the administrative system of the Tibetan Empire: the latter one denoted a concrete kind
of document whereas the former one was probably a mere generic term.2

khram- and its derivatives. The meaning of khram, according to CT dictionaries, is “a cut or mark on
wood, incision” (Cs:14b). To ascertain the exact meaning of khram in OT records the following
examples are cited:
mgo nag ’greṅ la rje myed (112) rje skos la / rṅog chags dud la khram thob (PT 126:111-2)
“The black-headed upright ones have no lord; appoint a lord [for them] and tally (lit. cast a tally
for) maned animals!”

rkaṅ / (91) ʼgros kyi rnams kyaṅ / sṅa slad khram btab ste // myi ʼchugs par bgyi (PT 1042:90-1)
“The herded livestock, before and after [one] tallied [it] (lit. casted a tally), was prepared without
being mistaken.”

1
śiṅ skya, that forms at first glance an interesting parallel to our compound, is quoted from two CT sources by UEBACH
2008:62-3n17 who translates it as “pale wood”. It could probably be understood also as “light wood [colour]”.
skya ris, cited by UEBACH (ibid., p.63) to support her argumentation on khram skya, does not refer to material on which a
sketch is made (either a fabric, wall or paper), but only points to its lighter colour than the colour of a drawing itself. In the
same way the material could have been also wood as long as the ink colour was dark and the colour of a wooden tablet
light. skya- connotes a (relatively) light-coloured background of a sketch.
2
Syntactic difference between the compound khram skya and the NP khram dmar po could be tentatively explained in
terms of lexicalisation of the first one as a consequence of a more frequent use of a device denoted by it: *khram skya bo >
khram skya.
 123

rgyal gyis thaṅ bcad de khram / (106) gñis bgyis te // gcig ni źa ʼbriṅ rje bo thaṅ chen po la gtad // khram
gcig ni skyibs lug la / (107) gtad (PT 1042:105-7)
“The officiant1, having decided the extent of power, made two tallies. One was delivered to the
entourage, lords of great authority. One tally was delivered to the sheep mount.”

rkya źiṅ dor phyedaṅ drug drug mñam bar khram du btab pa las // źiṅ yig dkar cag ’dris pa’i ’og du [---]
(PT 1078bis:16)
“upon adding (lit. casting) 5 ½ dor of cropland to the tally2 so that it equals 6, after writing an
index [to] a fields register [---]”

khram ’di la mchis pa (ITN 1643:r1; H.2, trslr. after TLTD.2:199:A)

“what appears on this khram”
From these we can infer that khram could contain certain information (khram ’di la mchis), be made
(bgyis), cast (btab, thob), delivered (gtad), or certain information could be added (lit. casted) to khram
(khram du btab). PT 126 and the first passage quoted from PT 1042 indicate that khram was a means
intended for registering various items. PT 1078bis, although incomplete, seems to refer to a practice
of writing down a fields register (źiṅ yig) that most probably specified types of arable land together
with their size (cf. ITJ 834r, ITJ 1243) after the relevant units had been listed in a khram.
Furthermore, khram and its derivatives are used in connection with two other verbs, rtsi ba and spo
ba, to refer to various administrative practices which we should now examine more closely.

Some degree of regularity may be observed in the way the verb rtsi “to count” and the phrase rtsis
bgyid “to make an account” are used in the OTA: different objects are counted or accounted for after
they were prepared or carried out some time (in most cases one year) before3:
678/9 680/1 nor brtsis
bkyon bab
698/9 bkyon phab 699/700 nor brtsis
705/6 bkyon phab 707/8 nor brtsis
706/7 bkyon phab
755/6 S bran spyugste / mtoṅ sod du bton 755/6 W nor brtsis
756/7 nor gyi mju(g) brtsis
690/1 phyiṅ ril btab 691/2 phyiṅ rild [...] rtsis bgyis
718/9 pyiṅ rildaṅ / sog rild bgyis 719/20 phyiṅ ril gyi rtsis daṅ / sog maʼi rtsis bgyis
719/20 pyiṅ ril btab 720/1 pyiṅ rild gyi rtsis bgyis
721/2 thaṅ khram chen po btab 722/3 lhag cad brtsis
729/30 g.yul sprad 729/30 mun magi snon god brtsis
738/9 S chad ka bcad 738/9 W cad ka brtsis
746/7 ʼbrog sogi mkhos bgyis 747/8 ʼbrog sogi rtsis gyi mj(u)g bcade
758/9 S chad ka bgraṅs 758/9 W chad kaʼi rtsis bgyis

1
rgyal in PT 1042 denotes a person who is actively engaged in performing funeral ritual. I assume that the term rgya bon
“bon priest [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets” (< *rgya thag brgyad kyi bon po) was originally intended here.
The primary *rgya bon has in the first step been etymologised as *rgyal bon and subsequently reduced to rgyal. This folk
etymology explains why rgyal and not the proper form rgyal po is used throughout the text. For details on *rgya thag brgyad
and the possible reasons for the replacement of rgya by rgyal see s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad.
2
The construction khramTERM ’debs is, as far as I am aware, not attested in any other OT document. I assume its meaning
differs from that of khramABS ’debs.
3
There seem to be only two kinds of events that did not need any preparations. First of them was making account and
counting of extinct lineages or households (rabs cad) carried out in the year 691/2 and again in 733/4. Another one were
nominations accounts of which were made (rtsis bgyis) in the years 719/20, 723/4, 730/1, 731/2, 742/3 and 745/6.
 124

Some events, however, can be related to each other only with limited certainty:
673/4 ʼbrog mkhos chen po bgyis 674/5 źugs loṅ dmar pho brtsis
708/9 ʼbaṅs la gser khral maṅ po bsdus 709/10 ru lagi źugs loṅ dmar pho brtsis
707/8 lṅa brgya stoṅ bu rjer bcos 708/9 sku sruṅs gyi khram dmar pho brtsis
711/2 pha los maṅ pho bkug 712/3 ru gsum gyi khram dmar pho brtsis
743/4 rgod g.yuṅ gyi pha los cen po bkug 744/5 dmag myi khram skya brtsis

The above juxtapositions evidence the existence in OT of two similar phrases, i.e. rtsis bgyid and rtsi,
which are used consistently across the OTA in concrete expressions:
rtsi: nor / mjug / lhag cad / snon god / cad ka / źugs loṅ / khram / khram skya
rtsis bgyid: phyiṅ rild / sog ma / chad ka
The phrases cad ka brtsis and chad ka’i rtsis bgyid demonstrate that rtsi and rtsis bgyid cannot be
treated as synonyms referring to the same administrative measures. In the first case chad ka
?“additional taxes”? were decided (bcad) in summer and counted in the following winter. The
second clause, however, referred obviously to a different kind of event as chad ka had already been
counted (bgraṅs) in summer before in winter an account (rtsis) was made.1 Accordingly, rtsi should be
translated as “to count, calculate” and rtsis bgyid as “to make an account”. Thus, translating the
above clauses we obtain the following pairs of events: accusation of crime ~ confiscation of wealth
(lit. counting of wealth)2; preparation of sheaves (see s.v. phyiṅ rild) ~ making an account of sheaves;
preparation of straw (see s.v. sog rild) ~ making an account of straw; committing a battle ~ drawing
(lit. making account of) a balance of border guards (see s.vv. snon god & mun mag); deciding chad ka ~
counting of chad ka; administration of summer pastures and hay-lands (’brog sog) ~ counting of
summer pastures and hay-lands; counting of chad ka ~ making an account of chad ka. By analogy, one
should think that counting of red źugs loṅ was preceded by undertaking necessary administrative
measures (mkhos) related to pastures and by collecting taxes. Counting of khram, on the other hand,
seems to have followed different kinds of population census.

Another verb the meaning and the use of which should be clarified in order to enable us a better
understanding of the semantics of khram is spo glossed for CT with “to alter, change; to remove, to
shift; to transpose, transplant; to alter, to mend, to correct” (J:331b). The following sentences
demonstrate its usage in OT sources:
yul ṅas po las // (185) ’phan yul du myiṅ spos so (PT 1287:184-5)
“[One] changed the name from ‘the land Ṅas po’ to ‘’Phan yul’.”

btsan po dbyar stod pho dam mdo na bźugs śiṅ / dbyar smad sum chu bor sposte (ITJ 750:56)

1
An analogous distinction should be made between rabs cad gyi rtsis bgyid “to make an account of extinct families” (ITJ
750:109) and rabs chad rtsi “to count extinct families” (ITJ 750:267).
2
Interestingly, three out of four incidents were immediately preceded by the death of a btsan po. In year 676/7 Khri maṅ
slon died (ITJ 750:66-7), in year 704/5 Khri ’dus sroṅ died (ITJ 750:148) and about 754/5 Khri lde gtsug brtsan died. At least
in the last case we know that the btsan po died a violent death. It seems legitimate to ask whether there was some
involvement of a third party in two other cases too or, at least, whether the accusation of crime (bkyon phab) was related to
the death of a btsan po?
 125

“The btsan po, while residing in the early summer in Pho dam mdo, moved [his residence] in late
summer to Sum chu bo.”

dbyar ʼdun lha gab du ʼbon da rgyal daṅ / blon chen po khri gzigs gyis bsduste / mṅan gyi khab soe khram
spos (ITJ 750:160-1)
“’bon da rgyal and grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having summoned the summer
council at Lha gab, changed the tally of mṅan’s khab sos.”

phagi lo’i ston ’bul bar rtse rjes gnaṅste // dkar chag spospa las (ITJ 844:2-3)
“[In] the autumn of the swine year, having allowed to give [the wheat], rtse rje changed the
register.”1
These examples confirm that the direct object of spo needs to stand in ABS but the oblique argument
(expressing in this case the TARGET of the action) has to be marked with TERM as demonstrated by the
first two examples. Thus, spo in the meaning “to change sth. into sth.” needs the following argument
structure: ‘AERG OABS AdTERM spo’. Now, we can conclude that changing the contents of khram or dkar cag,
for instance, by registering new amounts of relevant articles, was referred to as spo.

To sum up our investigation into the semantics of khram in OT documents, I propose to differentiate
between its two main meanings: 1. “an account kept by means of a tally stick” (khram ’debs lit. “to
cast an account”, i.e. “to tally”; khram rtsi “to count up an account “; khram spo “to change an
account”; khram la mchi “to be in an account”; khram du ’debs “to add (lit. cast) to an account”); 2.
“tally stick” (khram bgyid “to make a tally stick”; khram gtod “to deliver a tally stick”).2

Additionally the following derivatives of khram are attested in OT documents: khram pa, lit. “an
account-man”, i.e. “an official responsible for keeping accounts by means of a tally”; khram bu, lit.
“child-tally” (cf. Eng. foil); khram ma, lit. “mother-tally” (cf. Eng. stock)3; khram tshan “a tally-group”4;
chad khram “an account of punishments” (?)5; thaṅ khram “a tally of jurisdiction” (see s.v.); baṅ khram
“an account of a store-room”. As these examples clearly demonstrate, khram could be used in
Tibetan Empire for a wide range of administrative means.

Returning now to the main point of our analysis, I propose to interpret khram in khram skya as “an
account kept by means of a tally stick” assuming the meaning “plain account (kept by means of a
tally stick)” for the compound. khram skya is documented in its sole occurrence as an object of the

1
The clause dkar chag spos pa las appears also in ITJ 1379:r2 but the document is too fragmentary to allow any further
conclusions.
2
Cf. an analogous semantic development of Eng. tally (KLEIN 1966:1568a) which still retains its original meaning “a current
score or amount” beside “a piece of wood scored across with notches for the items of an account and the split into halves,
each party keeping one” in which case it can be called tally stick (Oxford Dictionary,
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tally?q=tally; 31.05.2014).
3
A similar practice of dividing a so-called split tally into stock and foil was known in mediaeval Europe.
4
I understand this term as referring to a group of people (not necessarily corresponding to the administrative unit tshan)
a joint account of which is prepared on one tally. On this compound see also TAKEUCHI 1994:860n32 and UEBACH 2008:59.
5
It could be that chad khram denoted originally “an account of additional taxes” (chad- < *chad ka) but had lost its meaning
and has been re-interpreted for religious needs literally as *chad kyi khram “an account of punishments”.
 126

verb rtsi. Regarding the context in which the clause appears, the interpretation “to count up a plain
account” seems to be more plausible than *“to count plain tally sticks”.

Linguistic notes. In the light of the semantic analysis of the OT khram presented above, I assume that
the CT meaning of khram “a cut or mark on wood, incision” (Cs:14b) is of secondary development
derived probably from the compound khram śiṅ. After the fall of the Tibetan Empire in the middle of
the 9th century, khram denoting tally ceased to be used in the by that time already completely ruined
state administration passing, instead, to the sphere of religion as an attribute of some deities and
changing its form to khram śiṅ “tally-wood” - an evidence for the lost of the original meaning “tally
stick” for khram. The new meaning “notch” appeared subsequently as a result of the re-
interpretation of khram śiṅ as “a notched [piece of] wood”, lit. “a [piece of] wood [of] notches”.

Already THOMAS (1957:101) noted the relationship between khra bo/mo “piebold, two-coloured”
(J:49a) and khram although he translated the phrase śiṅ khra mo “criss-cross piece of wood” (ITJ
734:6r244) falsely as “a wooden rack (?)” (1957:90) or “cross-grained wood” (ibid., p.101). khram
*“criss-cross [piece of wood]” (> OT “tally”) is assumed to have been derived through clipping from
khra mo *“criss-cross” (> CT “two-coloured”). This process could have been initiated by phrases like
śiṅ khra mo developing to a compound śiṅ khram1 and subsequently to khram by the reduction of the
first semantically redundant member as the term became to be used exclusively for wooden devices.
For other cognates, cf.: khra “2stripes; 3the grain in wood” (Gs:138a); khra bcad “room divider, screen”
(Gs:138a); khra khra “schwarz-weiß gemustert, bunt, beschmutzt” (WTS.8:97b); khra bo Balti,
Tshangra “black and white”, Tabo “many-coloured, striped, black and white”, Western Drokpas
“striped black and white” (CDTD:900); khra ma “khra khra bar bkra ba’i cha nas skar khuṅ gi khra
ma” (GC:90b), “framed window” (Gs:138b); khra śiṅ “zebrawood tree” (Gs:138c), but also rked/sked
khra “[a wooden slip] striped [in the] middle” (see DOTSON 2007b:35-6 for more details on the term)2.
The use of khra in compounds like rked khra to denote a specific legal document by referring to its
physical features (a stripe through the middle of a slip) could have contributed to its further
semantic development as seen in khra ma “1a verdict in a law case” (Gs:138b)3: rked khra “[a woodslip]
striped [in the] middle” > *“a waist-document”, i.e. “a legal document having a waist in the middle”.
Later on, a group of lexemes denoting various sorts of legal documents has been composed by
means of khra, like, for example, bka’ khra “Schlichtungsrechtsentscheid” (CÜPPERS 2004:30); gtan
khra “agreement, stipulation, convention; order or decision passed; a decree” (D:521a),
“Herrscherurkunden” (CÜPPERS 2004:53); ’dum khra “contract, agreement” (J:278b); spro khra
“Handliste zur Übergabe von Besitztümern” (CÜPPERS 2004:66); bar khra “Vergleich zwischen zwei

1
This compound is actually mentioned by LACOUPERIE as shing-tchram “a stick with knife-cut notches” (1885:421); cf. also
below.
2
The term rked khra could perhaps refer to the third group of woodslips as described by FRANCKE 1914:48-9, see below.
3
According to Mkhas pa lde’u‘s Rgya bod kyi chos ’byuṅ rgyas pa (p.262), rked khra was used to pronounce a legal judgement
in case it was unfavourable to the complainant; apus DOTSON 2007b:35.
 127

Parteien” (CÜPPERS 2004:69); rtsis khra “Abrechnung” (CÜPPERS 2004:78); bzlos khra “Landkarte zum
Disput, Disputschlichtung(surkunden)” (CÜPPERS 2004:87).

Archaeological surveys. FRANCKE (1914:48-9) reported on the following types of wooden documents
included in STEIN’s collection: 1. “tablets of a length of about 30-40 cm., square in section. They show
notches at their edges”; 2. “short wooden tablets, coloured red on the surface. The right lower
corner is generally cut out purposely [...]. They also show notches and short notes in writing.”; 3.
“kind of document, marked by a broad stroke of red colour, running round the middle. [...] On one of
these documents the red stroke was apparently painted with blood.” In addition, he mentions
certain wooden documents that were “furnished with a carefully cut socket at one end of the tablet”
which “was filled with clay, and a seal was probably impressed on the latter” (ibid., pp.52-3).
VOROB’EV-DESJATOVSKIJ1 divided wooden documents from MALOV collection into four groups: 1. Slips
9×1,5 cm in size with one personal name being probably identity cards of soldiers; 2. Slips of
different size bearing the name, the rank of the addressee, the place of destination and sometimes
the name of the sender. These were attached to letters and sealed with clay; 3. Small sticks painted
red on one side with a few incoherent words; 4. The rest of the documents being letters. It seems
that the second group of Francke can be identified with the third and the fourth with the second
group of VOROB’EV-DESJATOVSKIJ classification.

TAKEUCHI also describes a group of about 80 woodslips from Mazār Tāgh one side of which is painted
red. They have no seal cases which fact could point to their usage for military purposes (2003:44; see
Fig.42). There are also unpainted woodslips without seal case but there seems to be no painted
woodslips with seal cases. I assume that the painted ones were termed khram dmar po “red tally” (cf.
ITJ 750:106, 112, 167, 187, 208, 299) as opposed to khram skya “plain tally” which were made of
unpainted wood (see Fig.53). In this case, -skya is not used to mark a special colour of tallies but to
emphasize that these were of natural light colour, i.e. without additional dye.

Fig.4 ITN 1249A

Fig.5 ITN 916A

1
I summarise the results of his studies here after URAY 1954b:304.
2
Source: http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=9528633613;recnum=6873;index=1; 27.02.2015.
3
Source: http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=9538257016;recnum=6540;index=1; 27.02.2015.
 128

I was able to identify only two wooden documents which are referred to in their texts as khram: ITN
1643 and H.2 (cf. TLTD.2:199-200). Although their readings are uncertain, they seem to differ from
each other concerning both their shape and contents.1

Unfortunately, we still do not possess any detailed classification of Tibetan woodslips found in
Central Asia that would combine their physical characteristics with content’s typology.2 An even
more problematic issue is whether khrams used in the 7th and 8th centuries in Central Tibet and
portrayed in the OTA where somehow similar in their shape and usage to those known from Central
Asiatic excavations and dated to the 9th century?

Historical context. As the archeological findings demonstrate, the majority of woodslips found so far
is unpainted. Thus, red tallies were obviously the “marked” ones. It is still difficult, however, to see
any functional distinction between “red tallies” and “pale tallies” although we can try to make some
general observations.3

In three cases, red tally (khram dmar po) seems to be related to the office of lṅa brgya:
692/3 khram dmar po btab 693/4 lṅa brgya chen po bskos
707/8 lṅa brgya stoṅ bu rjer bcos 708/9 sku sruṅs gyi khram dmar pho brtsis
712/3 ru gsum gyi khram dmar po brtsis 713/4 lṅa brgya bskos4

After carrying out a red tally in the year 692/3 great lṅa brgyas were nominated. Administrative
actions concerning the functionaries lṅa brgya and stoṅ bu were followed by a red tally of sku sruṅs
who constituted stoṅ bu chuṅ (UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:318n18)5. In the year 712/3 red tallies were
counted up and in the next year heads of five hundred districts were nominated anew.6 From what
has been said till now it appears that keeping a tally (khram) aimed at dividing the society according
to the military, civil, and economic needs. Seen in this perspective, counting up plain tallies of

1
The second document was accessible to me only from TLTD.2:199-200. The fact that none of the OT documents written
on paper and published by TAKEUCHI (1995 & 1998) mentions khram or refers to itself by this term confirms the hypothesis
put forward below according to which a khram denoted only registers kept on wood. As opposed to this, dkar cag occurs,
also self-referentially, in some contracts (cf. PT 1119:5, 14; ITJ 844:3; ITJ 914:5; ITJ 1379:r2) what would suggest that this
term denoted registers kept on paper. khram and dkar cag differed additionally in their contents. Due probably to the
nature of the materials used (wood and paper respectively), khram was used solely for noting down amounts of various
items by means of notches cut into it, whereas dkar cag could contain also other informations like names, addresses or
dates in case of contracts.
2
For a short description of different types of woodslips see TAKEUCHI 2003.
3
Obviously, not every unpainted woodslip can be called “pale tally”. This term should be reserved exclusively for those
woodslips that were unpainted and were used as tallies. The question whether all unpainted tallies were denoted by the
term khram skya remains open.
Interestingly, two kinds of khram distinguished by their colours were incorporated as magic devices into the Buddhist
tantric mythology, cf. “Two important kinds of khram śiṅ are the bdud kyi khram śiṅ and the srin po’i khram śiṅ. The colour of
the former is black, the srin po’i khram śiṅ is yellow. The notches of these two khram śiṅ are red-coloured.” (NEBESKY-
WOJKOWITZ 1956:358).
4
In both cases, in the years 693/4 and 713/4, immediately after appointing (bskos) lṅa brgya [chen po] a mention of grazing
lands (’brog; ITJ 750:115) and places with unripe and sunburnt crops (sṅo sa skya sa; ITJ 750:189) is made. Thus, we obtain the
following sequence of events: issuing red tallies (692/3; ITJ 750:112) ~ counting up red tallies (712/3; ITJ 750:187) >
appointing heads of five hundred districts (693/4; ITJ 750:114) ~ appointing heads of five hundred districts (713/4; ITJ
750:189) > determining mountain pastures (of Rtsaṅ cen po) (693/4; ITJ 750:115) ~ regarding lands with unripe and
sunburnt crops (713/4; ITJ 750:189).
5
The term stoṅ bu chuṅ is not attested in OT documents. It is possible that, similarly to lṅa brgya, OT stoṅ bu denoted both
an administrative unit and its head.
6
Two other occurrences of khram dmar po accompany population census in Rtsaṅ chen (ITJ 750:106) and in Dags po
(ITJ:750:208).
 129

soldiers (dmag myi) was only one incident in a whole series of events carried out to meet specific
administrative needs:
[743/4] summer Issueing of tablets for census1;
winter Summoning of populace [obliged] to military and civil [duties];
[744/5] summer Counting up of plain tallies2 of soldiers;
winter Organisation of soldiers.3
From this juxtaposition one could tentatively infer that pale tallies contained informations about all
male able-bodied adults that could be enlisted as soldiers.

I cannot agree with the hypothesis according to which khram skya were registers kept on paper. The
interpretation presented here differs from this hypothesis in three main points:
- byaṅ bu ’bor = “to issue a tablet” not “to discard a tablet”;
- khram skya = “plain account kept by means of a tally stick” not “pale tally written in black and
white on paper”;
- khram dmar po śog śog ser po la spo ba = “to transfer red accounts to yellow paper” not “to
change the red tally into yellow paper”1.

1
I cannot support the interpretation of UEBACH (2008:60) who argues for the translation of bor here as “discarded” (for
which the verb spoṅ is mostly used in OT documents). I propose to interpret bor as a “verbaliser” (cf. J:396a: “4in particular
combinations, e.g. gom pa”) similar to CT ’debs or MT rgyab (all three verbs, apart from being used as verbalisers in different
periods of Tibetan language, share the core meaning “to throw, to cast”). Compare OT collocations: bka’ taṅ ’bor “to issue
bka’ taṅ”; mna’ ’bor “to swear”; bro ’bor “id.”; g.yab ’bor “to wave”; śol ’bor “to intercalate” (lit. “to cast intercalation”, cf.
Or.15000/426:r4; TLTD.2:141, TAKEUCHI 1998:179, text 542); bsam ’bor “to take counsel” (TLTD.III:191a; ~ *blo ’debs “blo ʼbul
ba’am gros ston pa”, DSM:576b, s.v. blo gdab pa) and CT gom pa ’bor “to make a step, to pace” (J:73a) or dmod pa ’bor “1to
curse, to execrate; 2to swear; 3to pronounce a prayer or conjuration; 4to affirm” (J:423b). I assume that all these phrases
were already highly lexicalised during the period of OT language and the verbaliser was fixed; thus, we find in OT records
byaṅ bu ’bor beside khram ’debs “to issue (lit. cast) a tally; to tally” and not *”to throw (away) a tally”. This interpretation is
indirectly confirmed by the parallel entry from Or.8212:187:1 where we read: bod yul gyi pha los gyi mgo (read: rtsis mgo)
mdzad “[One] prepared the initial account of the populace of Tibet.” - an affirmative statement from the summer of the
year 743/4 reporting the preparation of an administrative means and not discarding it as claimed by UEBACH.
It will not be extraneous to mention in this context the later tantric reading of khram as denoting a kind of “magic
weapon serving to destroy the life of an enemy, the number of notches should correspond to the number of years of the
potential victim.” (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:358). This interpretation could have developed under the influenced or at least
been triggered by the very collocation khram ’debs in which the verb has been read literally, just as UEBACH did, as “to
throw”; thus, *“to throw khram” > *“to throw khram[-weapon]”, ergo, khram = “a kind of weapon”. For a ritual usage of an
analogous device among Nakhi see ROCK 1952.2:590 who gives its transcription as 3k’o-1byu and equates it with Tibetan
khram śiṅ or khram kha’i śiṅ. The ritual power of the device is strengthened by the fact that it should be made from Rhus
verniciflus - the ‘varnish tree’ (ibid.). For the ritual significance of lacquer see s.v. khrab bse.
UEBACH (UEBACH/ZEISLER 2008:318n17) raised the question of reasons for mentioning byaṅ bu bor only once in the OTA and
its omission in other places that relate about the census (pha los). First of all, if we understand this phrase as “issued
tablets” and juxtapose it with khram ’debs the question will appear unfounded on the sole fact that khram ’debs were
administrative means referred to repeatedly in the records. Secondly, the Annals became more detailed as the time passed.
We can observe it comparing the entries from the first part where most of them are no longer than 2 lines, with those of
later dates comprising on average 4-5 lines. This was apparently related to the growing needs of the expanding state and
its newly introduced bureaucratic practices as evidenced by the intense administrative reforms undertaken during the
first half of the 8th century. Besides, as the OTA II clearly demonstrate, there were more than just one version of the text.
One can assume that some of them were more detailed than the others, and we actually do not know for what purposes the
text referred to as OTA I was composed and whether its various parts were not taken from versions composed for different
purposes and differening in contents. Finally, we still know too little about administrative practices in the Tibetan Empire
to decide what was of importance and what was not. Thus, we should prevent our own expectations from being projected
into field that still remains to a considerable degree unexplored.
2
It can be presumed that wooden tablets, byaṅ bu, into which counting notches have been cut became tallies, khram.
3
Whether the transfer of red tallies to yellow paper, that was also carried out in the winter 744/5, was a logical
consequence of the events described above remains to be proven.
 130

First of all, we read in the OTA I (ll.296-7) that khram skya were counted up in the summer 744. But
paper (śog śog) is first mentioned in the winter 744/5 when khram dmar po should be transferred to it.
Secondly, should khram skya denote a paper-register, why isn’t it directly called śog śog as in l.299?2
Moreover, there is a logical inconsistency in the argumentation of UEBACH who, acknowledging that
khram in khram dmar po refers to a wooden tally, states “The importance of the reference in OTA I
lies in the change of material, from wood to paper.” (2008:64). However, analyzing the compound
khram skya she writes (ibid., p.63) “the account/writing of the ‘Whitish Tally’ (khram skya – JB)
reported in the year of 744/745 therefore may be taken to designate that it was written in black and
white on paper. In other words, the Whitish Tally was a tally only in name.” Thus, according to
UEBACH, khram in khram skya refers to a register in general but in khram dmar po to a register kept on
wood, i.e. to a tally. This interpretation could actually be defended by acknowledging that the
compound khram skya had already been lexicalised by that time and its meaning generalised to
denote all sorts of registers. Unfortunately, we do not possess any other evidence proving
unambiguously that khram has ever referred to registers others than tallies, i.e. accounts kept on
woodslips. As this meaning of khram is still well documented in CT, it is rather improbable that at
some earlier point it should have been used for registers written on paper.3 Furthermore, if one
nevertherless assumes that khram skya, although literally “pale tally”, denoted actually a register
held on paper, one should probably also define the difference between khram skya and dkar cag in OT
sources.4

Moreover, we know from archaeological excavations in Mazār Tāgh and Mīrān that woodslips were
still used there as tallies at the end of the 8th and in the 9th century, probably as long as these forts
remained in Tibetan hands.5 We know also from Chinese sources (BUSHELL 1880:446, PELLIOT 1961:6)
that around 648 Tibetans sent a mission to the Chinese court asking for workmen to manufacture
paper and that Chinese agreed to this request. Thus, Tibetans around the middle of the 7th century
not only knew paper but also possessed means for its manufacture. On this ground, one can
reasonably assume that already by that time they also possessed a word denoting paper which was
surely neither khram not khram skya.

1
On the interpretation of spo see above.
2
In addition, paper in this passage is explicitly qualified as ser po “yellow” and not skya (bo).
3
One should not forget the economic issues in this context. It is a well known fact that paper was a rare good dispensed
carefully even for such important purposes as copying sutras; cf. VAN SCHAIK Tales from the scriptorium II: It’s a scribe’s life,
http://earlytibet.com/2007/07/26/scriptorium-ii/; 27.02.2015. This question was also raised by FRANCKE who stated “Paper
must have been a rather rare article, for we find it occasionally mentioned as a little present offered to the addressee, if
the latter was in a high position.” (1914:53). Eventually, no Tibetan “tallies” on paper are known so far that could be
assigned to the period of the Tibetan Empire or shortly afterward.
4
For the difference between khram and dkar cag as seen in this work see the remarks made above.
5
LACOUPERIE, who mentions a device called by him shing-tshram, relates some contemporary cases of using notched sticks
among various Tibeto-Burman tribes as late as at the end of the 19th century (1885:421 and 429-34).
 131

Whatever their particular functions might have been, khram in general was in Central Tibet a device
used in tallying amounts of various items.1

[T] yul yul dmag myi khram skya brtsis / dgun po braṅ (298) brag mar na bźugs / dgun ʼdun skyi śo ma rar
/ blon chen po cuṅ bzaṅ daṅ blon skyes bzaṅ gñis gyis bsduste (299) dmag myi mkhos chen po bgyiste / btsan
po bkas khram dmar po śog śog ser po la spos par lo chig (ITJ 750:297-9)
“In every land [they] counted up plain tallies of soldiers. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag mar.
Both, grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ] and councillor [’Bal] skyes bzaṅ [ldoṅ tshab], having
summoned the winter council at Śo ma ra [of] Skyi [and] having made the great arrangement [of]
soldiers, transferred, upon btsan po’s order, red tallies (i.e. red accounts kept by means of tally sticks)
to yellow paper. Thus one year.”

22 mkho śam
CT ’khos śam
DSM:67b: gra sgrig gam sta gon byed pa ste.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:73n19: gra sgrig.
WTS.9:135a: = ’khos śam (“Anordung, Verwaltungsordnung“, WTS.9:156a).
DTH:31: levée d’hommes ultérieurement; n.5: sko au lieu de mkho; MACDONALD.1971:318: réorganisation administrative;
URAY.1972b:27: administrative arrangement; URAY.1975:161: organisation administrative; YAMAGUCHI.1992:59: mkho śam chen
pho signifies an extensive system for supplying human and material necessities (mkho rgyu gśom pa); p.73: mkho śam chen po
great conscription and requisition system; DOTSON.2007b:7: administration; DOTSON.2009:49: arrangement of the
administration; p.85: administration; DOTSON.2012:175: administration.

[E] *mkhos kyi śam “foundation of needs”

[M] (N) administrative arrangements, organisation; mkho śam bgyid “to undertake administrative
arrangements; to arrange, organise”
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] ’brog mkhos
[A] WTS.9:156a cites under ’khos śam the following phrase: gnas pa’i ’khos śam la mkhas pa kun (Dran
pa nam mkha’, Bden pa bon gyi mdzod sgo sgra ’grel ’phrul gyi lde mig 54) “all skilled in a ’khos śam of
lodgings” (trsl. - JB). The form mkhos is documented also in the following verbal expressions: ’phrul
kyis ni mkhos bśamste (PT 1290:r1), lit. “having prepared mkhos by means [of his] ’phrul”, and chos gra
sum bcu thams par ’khos bśam (Nel 12a2-3; trslr. after UEBACH 1987:106), lit. “[they] prepared ’khos as
thirty united Dharma schools” (trsl. - JB).2 In the latter cases –s is not elided on account of the fact
that mkhos/’khos here are not members of compounds but directly objects of the verb bśam(s) ~ CT
śom “to prepare, make ready, arrange, put in order, fit out” (J:564a).

1
Interestingly enough, the word khram appears for the first time in the OTA in the entry for the year 690/1, i.e. after
Tibetans have conquered some parts of Tarim Basin during the 660s and 670s. As observed by Marc Aurel STEIN, artefacts
found in Mīrān fort and in Mazār Tāgh being similar to each other “show a distinct falling-off from the standards of
technical skill exhibited by the remains at the Niya and Lou-lan Sites.” (1921.1:462). One could hypothesise that khram was
a device taken over by Tibetans from other civilisations most likely Chinese, Khotanese or Sogdian. And perhaps exactly in
these cultures one should look for the solution to the question of functional differences between plain and red tallies.
2
In Mkhas pa lde’u‘s Rgya bod kyi chos ’byuṅ rgyas pa (p.273), we find also the phrase yul gyi khod bśams pa (apus DOTSON
2012:174) “khod of the country that were prepared”. In the light of the above quoted examples, khod can be deemed to have
resulted from folk etymologisation of the original mkhos/’khos.
 132

With regard to its origin, mkhos (CT variant ’khos) is derived from mkho “to be necessary, needed”1
and through the suffix -s2 acquired the meaning “[things or actions] needed”, i.e. “needs,
necessaries”; compare hereto Lat. desiderata.3

The following OT formations containing mkhos are further attested: mkhos bgyid (repeatedly in
various OT texts, cf. OTDO) “to do necessaries; to serve the needs; to administer” (cf. Eng. to do the
needful, which is given by THOMAS as a rendering for mkho byed, TLTD.3:21); ’brog mkhos (ITJ 750:58)
“administration of summer pastures” (see s.v.); źiṅ mkhos (PT 1078bis:7, 29) “administration of
fields”.

I assume the primary meaning of *śam to have been *“foot; base, foundation; lower part”4; from it
the following lexemes have been derived: (g)śam “the lower part of a thing” (J:557a), “below, bottom,
lower” (Gs:1107a)5; gśam pa “people of lower area” (CDTD.8659); gśam ma “the following one, the one
lower, below, beneath” (Gs:1107b); (g)śom “to prepare, make ready, arrange, put in order, fit out”
(J:564a; *“to form a base for sth.” > “to prepare; to arrange”). For the reconstructed meaning of *śam
compare further: la (g)śam “foot of pass” (CDTD:8218); ñal gśam “foot of the bed” (CDTD:2916); and in
toponyms: Yar lha śam po *“The Foundation [of the World], the deity of Yar” and Myaṅ ro śam po
*“The Foundation [of] Myaṅ ro”.

The above survey allows us to reconstruct the underlying structure of mkho śam as *mkhos kyi śam,
lit. *“foundation of needs; needful (N)”, i.e. “foundation [for satisfying] needs; arrangements,
organisation”.6 Thus, the proper understanding of the phrase mkho śam bgyid would be *“to prepare
foundation [for satisfying] needs; to do arrangements”, that is “to arrange, to organise” when
applied within the administrative system. In the passage from PT 1288 quoted below, mkho śam
refers probably to defining military and civil duties of social groups that would form the foundation
for any other administrative means. As demonstrated s.v. khram skya, records (rtsis) were made first
when the relevant administrative measures had already been accomplished.

[T] blon che stoṅ rtsan gyis / moṅ pu sral ʼdzoṅ duʼ (28) bsduste / rgod g.yuṅ dbye źiṅ / mkho śam chen pho
bgyi baʼi rtsis mgo bgyi bar lo gchig (PT 1288:27-8)

1
For modern dialectal meanings cf. CDTD.V:103.
2
-s could be explained here as a suffix forming either collective or abstract nouns.
3
Further derivatives of mkhos/’khos include ’khos ka “standard of living, livelihood” (Gs:163b) and ’khos pa “(rñiṅ) chud mi
za ba” (BTC:321b; cf. Eng. needs as an adverb).
4
Cf. “= gśam the lower part of a thing, also that of a country” (D:1231b), Dzongkha gśam “foot” (EDPD:319b), and Sherpa
kang ba sham “foot” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/gnis?t=foot; 01.06.2014).
5
Cf. also the modern dialectal meanings listed in CDTD:8657.
6
The word internal -s in *mkhos śam is assumed to have been elided (> mkho śam) due to the following sibilant ś-: -s > Ø /
_σś-. For a similar explanation see URAY 1972b:27n58a. More examples and a different explanation of the phenomenon are
conveyed in ZEISLER 2004:346-52.
Alternatively, one could attempt to explain mkho śam as an object-incorporating compound, cf. the above cited VP
mkhos/’khos bśam. However, I was not able to indisputably identify any verbal incorporating compound formed from a V2
stem of a verb so far. For this reason I propose to understand mkho śam as a determinative compound with a nominal
second constituent.
 133

“Grand councillor [Mgar] stoṅ rtsan [yul zuṅ] convened [the council] at Sral ’dzoṅ [of] Moṅ pu; the
initial account of braves and weaklings, that were divided, as well as of the great administrative
arrangements, that were undertaken, was made; thus one year.”

23 gum chad
BDN:57n6: gum chad gñis. śi ba daṅ dka’ ba gñis te ñen kha che bas ’chi ba daṅ tshegs che bas dka’ khag ci byuṅ ruṅ źes pa’i
don la ’jug; STK:184n30: śi gson źes pa’i don.
DTH:158: le châtiment et la mort; MACDONALD.1971:267: la mort et le châtiment; DOTSON.2013a:294: death or punishment.

[E] *gum pa daṅ chad pa “(what is) dead and extinct”

[M] (N) death and extinction
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[VNV2+VNV2]
[R] lhag chad
[A] The passage from the OTC quoted in the Text section forms part of a story of btsan mo Sad mar
kar and the conquest of Źaṅ źuṅ by Khri sroṅ brtsan. Sad mar kar complains in a song about
hardships of her life in Źaṅ źuṅ and encourages her brother, the btsan po, to subjugate the hated
country.1 She writes him a letter that contains the sentence cited below. After reading the letter, the
btsan po decides to destroy the dominion of Lig myi rhya (l.432ff.). Our sentence expresses the
immediate reason for launching the attack.

gñis, following the compound, allows us to interpret gum chad unambiguously as an additively
coordinate compound.2 I assume that chad, analogously to gum, is derived from the nominalised V2
of ’chad pa “to die away, to become extinct” (J:168a), as in the well-known OT phrase gduṅ ’chad pa
and the compound rabs chad. The interpretation of chad as representing chad pa “punishment”
(J:155a) cannot be accepted for logical reasons: If the first part of the compound gum chad denotes
“death”, what kind of further punishment could be meted out upon someone whose ultimate
sentence has already been pronounced? Moreover, the interpretation proposed here is also more
coherent on grammatical grounds: both parts are explained as nouns derived from V2 stems of
intransitive verbs. As is the case with many synonymic compounds in Tibetan, the first constituent
of gum chad can be deemed pleonastic and functions to mark off -chad as derived from ’chad pa and
not as representing chad pa “punishment”.

gum chad is attested also in SUMATIRATNA’s dictionary in the clause gum chad kyi rigs byuṅ na’aṅ “if a
lineage of [those who are] dead and extinct appears” glossed with “buyan kürgeǰü irebesü ber”
(SR.1:284.5-6; lit. “even if producing happiness”). The Tibetan phrase seems to contain a paradox
similar to mo gśam gyi bu “son of a barren mother” or ri boṅ gi rwa “horn of a hare”. The semantic

1
For a detailed analysis of the Sad mar kar’s songs see URAY 1972a and DOTSON 2013b.
2
In dictionaries of MT, we find a similar compound śi chad “mortality rate” (Gs:1095a), “Verlust durch Todesfälle” (CÜPPERS
2004:93), “mi phyugs śi god” (BTC:2840). However, here chad is not a nominalised verb but a suffix forming abstract nouns
and the formation is not an additively coordinate compound; for more details on compounds formed with -chad cf.
ZIMMERMANN 1979:117.
 134

relation of the Mongolian phrase to its Tibetan equivalent remains to be clarified but they both
seem to allude to an unexpected but positively connoted event.

[T] btsan pos bkaʼ stsal pa ni / gum chad gñis / rṅo ji thog gis ʼtshalHH źiṅ mchisHH so (PT 1287:426)
“Concerning the words spoken by btsan po, I do wish both, [my] death and extinction, above all (lit.
to the utmost [of] what is possible).”1
[-]s par la yaṅ gum chad taṅ (read: daṅ) bro ’tshal [par?] ma mchis (Or.15000/18:r4; for a slightly
different transliteration see TAKEUCHI 1998.2:23, text 72)
“did not come to swear by death and extinction even (yaṅ) against (?la) [...]”2

24 gyur sram
[V] gyur gsum (ITJ 739:17v3; scribal error; hypercorrection)
DTH:157: la loutre; SNELLGROVE.1967:296: kyur sram and khyur sram = otter (s.v. chu sram); STEINRA.1972:254: lively otter;
DOTSON.2013a:293: swirling otter.

[E] *gyur bu daṅ sram “watercourse-animal and otter”

[M] (N) otter
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[A] gyur bu is documented in the following passages from OT texts:
gyur bu (r132) ni skam la bton3 / [...] (r134) mo ’di ji la btab gyaṅ ṅan rab bo (PT 1052:r131-134)
“[If one] caused a gyur bu to come out on dry land [...], for whatever [reason] you have cast this
lot, it is an extremely bad [omen].”

gser mtsho ni / gyur bu ’p[h]yo (PT 1052:r148, r241)

“[In] a golden lake a gyur bu swims.”
From these we can gather that gyur bu referred to an aquatic animal that is able to come out of
water. WTS glosses gyur with “eine Art Seelöwe” (10:241a) and quotes the following sentence from
Gzi brjid:
rgya mtsho’i gtiṅ gi gyur chen daṅ / chu bo rgyud kyi gyur nag (2:175.2, metr.)
“a great gyur of the sea bottom and a black gyur of the river stream” (trsl. – JB)
It is obvious that we are dealing here with two compounds gyur chen and gyur nag the underlying
structures of which could be reconstructed as *gyur chen po and *gyur nag po respectively. In
DSM:91a we find gyur explained as “srog chags bye brag pa źig”. Besides, DSM glosses kyur, which
seems to be a variant of gyur, with “srog chags sre moṅ” (11a).

Two problems occur, however, if one would like to identify our gyur- in gyur sram with gyur/kyur as
described in the dictionaries. First of all, gyur does not seem to be attested in OT documents as a

1
For a detailed analysis of the passage see DOTSON 2013b:215f.
2
The text is too corrupted to allow us a proper evaluation of the whole context. We know only that it is a letter addressed
to jo bo Rgyal bzaṅ; cf. TAKEUCHI, ibid. In another letter addressed to jo bo Khoṅ bzaṅ (Or.15000/212; TAKEUCHI 1998.2:91, text
276) we find a very similar phrase: [-] la noṅs źo daṅ bro ’tsha[±4 m]chis (l.v3) “did not come to swear by mishap against (?la)
[...]”. For the meaning “to swear by” compare dbu bsñuṅ daṅ bro bor ro “they swore by their heads” (J:382a; see Bsam 19-20,
Skar 27 and 55) and for noṅs źo see s.v. noṅs yo.
3
The same phrase occurs probably at the end of the line r258; its last word, however, cannot be identified anymore.
 135

simple lexeme. Secondly, the identification of OT gyur bu with gyur glossed as sre moṅ “weasel”
(J:584a, CDTD:8973 ) would stand in contradiction to the OT description of the former as a
semiaquatic animal; weasels are terrestrial animals. Besides, we must not forget that it is always
problematic to identify concrete species on the basis of native terms. Thus, I propose to understand
gyur sram as a synonymic coordinate compound formed to meet the stylistic needs of the verses. I
render the compound simply as “otter”.

With regard to sram, JÄSCHKE notices: “encountering this animal is regarded as an evil omen”
(J:581a). Similarly, we read in PT 1052, quoted above, that provoking gyur bu to get out of water, i.e.
to make it being seen, is a bad omen. Thus, we see that both species were perceived of as ominous,
probably on account of their double character: as terrestrial but at the same time aquatic animals.1

[T] sdur ba ni chab daṅ ñe / “Sdur ba lies near the lake.

gyur sram ni pyo la laʼ // [Its] otters slip, slip away.
(422) ñen kar ni dog daṅ ñe / Ñen kar lies near the valley2.
ʼbras drug ni si li li // [Its] six crops rustle, rustle.
mal tro ni klum daṅ ñe / Mal tro lies near the dale3.
skyi bser ni spu ru ru (PT 1287:421-2) [Its] cold winds blow, blow.”
gyur sram ni mthiṅ (1v7) la phyo’ (ITJ 739:1v6-7) “Otters swam over the blue one.”4

25 dgyes skyems
BTC:464a: (rñiṅ) dga’ ston gyi chaṅ.
WTS.12:334b: ein chaṅ, der bei Festen gereicht wird.
DTH:140: un joyeux festin à libations (for dgyes skyems ston mo – JB); TLTD.3:34: pleasure, drinking and feasting (for dgyes
skyems ston mo – JB); p.122a: feasting and drinking; STEINRA.1972:255: feast of joy (for dgyes skyems ston mo – JB);
BECKWITH.1977:210: feasting and drinking; DOTSON.2013a:281: drinking and merriment.

1
With regard to the origins of the morpheme gyur-, as opposed to some previous authors, I would rather consider it being
a derivative of yur ba “aqueduct, conduit, water-course, ditch” (J:512b), although one would expect *g.yur instead of the
attested gyur-. It is also possible that the original form was, in fact, kyur (a loanword?) since it certainly is the lectio
difficilior. -bu in gyur bu is assumed to have a figurative meaning like, e.g., in skyes bu; cf. HAHN 1996:186. The
lexicographically attested form gyur/kyur is a back formation from gyur sram or another compounded lexeme.
2
I read sa dog for dog; for details see s.v. sa dog.
3
It is possible that klum is an OT term denoting *“(broad) valley, dale” that has been changed to CT kluṅ by analogy with
luṅ “valley” (J:549a). This was accompanied by the semantic change to “river” (J:8b). It is worth mentioning in this context
that the form kluṅ is not attested in OT sources. For klum as referring to a kind of landscape rather that being a proper
name see also l.235 of PT 1287 cited in the Text section of the lemma khur ra. This semantic reconstruction allows us to
construct a nice parallel between various kinds of landscape, i.e., chab, *sa dog, and klum, mentioned in the present stanza.
For the proposed meaning of klum compare Lepcha hlum in pă-hlum “pă-hlám, pŭn-hlám any rude or temporary structure,
that acts as a bridge, as a tree thrown over stream or precipice”, (MG:380b, s.v. hlă; hlă “hlám to move a little or change
position of body slightly when lying”; hlá-m “sloping, slantingly”, ibid.).
Alternatively, one could read klum as referring to a place that is mentioned in another passage in connection with Sdur
ba as well (i.e. Klum ya in PT 1287:136; see s.v. dku’ ’gel).
4
One more occurrence of gyur sram is documented in ITJ 738 where we read: mda’ sum ni ma byi na gyur sram ni sñan ma sra
(ITJ 738:2v20). I have not included it in the Text section because the clause is too obscure not allowing even an
approximate translation. Another variant of this phrase is found in ITJ 739:17v3-4: mda’ gsum ni ma byi na / gyur gsum ni
thugs sñuṅ ba. I hypothesise that gsum replaced here the original *sram as a result of a scribal error of first taking ra btags
for źabs kyu (thus, *sram > sum, which is not an uncommon error and could have been additionally triggered by -sum in
mda’ (g)sum) and then hypercorrecting *sum to gsum.
For the meaning of mthiṅ, see s.v. mthiṅ braṅ. As a matter of fact, it is probable that mthiṅ stands in the above quoted
passage for *mthiṅ braṅ.
 136

[E] *dgyes pa daṅ skyems “what is delicious and beverage”

[M] (N) delicacies and beverage
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; co-hyponymic; STRC[VNV1+N]
[A] In most of its occurrences in OT sources (see the Text section), dgyes skyems forms part of the
phrase dgyes skyems ston mo, lit. “dgyes skyems-feast”, that closely resembles another OT phrase,
namely, śa chaṅ ston mo (ITJ 734:r19; THOMAS 1957:77: “feasts of meat and drink”). Its modern Tibetan
equivalent is dgyes skyem (sic!) gsol ston “sm. chaṅ ston” (Gs:226a; chaṅ ston “cocktail party, reception
at which chaṅ, alcohol is a main item served”, Gs:354a) in which gsol ston “banquet, feast, reception
at which food is served” (Gs:1162c) is an honorific of ston mo. Furthermore, I propose to reconstruct
MT dgyes ston “1sm. dga’ ston; 2epithet for Monlam Chemmo” (Gs:226a) as a truncated form of dgyes
skyems ston mo. Its alleged equivalent from the normal register, dga’ ston, is assumed to have been
formed by analogy with dgyes ston.

With regard to the phrase dgyes skyems ston mo, it is not self-evident in what exactly class of
formations it should be included. On the one hand, its usage strongly reminds one of a compound: it
is treated as one NP and there is no GEN between dgyes skyems and ston mo. On the other hand,
however, the particle -mo, which is attested in all occurrences of the phrase as well as in śa chaṅ ston
mo (see above), would contradict its understanding as a compound. Additionally, dgyes skyems is
attested independently as a compound in PT 1047. Although aware of the problems connected with
both interpretations, I decided to treat dgyes skyems as a compound independent of ston mo based on
evidence from PT 1047. I interpret dgyes skyems ston mo as an appositional phrase.

Considering the dialectal data on dgyes mo (cf. Khalatse, Nurla, Leh “delicious, tasty (h.)”,
CDTD:1535), one feels inclined to reconstruct the meaning of dgyes- in the compound under
discussion as referring to a special kind of food, delicacies, served at royal feasts, rather than to
pleasure as such; cf. dgyes pa Rngaba“joy” (CDTD:1534). In the latter case, the reconstruction
*”pleasure and beverage” would be hardly intelligible from the point of view of the semantics of
Tibetan coordination both elements of which are supposed to belong to one semantic class, here:
FOOD (cf. the above mentioned śa chaṅ). If, on the other hand, we reconstruct the underlying

structure of the compound as *dgyes pa’i skyems, i.e. with a participle for the first member, then we
encounter another problem. To wit, dgyes “to rejoice, to be glad” (J:88a) is an INTR verb that needs a
subject from the semantic class of LIVING BEINGS. Thus, the only syntactically possible translation, *“a
beverage that rejoices”, can be excluded for syntactic reasons.

To conclude, it seems that the only permissible reconstruction is *dgyes pa daṅ skyems “delicacies (lit.
“what is delicious”) and beverage”. This interpretation would furnish us with an exact equivalent of
śa chaṅ “meat and beer” that could have denoted items served at feasts for commoners.
 137

[T] rgyal pho staṅs byal daṅ blon pho daṅ źam riṅ pha yan chad / (8) na bza’ bzaṅ pho bnabs śiṅ dgye[s]
skyems gsol ba’i źal (PT 1047:7-8)
“effigies (źal) of [persons] including (yan chad) the king, wife and husband, councillors and źam riṅ pa,
that [one] dressed [in] beautiful garments and to which [one] offered delicacies and beverage”
ʼuṅ gi rjes laʼ // (220) btsan po rjes ʼbaṅs dgyes skyems ston mo gsol lo (PT 1287:219-220)
“Thereafter, btsan po’s courtiers were offered delicacies and beverage, a feast.”
bdagi sdum pa khri bomsu // dgyes skyems / (321) ston mo gsol du ji gnaṅ (PT 1287:320-1)
“Would [you] allow [me] to offer delicacies and beverage, a feast, at Khri boms, a residence of
mine?”
ʼuṅ gi rjes la // btsan po rjes ʼbaṅs dgyes skyems ston mo gsol te / (435) btsan po khri sroṅ brtsan gyis mgur
blaṅs (PT 1287:434-5)
“Thereafter, having offered delicacies and beverage, a feast, [for] btsan po[’s] courtiers, btsan po Khri
sroṅ brtsan sang a song.”
bdag rgan po’i sdum pa khri bomsu dgyes skyems ston mo gsol bar ji gnaṅ (ITJ 1375:v4)
“Would [you] allow [me] to offer delicacies and beverage, a feast, at Khri boms, a residence of mine,
an old man?”

26 dgra chos
BTC:465b: dgra bo mnan gtad byed pa’i cho ga.
Gs:226b: defeating the enemy by casting an evil spell on them.
STEINRA.1983:46: = Ch. wu 武 “war” or Ch. rong 戎 “military”; LI/COBLIN:113: customs or rules of the enemy; military affairs,
military strategy; COBLIN.1991b:524b: warcraft, martial arts.

[E] *dgra’i chos “proceedings against an enemy”

[M] (N) warfare
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NDISAD+N]
[R] dgra thabs / dgra bźer / dgra zin / dgra zun
[A] From the passages quoted in the Text section we learn that dgra chos, even if only imagined,
could bring one to losing his courage (PT 16:26r2-3). In addition, it was used to conquer other
countries (PT 16:29v2) to which end auxiliary support for expeditionary forces (dra ma) was needed
(PT 986:92). Besides, the lexeme could determine arms (mtshon cha; PT 16:26r3). This short
description demonstrates that -chos, being the head of the compound, must be understood here as
“5custom, manner, common usage, fashion” (J:163b) - a meaning that relates the word directly to its
verbal origins. To wit, chos as a noun is derived from the V4 of ’chos “to make, make ready, prepare,
to construct, build” (J:171b). As phrases like chos lugs (PT 1283:445, 446; Khri 2), chos tshul gñis (ITJ
733:19), or dgra chos kyi thabs (ST Treaty E 49, see below) demonstrate, chos belonged to one semantic
field with lugs and tshul - both of which denote, in general, ways of proceeding; cf. hereto Ger.
Verfahren and Eng. cognates to proceed “begin a course of action”1 (cf. “to make ready, to prepare” for
’chos), procedure, and proceedings.

1
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/proceed?q=proceed; 06.06.2014.
 138

Cognates of dgra, CT “1enemy, foe; 2In W[estern Tibet] also punishment” (J:88b)1, include CT ’gran “1to
vie with, contend with, to strive (for victory); 2to fight” (J:98b; for modern dialectal data cf.
CDTD.V:249)2 as well as modern *sgran “to fight” (CDTD.V:298)3.

To sum up, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound in question as
*dgra’iGEN chos with the etymological meaning *”proceedings of an enemy” in which case GEN is
interpreted as genitive of disadvantage (Lat. genitivus incommodi), i.e. it expresses to whose
disadvantage something happens4; thus, *“proceedings against an enemy” > “warfare”.

[T] [[rgya drug (26r3) las stsogs pa] [raṅ raṅ gi ṅa rgyal sñems pha rnams kyaṅ]APP]S [drag dal gyi dmyig su
bab pa’i dgra chos kyis]AD spa bkoṅ (PT 16:26r2-3)
“Chinese and Turks, among others, swollen with pride, lost courage (spa) through warfare that
appeared in [their] thoughts (dmyigs) on (lit. of) drag dal.”
dgra chos kyi mtshon cha (26r4) ni bsñal (PT 16:26r3-4)
“[They] laid down arms [used in] (lit. of) warfare.”
mtha’i rgyal khams gźan dgra chos kyis gdab (PT 16:29v2)
“Other kingdoms of the confines were beaten by [our] warfare.”
phyin cad dgra chos spyad myi dgos te // dra ma’i rkyen myi dgos pas // (93) dmag myi brgyags khal gnag
rta rnams // raṅ ñam du yan par thoṅ śig ces bsgo nas (PT 986:92-3; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:308b)
“[He] ordered: ‘Therefore, on account of the fact that, it not being necessary to resort to warfare, the
support for (lit. of) expeditionary forces (dra ma) is not needed [anymore], send soldiers, provisions,
loads, yaks and horses free on their own!’”5
dgra chos kyi thabs daṅ // dmag brtsan po dag kyaṅ myi rṅul du ma (50) ruṅ ste // dgra zun gyi tshul du
gyurd kyis kyaṅ [...] (ST Treaty E 49-50)
“Even though military tactics6 and mighty armies, not being suitable not to pursue [the matter],
turned to hostility (lit. conduct of hostility), [...]”7

1
MATISOFF (2003:173) reconstructs the original meaning of *gra as “stranger, guest; enemy” recalling the semantic
development of PIE *ghos-ti-.
2
Compare hereto the pair dgra zla “enemy, foe, opponent” (Gs:227a) ~ ’gran zla “rival, competitor, match” (Gs:243c).
3
In addition, HILL (2010a:55) proposes to relate ’gras “to hate, to bear ill-will, to have a spite against” (J:99a) to dgra as well.
4
Cf. HAHN 1996:81, §10.2.f. Another example of genitive of disadvantage can be quoted from Mdzaṅs blun (trslr. after HAHN
1996:191, l.21):
lus daṅ srog gi bar chad du ’gyur
“[It] becomes a danger to (lit. of) [their] body and life.”
5
For a different translation see COBLIN 1991a:313b.
6
Lit. “means of warfare”; for details see s.v. dgra thabs.
7
According to ACIP, the compound is attested three times in the following canonical passages:
de’i slob ma rnams kyaṅ dgra chos daṅ / gtsug lag daṅ / yi ge daṅ / rtse ba daṅ / bźon pa daṅ / bon (v1) chos daṅ / mig maṅ daṅ /
glu ba daṅ / ’du ba daṅ / sbyugs pa daṅ / ’phoṅ rtsal daṅ / rta rgyug pa la sogs pa’i chos ma yin pa slob ciṅ spyod de (’Phags pa tiṅ
ṅe ’dzin mchog dam pa, H 139, mdo sde, tha 187r7-v1)
“His students were learning and practising warfare, science, letters, playing, vehicle, Bon-chos, chess, singing, ’du ba,
sbyugs pa, shooting arrows, horse racing, among others, that were not chos.”
rig pa’i gnas daṅ / bzo’ gnas daṅ / rol mo (v4) daṅ / rtsed mo daṅ / graṅs daṅ / rtsis daṅ / mig ’phrul gyi sṅags daṅ / sman daṅ /
ban glaṅ daṅ / rta daṅ / bźon pa daṅ / dgra chos daṅ / dmag draṅ ba daṅ / (v5) dpyad la sogs pa la mkhas par slob ste (Thabs
mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo, H 361, mdo sde, a 167v3-5)
“[He] was teaching to be skilled in science, crafts, music, play, counting, astrology, magical mantras, medicine, oxen,
horses, vehicle, warfare, leading an army, diagnosis, among others.”
rgyal po źig pa blon po mdzad (r2) pa blo daṅ ldan pa dgra chos la mkhas pa źig yod de (’Phags pa yoṅs su mya ṅan las ’das pa chen
po’i mdo, H 368, myaṅ ’das, ka 291r1-2)
“There was a king who acted as a councillor, was wise, [and] skilled in warfare.”
 139

27 dgra thabs
BTC:465b: dgra ’dul ba’i thabs jus; Negi.2:648b: kṛtāstraḥ (s.v. dgra thabs la mkhas pa); BYD:96b-7a: dmag thabs sam. dgra ’dul
ba’i thabs jus.
Gs:226c: a strategy to subdue, defeat (one’s) enemy.
TLTD.2:233: enemy’s chance (?); p.430: fighting, army; p.432: battle; TLTD:3:122a: expedients (thabs) of war or battle;
RICHARDSON.1952:23: the designs of the enemy; p.162: military skills, strategy; RICHARDSON.1985:162: military skill, strategy;
LI/COBLIN:384: warcraft; URAY.1991:196: warfare; DOTSON.2013a:304: war strategy.

[E] dgra chos kyi thabs “means of warfare”

[M] (N) military tactics
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[NDISAD+N]EXPL+N]
[R] dgra chos / dgra bźer / dgra zin / dgra zun / nol thabs
[A] The phrase dgra chos kyi thabs, which is presumed to have formed the underlying structure of
the compound under discussion, is attested in ST Treaty E 49 (see the Text section s.v. dgra chos). For
the etymology and a special meaning of thabs when used in military context see s.v. nol thabs.

[T] de nas rgya ʼi dmag // weṅ ker źaṅ śes bdaʼste byuṅ ba las // bod kyi dmag pon / blon khri ʼbriṅ gis /
dgra thabs / [stag]1 (522) daṅ g.yag ltar byas nas // go bar du g.yul sprad de // rgya maṅ po bthuṅs nas /
(PT 1287:521-2)
“After that, the Chinese army, being led by Weṅ ker źaṅ śe, appeared. Thereupon, the Tibetan army
commander, councillor [Mgar] khri ’briṅ [btsan brod], used military tactics in the manner of [tiger]
and yak. Hence, having commited a battle in the middle [between two armies], [he] killed many
Chinese.”
sbal pa ri’i so snon du ña rton dgun zla (A2) ’briṅ po’i tshes [b]chu g[s]um la [gth]aṅ ba’i (B) dgra thabs [...]
(ITN 871:A1-B1; trslr. after TLTD.2:433.7)
“Military tactics: Ña rton is sent as reinforcement (lit. in addition) to the guards of Sbal po ri on the
thirteenth day of the middle winter month.”
[[mgyogs bźi phrugs gcig so tshor stsa[ld] pa]S [chab srid gyi yan lag la gces te (A2) mchid luṅ dgra thabs ’og
du stsald pa]PRED lags gyis d[e] bźin lcogs par ’tshol la gñer (A3) khum śig / (ITN 1635)
“Because four couriers (lit. swifty ones) ordered as a unit of guards (so tsho) for one whole day,
holding in esteem branches of chab srid, are the ones who ?were given instructions under the
military tactics?, [they] shall wish to be able (lcogs par) [to act] accordingly and execute [the orders]
(gñer khum)!”
dgra’i śa (?) kri yan chad gya (?) tshaṅ smug phor ṅam ru pag (A2) sum tshugs gchig ’byam źiṅ so tshor stsald
/ (B1) pa’i dgra thabs / (ITN 2048)
“Military tactics: three ṅam ru pag [soldiers], one group of watchmen (tshugs), while spreading1 to
Tshaṅ smug pho up to dgra’i kri (proper name?), are ordered as a unit of guards.”

1
The proposed reconstruction is based solely on the references to both, tiger and yak, in military contexts of OT texts,
e.g.:
mtsho sṅon po pyogs kyi dmag pon // (497) mgar khri ʼbriṅ btsan brod ʼtshal ba la // woṅ ker źaṅ śes spriṅ baʼ // khre rkyal gaṅ
daṅ / yuṅs ʼbru rkyal gaṅ bskur te // (498) bod kyi dmag // stag ʼphraṅ g.yag ʼphraṅ du bgraṅs pa ʼi graṅs kyaṅ ṅa la yod do // (PT
1287:496-8)
“Woṅ ker źaṅ śe sent a message to Mgar khri ’briṅ btsan brod, the asking army commander of the Blue Lake region:
‘Having sent a full sack of millet and a full sack of grains of mustard-seeds, concerning the army of Tibet, I have also
numbers of [things] counted as tiger- and yak-straps.’”
In this passage, stag ’phraṅ and g.yag ’phraṅ are mentioned side by side referring obviously to awards that were granted to
Tibetan soldiers for their bravery in battle.
 140

28 dgra bźer
[V] dgra’ bźer (PT 1287:356)
DSM:105b: dmag sgar; BYD:97a: mkhar ram so ba’i khaṅ pa. dmag sgar.
BDN:398n6: dgra gźer źes kyaṅ bya ste ʼdir (PT 1287:356 - JB) dgra gñen daṅ don don gcig pa ʼdra; BTK:82n7: dgra ya.
DTH:33: fortresse; TLTD.2:368: war-magazine; TLTD.3:107: meaning not ascertained; CHANGK.1959:144: fortress;
DOTSON.2009:88: military barracks; HILL.2011:29: military barracks; DOTSON.2013a:310: military encampment.

[E] *dgra chos kyi bźer “support of warfare”

[M] (N) fortified encampment
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[NDISAD+N]BEN+N]
[R] dgra chos / dgra thabs / dgra zin / dgra zun
[A] The compound dgra bźer occurs only twice in the known OT documents2 from which we learn
that it is built (PT 1288:49) and that one fought a battle in/at/from inside of it (PT 1287:356)3. PT
1288 informs us that a dgra bźer was built on the (bank of the?) river Ji ma khol (Ch. Dafeichuan; cf.
MOLÈ 1970:168n451, PETECH 1988a:270f.) in 668/9 and two years later, in 670, a great battle was held
there between Tibetan and Chinese armies (PT 1288:51; cf. also BECKWITH 2009:130). Similarly as in
PT 1287:355-6, also here we have a battle in preparation for which a special construction is built
(comparatively quickly). Unfortunately, we do not have any information, supported by, e.g.,
archaeological excavations, about Tibetan forts in this area. By considering the only data we have,
one could assert that dgra bźer was rather a short-term construction prepared for immediate goals.

The morpheme bźer is scarcely documented in Tibetan lexicographic sources. I tentatively assume
that it is related to gźer (V1 *’jer V2 bźer V3 gźer?)4 “tüsikü” (SR.2:722.5; “to lean against; to prop,
assist; to rely on, count on, depend on”, Less:856b), “bsten pa’i miṅ” (GC:750a), “(rñiṅ) bsten pa”

1
For ’byam in military context compare Western Drokpas tɕa̱m ncA “with māk to spread, to develop (war)” (CDTD.V:894;
CT *dmag ’byam).
2
The third occurrence in Or.15000/230:1 is fragmentary and only the letter b and the middle part of the letter ź from the
presumed word bźer are visible. TAKEUCHI (1998.2:97, text 296) reconstructs the beginning of the line as “blon Dgra bźer” in
which case dgra bźer would form the first two syllables of a proper name.
3
The second occurrence stems from a metrical passage of PT 1287:355-6 and for this very reason it is, unfortunately, not
quite sure which case particle has been elided here, na, du, or nas (for the translation of the complete sentence see the Text
section):
[la boṅ ni rje daṅ skol /
blo che ni dkyel mkhas la //
rgal mkhas ni khoṅ dpaʼ bas]ERG //
[rgya rje ni bsam laṅ la]ALLAT /
[dgraʼ bźer]TERM? ni [g.yul]ABS sprad
By comparing other clauses that contain the verbal phrase g.yul sprad and a description of a place where a battle was
waged a solution could be perhaps proposed. Thus, we find:
[ʼguʼ log sgaṅ du]TERM g.yul sprad “committed a battle at ʼGu’ log sgaṅ” (PT 1287:379);
[go bar du]TERM g.yul sprad “committed a battle in the middle [between two armies]” (PT 1287:522);
[stag la rgya dur du]TERM g.yul sprad “committed a battle at sTag la rgya dur” (ITJ 750:122);
[mu le cu ler]TERM g.yul sprad “committed a battle at Mu le cu le” (ITJ 750:253).
In all four cases the place of a battle is marked with TERM but only one of them, go bar, is not a place name.
4
The syllable ’jer appears, to my knowledge, only in ’jer ’jigs which is glossed as an epithet of Indra (D:416a, GC:295a). I was
not able to trace the Sanskrit equivalent of ’jer ’jigs. One finds, however, in Corff.1:404a, 1826.1, the compound ’jigs yer
“zusammenzucken” rendered in Ch. as 吃惊 chi jing. jing “to start, to be frightened, to be scared, alarm”
(http://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php?page=worddict&wdrst=0&wdqb=%E6%83%8A; 02.03.2015) corresponds
to ’jigs-; thus -yer should be an equivalent of chi which we find glossed with “eat; drink; suffer, endure, bear”
(http://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php?page=worddict&wdrst=0&wdqb=%E5%90%83; 02.03.2015). The latter
meaning could tentatively be connected to the CT gźer.
 141

(BTC:2430b); sten should be understood here in its classical meaning as “to keep, to hold; to adhere
to, to stick to, to rely or depend on” (J:222a)1. I propose to interpret -bźer in dgra bźer as a deverbal
noun with the general meaning *“a support” similar to the meaning of rten when occurring as a
second member of a compound; cf., for instance, rkaṅ rten “a foot-stool; trestle; a raised ground or
stone step on which, at the time of alighting from any conveyance, the foot is placed” (D:73b; lit.
“support for the foot”); sku rten “image of Buddha” (J:22a; lit. “support for the body”); lag rten
“1walking stick, cane; 2stair railing; 3a potter’s tool” (Gs:1059c; lit. *“support for the hand”). -bźer as
denoting to a kind of military base is also documented in the phrase khri rtse ’bum bźer kyi khrims that
refers to the first code of law introduced allegedly by Sroṅ btsan sgam po (BTC:280b). Here, 10.000
rtses are obviously juxtaposed with 100.000 bźers. rtse *“hill fort”, beside mkhar, is another OT term
denoting a kind of construction serving military purposes.2 Apart from that, we find bźer also in the
phrase drag bźer byed pa rendered by CÜPPERS (2004:59) as “hart durchgreifen?”.

There is another type of realization of bźer documented in OT sources as well, namely, in personal
names.3 Chinese sources explain the syllable bźer in Tibetan name of councillor Guṅ bźer as being
“like the Chinese title lang” (after BECKWITH 1987:169n168) which BECKWITH translates as “steward”
(ibid.)4. One possible solution could be to understand bźer in these cases as referring to a person in
his function of giving support, on whom one can depend, like, e.g., “confidant”, “partisan”, or
“keeper”.5 Its further semantic development is perhaps evidenced by bźer “respecting, honoring”
(Gs:951b) as in mdo bźer bar bgyis “bka’ la brtsi bkur źus” (BNY:172n11).

As concerns dgra- in dgra bźer, regarding the contexts in which the compound is used, it seems
legitimate to interpret dgra- as referring rather to warfare than to a war as an abstract notion or to
an enemy. Accordingly, the underlying structure of the compound is reconstructed as *dgra chos kyi
bźer, lit. “a support of (i.e. for) warfare”, with GEN being explained as genitivus commodi (benefactive).6
Thus, dgra bźer is understood as a construction meant to support warfare, perhaps a kind of fortified
encampment or military base; cf. Ger. militärischer Stützpunkt.

1
sten is cognate with CT rten “to keep, to hold, to adhere to, to lean on” (J:213b). The subtle difference between these two
verbs in CT can be observed in their valency: sten cEA *”to lean on sth./so.” vs. rten cE(A)D *“to lean (sth.) against sth.”.
The only example that partially shows us the valency of the verb gźer is the verbal phrase mdo bźer bar bgyis for which see
below. As long as no further examples clearly demonstrating the complete valency are found I will interpret it as a cEA
verb.
2
Cf. THOMAS 1948:167: bźer “fort” (“mart”?, “magazine”?). THOMAS discusses bźer, that, according to him, designated some
kind of war-structure, as a Tibetan loanword in Nam and quotes the phrase ḥwa bźer glossing it with “bźer of power or
government or control” (ibid., pp.339-40).
For a more detailed discussion of the law khri rtse ’bum bźer kyi khrims in later historiographical tradition Tibet’s see
DOTSON 2007a:320f.
3
In CT, bźer is attested also as a part of two tribe names źu bźer (D:1073b) and ya bźer (D:1125a).
4
Although it is not clear whether BECKWITH renders here the Tibetan word or its alleged Chinese equivalent. Cf. also
DTH:202: “titre de haut fonctionnaire”.
5
Compare in this context Lepcha tŭk-jer “side of a thing” (MG:101a; tŭk = prefix, MG:129a) and Pol. stronnik ~ strona. For the
alternation Lepcha j- ~ Tibetan Cź- cf. Lepcha je “T[ibetan] bźes hon. vb. to eat or drink” (MG:100a) and juṅ “T[ibetan] gźuṅ
the middle, the best part” (MG:99b).
6
Cf. HAHN 1996:81, §10.2f.
 142

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa / “Formerly, last year, two years ago,
chab (355) chab ni ma gźug nas // from the lower end of the river1,
la boṅ ni rje daṅ skol / [Kag] la boṅ2, the lord and [his] subjects,
blo che ni dkyel mkhas la // of broad mind, experienced in overthrowing and
rgal mkhas ni / (356) khoṅ dpaʼ bas // experienced in fighting, of brave ?heart?,
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ la / who commited a battle3 at a fortified
encampment
dgraʼ bźer ni g.yul sprad ciṅ / against the Chinese ruler, Bsam laṅ4, and
dgra zin ni gsar (357) spaṅs pas // who renounced anew [his] enemies and allies5,
srid kyi ni mgo bzuṅ źiṅ / tried to obtain from (lit. upon) the divine son, the
btsan po,
pha skyabs ni sdug btsal paʼ // the head of the dominion that he had held and
lha sras ni btsan la / (358) btsal // (PT 1287:354-8) the agreeableness under the protection of the
father (i.e. the btsan po)6 he was looking for.”
ʼbrugi lo la / btsan po sprags gyi śa ra na bźugs ciṅ / ji ma khol du dgra bźer brtsigs par lo chig (PT 1288:49)
“In the year of the dragon, while the btsan po was staying in Śa ra of Sprags, [one] raised a fortified
encampment at Ji ma khol. Thus one year.”

29 dgra zin
YeŚes:103b: yil da’i saṅ; SR.1:384.1: daisun el; GC:151b: dgra bo’am dgra gñen; DSM:105b: dgra daṅ gñen; BYD:97a: dgra daṅ
gñen.
BDN:398n7: ʼdir (PT 1287:356 - JB) dgrar ʼgyur. źes pa daṅ gcig pa ʼdra’aṅ. dgra zun te dgra gñen du ʼgrel ba yaṅ mchis;
BTK:82n8: dgra grogs so. don grub rgyal gyi ⟨mgur glu’i lo rgyus daṅ khyad chos⟩ las. ‘a mdo’i kha skad du spu (sic!) zla la
zin rgya daṅ. pha spun ma spun sogs la pha zin daṅ ma zin źes ʼbod.’ ces so.
R.2:164a: 1враг; enemy; 2друзья и враги; friends and enemies; WTS.12:337b: 1Feind; 2Freund und Feind.
DTH:151: attaque; TLTD.2:104: enemy; SØRENSEN.2002:250: foe or relative; DOTSON.2013a:310: recognizing as enemy.

[E] *dgra daṅ zin pa “enemy and adhering-one”

[M] (N) enemy and ally
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; antonymous; STRC[N+VNV1]
[R] dgra chos / dgra thabs / dgra bźer / dgra zun
[A] Although one finds in some modern Tibetan dictionaries zin glossed as “el; sadun” (SR.2:746.6; el
“ally”, Less:306b; sadun “friend, relative”, Less:656a), “’dzin pa daṅ dgra zin daṅ mdza’ bśes daṅ rang
phyogs la’aṅ” (GC:760a), “2gñen” (BTC:2459b), it seems probable that the morpheme is in fact a
backformation from compounds like dgra zin. I assume that its original form was *zin pa, for which
compare the fragment from PT 1287:453:

1
This could possibly refer to the place of residence of Kag la boṅ, who, as a ruler of Mywa, lived downstream of the
Central Tibet.
2
The leader of Nanzhao known in Tibetan sources as Kag la boṅ and in Chinese as Geluofeng (Ko-lo-feng; BACKUS 1981:71).
3
For the rendering of g.yul sprad compare Ger. jemandem eine Schlacht liefern and Pol. wydawać bitwę.
4
The same person as Sam laṅ kha’e ’gwan śeṅ b’un śin b’u hwaṅ te of ST Treaty E 26. According to LI/COBLIN (p.108), it is
the famous Tang emperor Xuanzong (reigned 713-756).
5
This fragment might refer to the fact that Kag la boṅ has changed his allies, abandoning his coalition with Chinese and
entering one with Tibetans, i.e. he has renounced both his old enemies (Tibetans) and his old friends (Chinese).
6
According to BACKUS (1981:71), a “high-level mission [...] was sent to the Tibetan capital with articles of tribute in 751.
The Tibetan court responded with lavish gifts and agreed to regard Nan-chao as a ‘fraternal-state’ (hsiung-ti chih kuo). That
this relationship was one of elder to younger brother, however, is reflected in a title that the Tibetans bestowed on Ko-lo-
feng: ‘Tsan-p’u chung,’ i.e., ‘younger brother (chung) of the Tsan-p’u, or Tibetan king.” The above quoted passage, however,
would rather suggest a father-son relationship, cf. pha in pha skyabs.
 143

legs pa zin pa ʼi bya dgaʼ daṅ / ñe yo ba ʼi chad pa

“rewards for good ones that adhere [to us], punishments for culprits”
In this passage, legs pa zin pa “good ones that adhere [to us]” are contrasted with ñe yo ba “those
actively engaged in a mishap” (see s.v.) by rewarding the former and punishing the latter. Another
passage from the same document provides us additionally with an alternative structure employing
the same two lexemes that form the compound dgra zin, cf.:
myaṅ (160) dbaʼs mnon daṅ gsum // bro len chiṅ mkhar pyiṅ bar mchis nas // ñin źiṅ ni phag tshal gyi
śiṅ (161) khuṅ na skugso // mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ bar mchi ste // dbu sñuṅ bro mnaʼ gcod pa ʼi tshe // yar
myi ʼbaṅs kyis (162) dpyad paʼ //
myi bzaṅs ni rta bzaṅs śig //
ñin źiṅ ni phag tshal na /
mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ (163) bar mchiʼ /
dgraʼ ʼam ni zin ci ʼu
źes dpyad do // (PT 1287:159-63)
“The three, Myaṅ, Dba’s and Mnon, under oath (lit. while taking the oath) went to the fortress
Pyiṅ ba. By day, [they] were hiding1 in a tree hollow of a forest hideout. By night, at the time of
going to Pyiṅ ba and swearing an oath, a subject of2 a man from Yar, who was examining [the
three men], enquired:
‘Good men, good horses,
by day in a forest hideout,
by night going to Pyiṅ ba,
are [you] enemies or allies?’” (lit. “what are you, enemies or allies”)3

The word zin pa *“adherent” can be juxtaposed with the better known CT ’dzin pa “adherent, keeper”
(J:465b).4 Compare also the gloss from BTK:82n8 given in the Lexicographic section where Amdo pha

1
My translation of skugso is purely contextual. On account of the fact that the stem in PT 1287 is combined with the final
particle so we can infer that its proper form was skugs. From the context it is obvious that skugs should be read as an
imperfective stem. For these reasons I feel reluctant to identify it with the CT sgug “to wait; to await, to expect; to lie in
wait, to waylay” (J:114b). Toni HUBER mentions the compounds sgug ra “hunter’s hide” (2005:14) used in Gertse and
referring to “a shallow, circular pit (T[ibetan] sa doṅ) of ca. 2,5-3 m diameter and excavated to a depth of ca. 40-50 cm, in
which a hunter can lay in wait with his gun” and sgug rtsig (< *sgug ra’i rtsig pa) “a low wall” arranged around sgug ra (ibid.).
skugs is attested in OT sources as a noun in phrases like ’prul skugsu sbas pha las “upon concealing ’prul in a skugs” (PT
1047:55) and ñin źiṅ ni skugs na ñal “by night [he] was lying in a skugs” (ITJ 739:17v7). WTS.5:287a glosses, on the one hand,
skugs khoṅs as “Falle, Hinterhalt” and, on the other hand, skugs as a variant form of bsgugs. However, according to OTDO,
sgug is not attested as a verb in OT documents. skugs as a noun could actually be juxtaposed with sbugs “more fr[e]q[uently]
sbubs, hollow, cavity, excavation, interior space” (J:404a). We find skugs pa explained as “yib pa’am gab nas bsdad pa” in
DSM:33b; the only quotation, however, comes from the same passage in PT 1287 and the definition seems to be contextual
as well. I propose to include the lexeme tentatively in one word family with CT skuṅ “1to hide in a ground; 2to bury, to
inter; 3to tie in a doubled or twisted position, to cord on all sides” (J:22b); cf. also modern dialectal meanings in CDTD.V:29.
2
I interpret the reversed gi gu in myi as representing the double i of *myi’i. For details on this usage of the reversed gi gu
see the section General philological remarks of the Introduction.
3
’u stands in a position that can be occupied by either a final particle or a verb. Due to that, one could identify it with
either a demonstrative pronoun ’u interchangeable with ’o (> final particle), cf. “3also ’o” (J:499a), “for ’di, pron. this”
(Cs:170a), “that; cf. ’o” (CDTD:7565), or yu as in yu na “wenn es wahr ist, wäre es wahr” (Sch:529b). For the initial
alternation ’u ~ yu compare ’u bu cag ~ yu bu cag. We cannot exclude the possibility that the morphemes are in fact cognate.
4
CDTD.V:1118 provides zin with a separate lemma as an nc-counterpart of a c-verb ’dzin (ibid., 1052).
 144

zin and ma zin are explained as pha spun and ma spun respectively. The contrast expressed through
dgra zin in the fragment from ITJ 751 cited below is paralleled by the eternal opposition of gnam sa
“the sky and the earth” mentioned earlier in the same sentence.

Still another usage of dgra zin is attested in the Tibetan translation of the Varṇārhavarṇastotra of
Mātṛceṭa where in the stanza 3.6d it renders Skt. samāsama “equal and unequal, of equal and
unequal rank” (MW:1153a; cf. HARTMANN 1987:141).1

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa / “Formerly, last year, two years ago,
chab (355) chab ni ma gźug nas // from the lower end of the river,
la boṅ ni rje daṅ skol / [Kag] la boṅ, the lord and [his] subjects,
blo che ni dkyel mkhas la // of broad mind, experienced in overthrowing and
rgal mkhas ni / (356) khoṅ dpaʼ bas // experienced in fighting, of brave heart,
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ la / who commited a battle at a fortified encampment
dgraʼ bźer ni g.yul sprad ciṅ / against the Chinese ruler, Bsam laṅ, and
dgra zin ni gsar (357) spaṅs pas // who renounced anew [his] enemies and allies,
srid kyi ni mgo bzuṅ źiṅ / tried to obtain from (lit. upon) the divine son, the
btsan po,
pha skyabs ni sdug btsal paʼ // the head of the dominion that he had held and
lha sras ni btsan la / (358) btsal // (PT 1287:354-8) the agreeableness under the protection of the
father (i.e. the btsan po) he was looking for.”2
gnam ral ba ni lha’i byin kyis drubs / sa gas pa ni blon po’i rlabs kyis (41r3) btsems te / gnam sa ni yid sbyar /
dgra zin ni mjal dum nas (ITJ 751:41r2-3)
“The sky torn was stitched [anew] through the splenour of the gods. The earth split was sewed
[anew] through the glory of the councillors. The sky and the earth conformed in mind. Enemies and
allies reconciled.”

30 dgra zun
YeŚes:103b: da’i saṅ nou hour. da’i saṅ sa daṅ. dgra gñen. dgra zin. yil da’i saṅ; BYMD:23a.1: daisun el (s.v. dgra zun nam zin);
SR.1:384.1: dgra zin. dgra gñen. dgra zun. daisun el. daisun sadun. daisun il; GC:151b: (注同上) (sm. dgra zin – JB, see s.v.);
BTC:466b: dgra daṅ gñen; BYD:97a: dgra zin daṅ ’dra’o.
BDN:398n7: ʼdir (PT 1287:356 - JB) dgrar ʼgyur. źes pa daṅ gcig pa ʼdra’aṅ. dgra zun te dgra gñen du ʼgrel ba yaṅ mchis.
R.2:164a: = dgra zin; Gs:227a: sm. dgra gñen (“enemies and friends”, ibid., p.226c); WTS.12:337b: 1Feind; 2Feind und Freund.
RICHARDSON.1985:162: neither war nor peace; LI/COBLIN:384: enemy; DENWOOD.1999:90: enemy; BELLEZZA.2005:412: allies and
enemies.

[S] *dgrar zun “to take as an enemy”

[E] *dgrar zun pa “a taking as an enemy”
[M] (N) hostility, enmity
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTAD-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[R] dgra chos / dgra thabs / dgra bźer / dgra zin
[A] That the compound dgra zun, in spite of the attestations of the majority of modern Tibetan
dictionaries, should be distinguished from dgra zin is evidenced by the context in which it appears in

1
For misunderstandings concerning gñen in dgra gñen and for confusion arosen between the meanings of dgra zin and dgra
zun see s.v. dgra zun.
2
For additional comments concerning this passage see the Text section s.v. dgra bźer.
 145

the ST Treaty inscription. The east side of the inscription conveys the history of political and
military relations between Tibet and China. The lines 45-50 describe a state of growing animosity
and mistrust on both sides in which both armies, not being able to refrain from hostile actions,
resorted to operations in the manner of dgra zun. This state of affairs led to concluding the treaty. If
one accepts the proposed interpretation of dgra zin as “enemy and ally” (see s.v.), the problem arises
of how should one understand the “ally-wise” behaviour of an army which, alongisde military
tactics, is the subject of the verb gyurd in l.50 of the inscription? Army is not an ally of a
government, but its military representation.1

I tentatively propose to relate -zun in dgra zun to the reconstructed verb *zuṅ (see BIELMEIER
2004b:404-5). As demonstrated by BIELMEIER (ibid.), the CT paradigm of the verb ’dzin resulted from
the conflation of the conjugations of two distinct verbs *zuṅ2 and zin probably due to their semantic
and phonetic similarity. Leaving aside the question whether these were etymologically cognate or
not, one can hypothesise about their common semantic denominator.

As can be gathered from the following OT passage, zin and zun, if not alternant forms of one verb,
were closely related semantically to each other (quotation arranged as to demonstrate the parallel
structures of the clauses):
g.yu’i ltam la zun pa lta byaste ma zun cig
g.yu’i ltam la non (v84) pa la (read: lta) byaste ma non //
rta rṅa’i sñi la zin pa ltar byos śig
rto ba’i mdzol la (v85) non pa ltar byos śig (ITJ 731:v83-5)

1
Although one could also put forward arguments supporting the identification of dgra zin with dgra zun. First of all, the
vowel alternation i ~ u is attested also in other OT words, cf. mkhyid (ITJ 750:69, 71) ~ mkhyud (PT 1288:17). The second
evidence may be adduces from the canonical literature. There we find both compounds mentioned in identical or almost
identical contexts (for the sake of clarity, the data are presented after RKTS without titles), cf.:
1
byams daṅ sñiṅ rjes dgra zin mi mṅa’ yaṅ // (D 1674, 205v) byams daṅ sñiṅ rje dgra zun mi mṅa’ yaṅ // (H 804, 277r)
dgra zin byams sdaṅ mi mṅa’ źiṅ // (H 61, 360r)
2
mgon po thugs kyis dgra zin mñam sñoms // (H 154, 242v) byams pas dgra zun mñam por dmigs // (D 2008, 215r)
dgra zun thams cad mñam pa bsgoms (D 3773, 178r)
dgra zin sñoms pa’i mñam med lags // (D 1138, 88v)
3
dgra zin la sems sñoms pa (D 3940, 173r) dgra zun la thugs sñoms par ’jug go / (H 239, 13r)
dgra zun la sems sñoms pa / (H 239, 76r)
dgra zun la sems sñoms pa (D 2534, 250r)
4
dgra zin daṅ byams sdaṅ bye brag dbye med pa’i dmag (D 3807, 169v) dgra zun ye med ’khrul (D 2454, 118v)
The identity of the compounds is evidenced in four different structures. The clauses leave no doubt that dgra zun should be
identified here with dgra zin explained in the present study as “enemy and ally” (see s.v.). Apart from that, dgra zun is
attested in the canonical literature also in one additional phrase that does not seem to possess any equivalent with dgra
zin, cf.:
dgra zun kun la phan ’dogs śiṅ gnod pa mi byed pa’i ’jam dpal (Won-ch’uk, Dgoṅs pa zab mo ṅes par ’grel pa’i mdo rgya cher ’grel pa,
D 4016, mdo ’grel, di 97r6)
“’Jam dpal who, while benefiting all enemies and allies, does not cause any harm [to them].”
However, even in this case can dgra zun be clearly identified on semantic basis with dgra zin. To conclude, this small survey
on canonical sources, we can state that dgra zin and dgra zun are used there indeed interchangeably - the situation
mirrored in the lexicographic sources on CT cited above.
2
For the dental final -n instead of the guttural -ṅ see various dialectal forms glossed in CDTD.V:1052. Interestingly, the
dental final -n is attested in most of the WAT dialects, cf. Balti, Kargil, Tshangra, Chiktan, Sapi zun. Besides, see Balti zunma
“to catch” and ŋozin “recognition” (< *ṅo zin ~ CT ṅo ’dzin; BIELMEIER 2004b:405).
 146

“Having acted as if [he] had caught in the ltam of turquoise, [they said] ‘[You] should not catch!’
Having acted as if [he] had reached for the ltam of turquoise, [they said] ‘[You] should not reach!
[You] should act as if catching in a trap [made] of horse-tail! [You] should act as if reaching for a
snare [made] of rope1!’“
The passage seems to attest to an existence of a difference between zun and zin that concerned their
aspect. The former verb would represent the perfective whereas the latter the imperfective.2 This
would actually agree with the grammatical distinction between CT bzuṅ and’dzin. The next step in
our understanding of these verb forms should consist of a careful analysis of OT texts in which more
than one form is attested, e.g., PT 1047 (zun, zund, bzuṅ, ’dzind), PT 1136 (zun, bzuṅ), ITJ 731 (zun, gzuṅ,
zin, ’dzin; for details see OTDO).

Leaving aside the complicated question of verb morphology and semantics we can gain some insight
into the structure of dgra zun by juxtaposing it with comparable CT compounds and phrases: khoṅ
’dzin “= khoṅ khro anger; vindictiveness” (D:153b); ṅos (’d)zin pa “1to be selfish, self-interested, also
adj. selfish; 2more frq. to perceive, to know, to discern, also ṅo yis (’d)zin pa” (J:130b)3; thugs rjes zin pa
“to be kindly, graciously affected towards a person” (J:465a); sdig pas zin pa “to be affected, taken, by
sin” (J:465a). All these formations denote a person affected by a kind of emotion which is expressed
by the first member of the compound. Apart from that, JÄSCHKE glosses a VP dgrar ’dzin pa with “to

1
I understand rto ba here as related to CT sto thag “ein Strick” (Sch:222a), both are most probably corrupted variants of
rtod thag “the rope, tether tied to a stake to limit an animal’s range of grazing” (Gs:463b), Dingri, Dartsedo “cord, rope”
(CDTD:3304). Alternatively, rto ba could stand for *rtod pa, i.e., *rtod pa’i mdzol “a snare that tethers” or “a snare for
tethering”.
The meaning of ltam remains unknown.
2
Whether IMPF zin and PRF zun are to be understood as two stems belonging to one verb paradigm (similar to V1 and V2 in
CT) or rather as two independent although cognate verbs cannot be settled for the time being. A more detailed study, first
of all of their usage in OT documents, is needed before any decisive conclusions can be drawn.
In a note commenting upon his article (2004b), BIELMEIER particularised his standpoint on zin and zun stating that he
understood zin as PRF from which IMPF ’dzin has been derived by means of the prefix ’a-. The dialectal and OT zun, on the
other hand, is, in his opinion, a variant of CT (b)zuṅ that was first an IMPF form (pr. com., 07.08.2012). This assumption could
be supported by the following passage from Mdzaṅs blun cited by BIELMEIER in his paper (2004b:404 after HAHN 1996:144, l.5):
bu [...] gñis [...] nor bdag gis zin nas
“after the two sons were seized by a rich man” (trsl. BIELMEIER, ibid.)
However, some other factors could be involved here as well since the whole clause is:
de’i tshe na groṅ khyer de na rgan mo źig la [bu rtag tu rku ba gñis śig]S yod de / [nor bdag gis]A zin nas [...] (trslr. after HAHN
1996:144, ll.4-5)
“At that time, in that town, an elderly woman had two constantly robbing sons; [they] were seized by a wealthy man.”
(trsl. JB)
As is now obvious, the object of the verb zin is missing from the very clause and must be filled in from the preceding clause
where it is a subject of the copula yod. The converb de in yod de has an introductory function (cf. HAHN 1996:151-2, § 15.3)
emphasising the fact that bu gñis remains the pivot of the sentence; the passage continuous:
źal che pa’i mdun du khrid de / khrims daṅ sbyar nas bsad pa la thug nas / (trslr. after HAHN 1996:144, l.5)
“[The two sons], having been led to a judge, were judged according to the law. Hence, [they] were just on the point of
being killed.” (trsl. JB)
Thus, if one considers the clause in a broader context, it appears that zin should be read either as a passive form and thus
outside the dichotomy IMPF/PRF or as an intransitive nc-verb with meaning *”to be reached, seized” (for dialectal
collocations with zin as an nc-verb see CDTD.V:1118; for other OT intransitive constructions with an additional
complement in ERG see BIALEK, forthcoming b). In either case the literal translation of the passage would be “[two sons]
were reached by a wealthy man”.
Eventually, one should not forget that Mdzaṅs blun was translated, probably from Chinese, and is not a native Tibetan
text.
3
See hereto modern dialectal compounds ṅo ’dzin ~ ṅos ’dzin Balti “recognition, acquaintance”, Tabo, Shigatse
“recognition” (CDTD:2115).
 147

look upon one as an enemy, to take him for an enemy” (88b). Accordingly, I propose to reconstruct
the underlying structure of the compound in question as *dgrar zun pa, lit. “a taking of sb. as an
enemy” (< *dgrar zun “to take as an enemy”), understood as denoting “hostility, enmity”; compare
hereto dgrar blaṅs in PT 1283:397 and PT 1287:348.1

[T] dgra chos kyi thabs daṅ // dmag brtsan po dag kyaṅ myi rṅul du ma (50) ruṅ ste // dgra zun gyi tshul
du gyurd kyis kyaṅ // (ST Treaty E 49-50)
“Even though military tactics (lit. means of warfare; see s.v. dgra thabs) and mighty armies, not being
suitable not to pursue [the matter], turned to hostility (lit. manner of hostility), [...]”2

31 mgo nan
CT ’go nan
GC:160b: ’go ba nan tan can daṅ daṅ po (s.v. ’go nan); LCh:148b: =thog ma prathama; BTC:497b: (rñiṅ) thog ma (s.v. ’go nan);
DSM:106b: thog ma; BYD:100b: thog ma.
LCAṄSKYA.2006:266: thog ma (s.v. ’go nan).
D:285a: thog ma, prathama first, foremost (s.v. ’go nan); R.2:179a: prathama; первый; передовой; first; foremost; p.194a:
начальный, первый; beginning, first (s.v. *’go nan); B:108a: beginning; first [thog ma] (s.v. ’go nan); Gs:239c: starting,
beginning (s.v. ’go nan); WTS.12:356a: 1Vorrechte; 2= ’go nan (“Oberstes, Erstes, Anfang”, 372b).
TUCCI.1950:51: mgo nan la first; RICHARDSON.1969:254: principal clause; RICHARDSON.1973:16n16: important rules for
safeguarding monastic endowments; RICHARDSON.1985:81: principal instruction; p.162: strict instruction (?); LI/COBLIN:331:
main urgency; p.384: primary exigency (?); DOTSON.2007b:49: earliest.

[S] *[mgo]O nan “to press the head”

[E] *mgo nan pa “what presses the head”
[M] (N) incipit
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[R] rtsis mgo
[A] According to the syntactic structure of the clause from the Skar cuṅ inscription (see the Text
section), mgo nan has to be interpreted as a noun: it is followed by the case particle las and preceded
by the genitive particle gi by means of which further specifications are added to the word. We learn
from the passage that monastic estates (lha ris) were in possession of a document, the so-called
“households register” (see s.v. khyim yig), a part of which either was called mgo nan or referred to
matters which were called mgo nan. mgo nan apparently contained instructions according to which
the assets of the Three Jewels, i.e. of the Buddhist establishment, shall be administered.

1
Returning once more to the question of the relationship between zin and zun and having in mind our analysis of both
compounds dgra zin and dgra zun a working hypothesis could be put forward concerning deverbal derivational processes.
Namely, the assumed IMPF -zin in the former compound yields a noun that denotes a person performing the action
described by the verb (“to adhere” > “adherent”; cf. in this context also gñen ’dzin Tabo “relative, member of family”,
Yolmo “friends”, CDTD:3060) whereas the PRF -zun renders action caused by an agent (“to take” > “taking/having taken”).
The lack of semantic distinction between dgra zun and dgra zin in the canonical sources might have resulted from the fact
that at some point of time the very derivational processes ceased to be productive. Thus, the original meaning of dgra zun
has been consigned to oblivion and the compound itself understood as a variant of dgra zin.
2
THOMAS quotes also dgra zun from ITN 1643:B, but, according to him, it should be read dgra zon “guard-house”
(TLTD.2:424), “ watch (in fort)” (TLTD.3:122b). Although it is obvious that THOMAS’ translation (and perhaps even the text
reconstruction as well as the ordering of lines) is incorrect (cf. dgra zun gyi mtshams gyi son [...] (trslr. after TLTD) “son [...] of
the dgra zun’s borders” rendered by him as “coming to the guard-lines”, TLTD.2:184), I myself am not able to propose an
interpretation that would contribute to our understanding of dgra zun in this context. Nevertheless, from the context it
seems to be a different compound than the one analysed here, maybe a variant of dgra zin, “borders between (lit. of)
enemies and allies”?
 148

In order to provide the reader with a better understanding of the compound, I shall cite a few
chosen clauses from OT documents that clarify the semantics of the phrase ‘X las ’byuṅ’:
kha mar las ’byuṅ “to appear from the kha mar[-document]” (ITJ 740:258);
gral thabs las ’byuṅ “to appear from gral thabs” (PT 1085:r47);
chad byaṅ las ’byuṅ “to appear from a punishment-tablet” (ITJ 740:327);
chos gtsigs daṅ / bka’ luṅ stsald pa las ’byuṅ “to appear from the edict on religion and command
given“ (Lcaṅ 8; Or.15000/265:v3);
gtad las ’byuṅ “to appear from a gtad” (PT 1297.2:13);
dam gi glad nan las ’byuṅ “to appear from glad nan of a bond” (PT 2124:B10; PT 2125:A9)1;
dam yig las ’byuṅ “to appear from a text of a bond” (PT 1119:D12)2;
nan skor goṅ ma las ’byuṅ “to appear from the former nan skor” (PT 1136:37-8);
dpaṅ rgya las ’byuṅ “to appear from the contract” (Or.15000/426:r5; Or.15000/470:5)3.
phyag rgya las ’byuṅ “to appear from the officially sealed document” (PT 1085:r9; PT 1120:r14);
(’)phrin byaṅ las ’byuṅ “to appear from a message-tablet” (PT 997:13; PT 999:8; PT 1085:r51-2);
myig mar las ’byuṅ “to appear from a myig mar[-document]” (ITJ 740:337);
źu(s) lan las ’byuṅ ba “to appear from the reply to the petition” (ITJ 740:272, 286, 307, 320);
raṅ nan las ’byuṅ “to appear from a raṅ nan” (PT 1120:r3);
śo tshigs las ’byuṅ “to appear from a statue of dice divination” (ITJ 740:292).
Even though the exact meanings of some of the lexemes mentioned here cannot be established with
absolute certainty, it seems obvious that most of them denoted various kinds of documents. It
follows that the phrase ‘DOCUMENT las ’byuṅ’ introduced an authority on which the relevant action
rested. Still even more interesting is the observation that three compounds cited above contain the
morpheme nan: raṅ nan, glad nan and nan skor. Unfortunately, raṅ nan occurs in a fragment about one
third length of lines of which is missing not allowing us any satisfying conclusions concerning its
content. Concerning glad nan, we are provided with some additional information; namely, that it
forms a part of dam “a bond”4. Moreover, its first member is a synonym of mgo (cf. J:80a-b and PT
1287:54). In case of mgo nan of a households register it is the maintenance of a religious institution
that is managed according to it whereas glad nan of a bond obviously comprises details regarding the
repayment or return of loans, e.g., the time of repayment5. By comparing clauses containing mgo nan
and glad nan with other phrases quoted above one can ascertain that their structures differ
significantly in the following manner:
1. ‘DOCUMENT TYPE + las ’byuṅ’
2. ‘DOCUMENT TYPE + GEN + mgo/glad nan + las ’byuṅ’

1
For both documents see TAKEUCHI 1995:238ff., texts 29 & 30.
2
See TAKEUCHI 1995:247ff., text 31.
3
See TAKEUCHI 1995:283ff., text 42 and 299f., text 50, respectively.
4
For this meaning of dam see TAKEUCHI 1995:140.
5
Cf. TAKEUCHI 1995:239 and 243.
 149

This comparison demonstrates unequivocally that mgo/glad nan neither was a kind of document nor
referred to special rules that would constitute the main part of a document. The latter statement is
based on the assumption that indicating directly a concrete official document, as in all the other
cases, gave it already sufficient authority. There was no need to mention any further rules.

Let us now take a closer look at glad nan in the passage reconstructed by TAKEUCHI (1995:239:10-11) as
follows:
’bul pa’i dus ni lan ’di’i dgun sla ’briṅ [po] ña la dam gi glad nan [las] ’byuṅ (11)] [bgy]is // (PT 2124:10-1)
“Concerning the time of repayment, [one should] make [it] on the fifteenth (ña) of the middle
winter month of this year [as it] appears from glad nan of the bond.” (trsl. JB)
Now, ll.3-4 of the same document contain the following statement regarding the time of repayment:
’bul ba ’i dus ni lug gi lo’i dgun sla (4) [---] [’byuṅ pa bźin] du [...] ’bul bar bgyis (PT 2124:3-4;
reconstruction following TAKEUCHI 1995:238)
“Concerning the time of repayment, [it] should be paid back in [---] the winter month of the
sheep year according to what appears [---].” (trsl. JB)
Thus, we see that the information which is referred to by means of the phrase glad nan las ’byuṅ in
l.10 is indeed contained in ll.3-4 of the same document. Terms of repayment formed the third out of
seven obligatory parts of a loan contract following immediately the date of the contract and its
subjects (for the whole formula see TAKEUCHI 1995:48ff.).

Listing of compounds with the second member -nan should help us to determine its meaning in mgo
nan: ska nan “fitted to the waist” (SNELLGROVE 1967:291; < *ska nan pa “pressing the waist”, i.e. “a
girdle”, cf. CT ska rags); goṅ nan “upper press?” (THOMAS/GILES 1947:756); chag nan/non “sandals”
(SNELLGROVE 1967:296; < *chags pa nan pa, lit. “pressing the stepping one”?); mchin nan “lit. liver-
pressing, i.e., keeping the liver in order” (D:434a); steg nan “saddle-girth” (CDTD:3395); them nan
“exakt, sorgfältig” (CÜPPERS 2004:56); ’thus nan “klar, deutlich” (CÜPPERS 2004:57); ’thems nan “(rñiṅ)
nan chags byas pa” (BTC:1230a), “eindringlich” (CÜPPERS 2004:57), “nan tan” (DSM:313b); dbu nan
“urging, insisting (h.)” (Gs:752c); OT stsaṅ nan lit. “grain-pressing”, “(rñiṅ) btuṅ ba” (BTC:2214b, s.v.
rtsaṅ nan); tsha nan “strict, stern, harsh” (Gs:870b); tshal nan “(rñiṅ) btuṅ ba” (BTC:2264a); źib nan
“intensive Prüfung” (CÜPPERS 2004:84: < *źib ’jug nan tan); ’og nan “thog ma” (DSM:822b; BDSN apus
MIMAKI 1992:489). In all these examples -nan seems to have represented a deverbative (derived from
the verb *nan pa “to press”1) with the original meaning “pressing” that could be used either as an
adjective “pressing, urgent” or as a noun “the act of pressing; presure”.

1
Cf. CT non “1to press; 2to overtake, to catch, to reach; 3to brood, to hatch” (J:307a-b) and BIELMEIER 2004b:403-4 on the
suppletive paradigm of CT non.
 150

To sum up, the underlying structure of the compound in question can be reconstructed as *mgo nan
pa, lit. “pressing the head”1, which, in accordance with our earlier analysis, can be interpreted as
denoting a concrete part of an official document, most probably its incipit. I assume that glad nan
and mgo nan were synonyms coined, in all likelihood, in various dialects.2 The widely attested
variant ’go nan has developed probably paralleling the semantic specialization from mgo “head; first
place, principal part” to “head (part of the body)” and arising of the new form ’go that took over the
meaning “first place, principal part”.3

[T] dkon mchog gsum gyi rkyen bcad pa’i rnams (50) kyaṅ ma dma’s ma źig pa’i chos su // lha ris kyi khyim
yig gi mgo nan las (51) ’byuṅ ba bźin du chis mdzad do (Skar cuṅ 49-51)
”Concerning the assets allotted to the Three Jewels, [they] are managed on the authority of what
appears from the incipit of the households register of the monastic estate according to the
[established] custom [that it] must not be diminished nor destroyed.”

32 rgal mkhas
BTK:82n5: dmag ʼthab la mkhas pa’i don no.
DTH:151: habile aux gués; DOTSON.2013a:310: skilled in battle.

[E] *rgol ba la mkhas pa “skilled in fighting”

[M] (A) experienced in fighting
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTincorporating; adjectival; STRC[VNV1+A]
[R] dkyel mkhas
[A] A list of OT compounds formed with the second member –mkhas is provided s.v. dkyel mkhas. In
the passage from the OTC cited in the Text section below, [Kag] la boṅ is praised for his skills and
qualities, like intelect, or bravery. The context in which he is attributed a victory over a Chinese
emperor leaves no doubt that rgal mkhas is indended to describe his military skills. This in turn
brings us to the verb rgol “to dispute, combat, fight” (J:104b) the OT meaning of which is confirmed
in the following passage:
yu bus li[g] (431) myi rhya la rgol phod na ni g.yu thogs śig // rgol ma phod na ni bud myed daṅ mtshuṅs
źu gyon chig zer (432) ba lta źes bkaʼ stsal nas // rje blon blod blod de // lig myi rhya ʼi srid brlag go //
(PT 1287:430-2)
“’Like [she] said, if we dare to fight against Lig myi rhya, [we] shall bind the turquoises! In case
we do not dare to fight [against him], [we] should put on hats like women!‘, thus [the btsan po]
said. Therafter, lords and councillors, having conferred, destroyed the dominion of Lig myi
rhya.”

1
< VP *[mgo]O nan, lit. “to press the head”, i.e. “to begin”. For a similar semantic development cf. dbu brñes “vi. to be
founded, to come into existence/being (h.)” (Gs:752c; < *”to get the head”).
2
On the semantic differences between mgo and *glad in modern spoken Tibetan dialects cf. BIELMEIER 2004a:169ff.
3
With this in mind one would actually expect ’og nan to have meant “the end” (lit. *”pressing the bottom”) as against its
meaning glossed in DSM:822b and cited earlier.
The meaning “1Vorrechte“ glossed for mgo nan in WTS.12:356a, based on the very passage from Skar cuṅ inscription, is
purely contextual and can be dismissed in favour of the lexicographically attested and herewith confirmed identity of mgo
nan with the CT ’go nan.
 151

We find the same meaning in PT 1287 attested for the form brgal as well, cf.:
ʼuṅ nas myi chen gyis // dags po lha de la brgal te // dags po yoṅs su bkug ste // myi chen (215) gyi bya
dgaʼr // gser khuṅ re ʼu rgal gyi myi daṅ ʼbrog du bchas te stsal to // (PT 1287:214-5)
“Thereafter, Myi chen, having fought against Lha de [of] Dags po, completely subdued Dags po; as
a reward for (lit. of) Myi chen, [one], having put together men and mountain pastures of Gser
khuṅ re ’u rgal, gave [them to him].”
This passage contains the clause dags po lha de la brgal that can be juxtaposed with ‘X la rgol’ “to fight
against X” from the first fragment. Herewith is the identity of the verb forms rgol and brgal as
belonging to one paradigm confirmed.

rgal, on the other hand, as a verb form is attested in OT sources in two different structures: ‘X las
rgal’, lit. “to cross over X”, and ‘X rgal’, lit. “to cross X”. This verb is obviously related to CT rgal “to
step over; to pass or climb over; to leap over; to ford; to travel through, to sail over, to pass” (J:103b).
Both, rgal and rgol are c-verbs (see CDTD.V:269 & 271).1 The meaning “to conquer” for rgal does not
seem to be documented neither in CT literature nor in the modern spoken dialects.2

In accordance with the preceding analysis, the underlying structure of the compound is proposed to
have been *rgol ba la mkhas pa, lit. “skilled, experienced in fighting”.3 The sound change from *rgol
mkhas to rgal mkhas is most likely to be accounted for as a case of a regressive vowel assimilation: -o-
> -a- / _Cσ-a-.

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa /
chab (355) chab ni ma gźug nas //
la boṅ ni rje daṅ skol /
blo che ni dkyel mkhas la //
rgal mkhas ni / (356) khoṅ dpaʼ bas //
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ la /
dgraʼ bźer ni g.yul sprad ciṅ /
dgra zin ni gsar (357) spaṅs pas //
“Formerly, last year, two years ago,
from the lower end of the river,
[Kag] la boṅ, the lord and [his] subjects,
of broad mind, experienced in overthrowing and
experienced in fighting, of brave ?heart?,
who commited a battle at a fortified encampment
against the Chinese ruler, Bsam laṅ, and
who renounced anew [his] enemies and allies,

1
The verbs rgol and rgal are apparently cognate. The word family encompasses also ’gal “to be in opposition or
contradiction to; to counteract, to transgress, violate, infringe, break” (J:93a). Two further verbs could be considered as
belonging here as well, namely, rgyal ba “to be victorious” (J:108a; for the assumed palatalisation of the stem consonant see
SIMON 1975:613 who adds here also brgyal “to sinkdown senseless, to faint”, J:123b) and sgrol ba “2to lead, transport, carry, to
cross” (J:122b-3a). CDTD.V:269 includes here also gal ba “to force, to press something on a person” (J:68b; < *”to impose sth.
on sb.”), but this verb seems to be cognate rather to ’gel ba “1to load, to lay on; 2to put, to place on or over” (J:95a), etc.
2
Although, as against this statement, one could quote:
dgra ru rgal g.yag du druṅ (9) phod dam (PT 1287:8-9)
“Would [you] dare to fight as [my] foe? Would [you] dare to wage [war] as yak?”
Two text amendments are proposed here. rgal [...] phod should be read *rgol [...] phod for which compare rgol phod in PT
1287:431 quoted above as well as various other OT constructions involving the modal verb phod, all of which are formed
according to the structure ‘V1+phod’ (see OTDO; CT examples of the same structure can be found in J:346b). Secondly, I
assume that druṅ should be read *draṅ and interpreted as an abbreviation, due to metrics, of a well known OT phrase dra
ma draṅ (for details on this collocation see s.v. dra cen). Both changes could have resulted from vowel assimilations
although the operation of folk etymologisation cannot be dismissed especially in the case of druṅ were the omission of the
assumed direct object *dra ma might have brought about the re-interpretation of the phrase *g.yag du draṅ as a N+POST, i.e.,
g.yag du druṅ. Further textual problems occurring in the transmitted version of the first chapter of the OTC are discussed
in the footnotes to the Text section s.v. rje dbyal.
3
For other examples of mkhas pa as used after nouns derived from v1 stems see s.v. dkyel mkhas.
 152

srid kyi ni mgo bzuṅ źiṅ / tried to obtain from (lit. upon) the divine son, the btsan
po,
pha skyabs ni sdug btsal paʼ // the head of the dominion that he had held and
lha sras ni btsan la / (358) btsal // (PT 1287:354-8) the agreeableness under the protection of the
father (i.e. the btsan po) he was looking for.”1

33 rgod g.yuṅ
SR.1:429.1: qataγu ǰögelen2; GC:169b: rtsub rgod daṅ ’jam dul la’aṅ. rgod btul; BTC:527a: 1gyoṅ po daṅ dul po; 2sman gyi nus
pa drag źan; DSM:114b: ’baṅs rab daṅ ’baṅs kyi las byed kyi miṅ ste; BSh:118b: 1sgom gyi skabs su sems rgod pa daṅ byiṅ ba;
2
rgod daṅ g.yuṅ ste rgod ni ma dul ba daṅ gyoṅ po’i don daṅ g.yuṅ ni dal źiṅ lhod pa daṅ źan pa’i don.
Gs:251b: 1abbr. unyielding / hard and gentle; 2the strength of medicine; 3military and civil; WTS.13:408a: die zum
Militärdienst Verpflichteten und die zum nichtmilitärischen Dienst Verpflichteten (s.v. rgod).
DTH:51: (yack) sauvages et (yack) apprivoisés; TUCCI.1956:86n1: military men and civilians; URAY.1971:556: 1. sens propre:
“domestiqué et indomestiqué, sauvage et apprivoisé, violent et doux”, adj.; 2. sens figuré, comme terme social: a) “(sujets)
obligés au service militaire et (sujets) corvéables”, b) “tous les (sujets)”, adj. et nom; URAY.1972b:27: the savage and the
tame; URAY.1975:161: personnes astreintes au service militaire et des corvéables; UEBACH.2003:23: men obliged to military
service and men obliged to civil service; DOTSON.2007b:7: the military and the civilians; UEBACH.2008:60: [those] obliged to
military and those obliged to corvée service; UEBACH/ZEISLER.2008:318: those obliged to military service (rgod) and those
obliged to non-military service (g.yuṅ); DOTSON.2009:85: fierce (military) and tame (civilians); p.123: soldiers and civilians;
IWAO.2012:73: The rgod g.yuṅ division in the Tibetan Empire was represented by rgod kyi sde (xingren buluo) and dar pa’i sde
(simian buluo) in Dunhuang.

[E] *rgod daṅ g.yuṅ “fierce and weak ones”

[M] (N) 1braves and weaklings; 2bondservants; all those obliged to corvée work
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; antonymous; 1copulative; 2generic, hypernymic,
collective; STRC[N+N]
[A] rgod is glossed with “2bird of prey; 3wild; 4prudent” (J:104a), “1vulture; 2wild, untamed; 6vi. to be
unable to concentrate when meditating; 7military” (Gs:251a), “1wild, rau, unstet, beweglich; 2zum
Militärdienst verpflichtet, militärisch, heldenhaft; 3klug” (WTS.13:407b-8a), “warrior” (TUCCI
1956:84n2), “militaires” (STEIN.RA 1963:328), “1indomestiqué, sauvage, violent, combatif; 2(sujet)
obligé au service militaire; 3aigle” (URAY 1971:555), “savage” (URAY 1972b:18), “military household”
(YAMAGUCHI 1992:57), “military [thousand-district]” (TAKEUCHI 1995:510b), “brave and splendid
particularly in Amdo dialects” (KARMAY 1998:397n56), “a subject with military duties” (RICHARDSON
1998c:163n28).

The following meanings could be ascertained for rgod in derived formations attested in OT
documents3:
1
untamed, wild (of animals): rgod po (PT 126:148) “vulture”; rgod gśog (PT 1194:41, 45) “vulture’s
wing“; phag rgod (PT 1287:328) “wild boar”; bya rgod (numerous attestations, see OTDO) “vulture”;
g.yag rgod (PT 1047:281-2, 286; PT 1287:328; ITJ 750:232, 233) “wild yak”;

1
For the explanation of some of the expressions used in this fragment see s.v. dgra bźer.
2
CM qataγu “hard, strong; steadfast, inflexible; tight, still; grim, cruel, rigorous; strict, severe; drastic; pitiless” (Less:943b);
ǰögelen “soft, tender; weak, vapid, feeble” (Less:1074b).
3
Whether rgod ma “a mare” (J:104a) and rgod mo “mare” (CDTD:1666) are derived from rgod “wild” or rgod “to laugh”
remains uncertain. The last two should be treated as separate lexemes, rgod and dgod, respectively.
 153

2
wild growing (of plants): rgod sman (ITJ 738:3v57) “wild medicament” (THOMAS 1957:133); sman
rgod (ITJ 738:3v38, 92) “wild-grown medicament; wild drugs” (THOMAS 1957:132, 135), “wild sman”
(BELLEZZA 2005:234);
3
aggressive, fierce, cruel; coarse, crude (of behaviour, character): myi rgod (PT 1047:347; PT 1283:
627; CT mi rgod) “ein Wilder, wilder Mensch; Räuber” (Sch:104a), “a wild or savage man; a robber,
ruffian, [...] the Tibetan always attaches to this word mi rgod the notion of some gigantic hairy
fiend” (J:104a), “wildman, savage; robber” (D:957b), “klo ba lta bu” (GC:632a), “1ape, gorilla; 2yeti,
abominable snowman; 3strong, brave, courageous, tough” (Gs:794a)1.
Moreover, in OT legal texts rgod aquired a special meaning referring to a social group and its
members: rgod do ’tshal (PT 1071:r247, r301, PT 1072:19-20) “whichever rgod (or: whoever belongs to a
rgod group)”; rgyal ’baṅs rgod do ’tshal (PT 1071:r250-1, r265, r277) “whichever king’s subject who is a
rgod”2; rtse rgod (ITJ 753:2, 4, 8, 50) “rgod of a hill fort”, “’baṅs” (GC:683b); rgod kyi stoṅ pon (PT
1089:r30) “head of the thousand[-district] of rgod”, “le stoṅ pon de Rgod” (LALOU 1955:181); rgya śa cu
pa rgod (PT 1111:4; Or.8210/S.10647:v1) “Chinese rgod-inhabitant of Śa cu”; rgod stoṅ sde, lit.
“thousand-district of rgod”, “groupes de mille militaires” (STEIN.RA 1963:328), “military chiliarchies”
(DOTSON 2009:195)3.

It appears that rgod as an adjective was used in OT sources in relation to human beings only in a
clearly defined meaning as “aggressive, fierce”. Thus, I propose to interpret the legal and
administrative term rgod as referring originally to the trait of the character of those men by calling
them “fierce[-ones]”. However, the term underwent lexicalisation already in OT and aquired the
meaning “brave, warrior”.4 On the whole, rgod denoted a man bound to military duties (frontier
guard, military service in strongholds, etc.) during war and peace periods. As opposed to rgod, dmag
myi, lit. “an army-man”, seems to have denoted soldiers actively fighting a battle.

1
Cf. myi rgod dam rkun / (348) / pho ’am myi ’dzind grog chen pho (PT 1047:347-8) “ruffian or thief or great ?kidnapping? (lit.
man-capturing) rogue (read rog instead of grog)”. This clause, juxtaposing myi rgod with a thief and a rogue, demonstrates
that the compound denoted a man that was regarded dangerous. -rgod would then refer to his impulsive, savage
behaviour.
2
The usage of the word rgyal- in this compound (< *rgyal po’i ’baṅs) could point to the post-imperial date of this document.
The compound rgyal ’baṅs is otherwise not attested in OT records, instead it occurs few times in canonical literature, cf.
RKTS.
3
The term rgod stoṅ sde has not been attested so far in OT documents. According to TUCCI’s description (1956:81ff.) of the
military division as depicted in Dpa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreṅ ba’s Chos ’byuṅ mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, rgod stoṅ sde = stoṅ sde, i.e. each
ru consisted of eight rgod stoṅ sde “great military chiliarchies”, one stoṅ bu chuṅ “small chiliarchy” and one sku sruṅ gi stoṅ
sde “chiliarchy of guards, personal guards”.
Perhaps rgod khaṅ “brave house” (BELLEZZA 2005:265; actually “a house of a rgod”, i.e. a house where a member of a rgod
group lives), rgod bon “military chaplain?” (BELLEZZA 2008:374; lit. “a bon-priest of a rgod-group” ?), and the already assigned
to the second group of meanings rgod sman *”a sman of a rgod-group”, belong here as well.
The employment of the term rgod in administrative practice resulted even in giving to one of the thousand-districts the
designation rgod sar gyi sde (ITJ 844:1) or, alternatively, rgod sar stoṅ sde (ITJ 1383:1).
4
For the proposed translation compare Eng. brave which used as a noun means “an American Indian warrior”;
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/brave?q=brave; 13.06.2014. On the modern connotation of the term rgod
see the following note by KARMAY (1998:397n56): “the word rgod often has the sense of brave and splendid particularly in
Amdo dialects, for example, bu rgod, the ‘fine brave man’.”
 154

g.yuṅ is glossed with “g.yuṅ ni mis bdag byed kyi g.yag go; sarluγ; manda, nomuqan, dölgegen”
(SR.2:863.41), “tame, domestic” (Cs:35a), “zahm” (Sch:536a), “1=mdzo g.yuṅ the cross between cow and
yak” (D:1153b), “g.yuṅ ba ste źan pa’i don” (BYD:519b), “1’baṅs mi’am bran g.yog; 2ṅes pa; 3źan pa;
4
bod kyi rus miṅ źig ste” (DSM:866a-b), “dmag don min pa’i las byed ’baṅs mi’am bran g.yog”
(BTC:2624a), “L’étymologie du mot g.yuṅ reste obscure. Son alternance avec kheṅ pourrait bien
suggérer un emprunt au chinois.” (STEIN.RA 1963:330), “1domestiqué, apprivoisé, doux, tranquille,
faible; 2(sujet, sutout artisant et commerçant) non atreint au service militaire, mais corvéable” (URAY
1971:556), “labour force; those liable to statute-labour, working people” (STEIN.RA 1972:111), “tame”
(URAY 1972b:18), “people of the lowest order, virtually outside the pale of Tibetan society”
(RICHARDSON 1983:137), “civilian households” (YAMAGUCHI 1992:57), “subjects with civilian duties –
farming, labouring etc.” (RICHARDSON 1998c:163n28), “civil household” (IWAO 2007:211), “civilian, lit.
‘tame’” (DOTSON 2009:261), “civil servant” (IWAO 2009:99).

Additionally, certain number of derivatives can be listed in which the morpheme g.yuṅ is used to
refer to human beings, cf.: g.yuṅ pa “= mgar, forgeron; = bśan, boucher; = rṅon pa, chasseur, etc.;
hommes de condition vile” (Desg:922b); g.yuṅ po “1pukkasaḥ; 2ḍomba” (Mvy:3872-3), “pukkasaḥ;
ḍombaḥ” (Negi.13:6066a), “a low caste people of India” (D:1154a), “kla klo’i rigs sam ba laṅ daṅ bya
daṅ sdig sbur sbal lcoṅ sogs za ba’i rigs yin par ’dul ba ’grel chuṅ las gsuṅs” (GC:809a), “kla klo’am
kla klo’i rigs” (BYD:519b), “1ma rabs; 2kla klo” (DSM:867a), “person of low caste in India” (Gs:1013a),
“1(tsaṇḍala) (bukkasaḥ) gdol rigs te. sṅar rgya gar gyi rigs dman pa źig; 2sdig srin daṅ sbal pa lcoṅ mo
sogs za mkhan gyi mi rigs la dma’ ’bebs byas pa’i miṅ” (BTC:2624b), “folk” (TUCCI 1956:90); g.yuṅ pho
“sukkasaḥ (for pukkasaḥ - JB), parpaka (?), ḍombaḥ” (Ts:164a3), “rigs ṅan pho” (DSM:867b); g.yuṅ ba
“garhyaḥ” (Negi.13:6066b), “1to outcaste; to cast out; 2one of the very ugly and repulsive appearance,
a cadaverous-looking person” (D:1154a), “= źan pa, mauvais, vil” (Desg:922b), “źan pa ste. gzugs po
źan pa daṅ dṅos rigs źan pa” (BYD:519b-20a), “brlib ba daṅ źan pa sogs la ’jug ste” (DSM:867b),
“3inferior goods, items” (Gs:1013a-b); g.yuṅ mo “pulindaḥ” (Mvy:3871), “ḍombinī” (Ts:164a3), “a
woman having always the menses” (Cs:35a), “ein Weib mit beständigem Blutflusse; ein gemeines,
unreines Weib” (Sch:536a), “1a woman of the lowest caste in India” (D:1154a), “servante, femme
débauchée” (Desg:922b), “kla klo’i rigs sam ba laṅ daṅ bya daṅ sdig sbur sbal lcoṅ sogs za ba’i rigs yin
par ’dul ba ’grel chuṅ las gsuṅs” (GC:809a), “rigs ṅan pa’am źan pa” (BYD:520a), “rigs ṅan mo”
(DSM:867b), “female of low caste in India” (Gs:1013b), “1sṅar rgya gar gyi bśan pa’i rigs kyi bud med;
2
bud med rigs ṅan nam ’chal mo” (BTC:2625a); g.yuṅ rigs “pukkasakulaṃ” (Negi.13.6067b). Therefore,
two main meanings of g.yuṅ when used in connection with humans could be discerned: 1”a person of
lower social class, commoner” and 2”inferior; contemptible, vile”.

1
CM sarluγ “yak” (Less:676b); nomuqan “peaceful, meek, gentle, calm; modest; obedient, tame” (Less:591a); dölügen “gentle,
calm” (Less:267a).
 155

As opposed to rgod, the morpheme g.yuṅ is much more sparsely attested in OT documents.1 The
phrases in which it occurs include: g.yuṅ ṅo ’tshal(d) (PT 1071:r277, 300, PT 1072:19) “whichever g.yuṅ
(or: whoever belongs to a g.yuṅ group)”; rgyal ’baṅs g.yuṅ ṅo ’tshal(d) (PT 1071:r287, 288, 299, 311, PT
1072:6, 7, 18, 30) “whichever king’s subject who is a g.yuṅ”; myi g.yuṅ (ITJ 740:140) “a weak man” (?);
pe’u g.yuṅ (ITJ 740:141) “a weak calf” (read be’u instead of pe’u?).

Although the etymology of g.yuṅ remains unclear (a borrowing cannot be excluded), based on the
documented glosses the following semantic development could be proposed: “weak” > “weakling” >
“low-caste” > “vile”. Similarly as in case of rgod, I assume that g.yuṅ as a social and legal term was
originally meant to describe the trait of character of people who were supposed to be either literally
too weak to do military service (children, women, elderly people, etc.) or for any other reason unfit
for it.

The comparison of the social groups rgod and g.yuṅ on the basis of the OT legal texts allows us to
state that the latter belonged to the lowest class of the society together with serfs, who were bound
to the fields of commoners or aristocrats (źaṅ lon daṅ dmaṅs kyi bran rkya la gtogs pa, PT 1071:r288-8),
and barbarian captives (lho bal kyi btson, PT 1071:289). rgod together with gtsaṅ chens, serfs bound to
the fields of commoners or aristocrats (źaṅ lon daṅ dmaṅs kyi bran rkya la gtogs pa PT 1071:265-6) and
mṅan’s assistants (mṅan gyi mṅan lag, PT 1071:r266) formed the second lowest class.2 Apart from rgod,
all the other social groups mentioned here as well as the first seven social strata (for description of
which see DOTSON 2004:81-2 and DOTSON 2007b:8-9, Table 1) were actually civilians. For this reason I
have decided to render g.yuṅ as “weakling”, which, on the one hand, refers to the assumed character
of the members of this class and, on the other hand, allows us to capture the semantic shift to
“outcast” or “the lowest social class” attested in later sources.3

rgod g.yuṅ is an antonymous compound strongly resembling compounds formed from two adjectives
to denote an abstract notion, like che chuṅ “size”, lit. “big or/and small”, etc. However, it is used
exclusively as a collective noun in OT documents.4 Its collective character can be better accounted
for if we juxtapose rgod g.yuṅ gyi pha los (see the Text section) with the following phrases: źaṅ źuṅ daṅ
mard kyi pha los (ITJ 750:213), ’a źa’i pha los (ITJ 750:269-70), and bod yul gyi pha los (Or.8212.187:1).

1
The morpheme g.yuṅ as occurring in the richly attested compound g.yuṅ druṅ is deemed unrelated to the discussed g.yuṅ.
2
Either the text is corrupt here or it was composed some time after the fall of the Tibetan Empire and the subtleties of the
social hierarchy were not correctly recognised any more. Otherwise it is hardly understandable why the same group of
serfs bound to the fields of commoners or aristocrats (źaṅ lon daṅ dmaṅs kyi bran rkya la gtogs pa) is mentioned twice: in the
eighth and ninth class. Serfs (bran) should probably be included in the ninth class, rather than together with gtsaṅ chens,
warriors, and mṅans’ assistants who are in the eighth.
3
Eng. weakling is actually glossed also as “1.1An ineffectual or cowardly person”
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/weakling?q=weakling; 13.06.2014) - a description that matches
quite well our idea about the social role of g.yuṅ in the Tibetan Empire as a social group unable to cope with military
duties.
4
The interpretation of rgod g.yuṅ as a coordinate compound formed from antonyms in order to express their hypernym
could explain its usage as a collective term for which no suffix -s was needed although the form *rgod g.yuṅs would be
allowed according to the phonotactics of the Tibetan language. On -s as a collective suffix see DENWOOD 1986, ZEISLER
2011:144 and the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan of the present work.
 156

Accordingly, apart from the literal reading “braves and weaklings”, I propose to render rgod g.yuṅ as
“bondservants; all free people (in contrast to bran) obliged to do corvée work1” - the term meant
here provisionally to encompass all social groups with the exception of the aristocracy (the first
seven groups in Table 1 in DOTSON 2007b:8-9), serfs (bran) and barbarian captives.2 Yet, to understand
entirely the scope of the meanings of this compound it is necessary to define the difference between
rgod g.yuṅ and dmaṅs.

According to DOTSON (2004:82), dmaṅs “commoner(s)” is a general term referring to people of all
social groups that belonged to the eighth and ninth social strata, i.e. gtsaṅ chens, braves (rgod),
mṅans’ assistants, weaklings (g.yuṅ), serfs (bran) bound to the fields of commoners or arisocrats, and
barbarian captives. rgod g.yuṅ would thus include braves and weaklings – the only two groups from
among these that were obliged to regular corvée work: rgod to military service, g.yuṅ to all the other
kinds of labour. Consequently, I would like to offer the following translations for the terms under
discussion: dmaṅs “populace; commoner(s)”, rgod g.yuṅ “bondservant; a person bound in service
without wages”, bran “serf”3. Another commonly occurring term, ’baṅs “subject”, is a relative noun
connoting a condition of being subject to someone else; thus, in the Tibetan Empire the only person
that could not be included in ’baṅs was the btsan po.4

[T] 1 blon che stoṅ rtsan gyis / moṅ pu sral ʼdzoṅ duʼ (28) bsduste / rgod g.yuṅ dbye źiṅ / mkho śam chen
pho bgyi baʼi rtsis mgo bgyi bar lo gchig / (PT 1288:27-8)
“Grand councillor [Mgar] stoṅ rtsan [yul zuṅ] convened [the council] at Sral ’dzoṅ [of] Moṅ pu; the
initial account of braves and weaklings, that were divided, as well as of the great administrative
arrangements, that were undertaken, was made; thus one year.”
2
lugi lo la / btsan poe po braṅ dbyard ra mtshar na bźugste / blon chen po chuṅ bzaṅ gyis / dbyar ʼdun (294)
breṅ du bsduste / pha los gyi byaṅ bu bor / dgun pho braṅ brag mar na bźugs / skyi rnamsu rgod g.yuṅ gyi
pha los (295) cen po bkug / (ITJ 750:293-5)
“In the year of the sheep, the btsan po’s court stayed in the summer at Ra mtshar; grand councillor
[’Bro] chuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having convened the summer council at Breṅ, issued (lit. casted) tablets
for (lit. of) a gathering. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag mar. [One] convoked a great
gathering of bondservants at Rnams [of] Skyi.”

1
The term “corvée work” is used here in its broadest sense as referring to all sorts of unfree labour imposed by a superior.
2
An interesting picture of the relationship between rgod and g.yuṅ can be gathered from the following, unfortunately
incomplete, passage:
bdag ṅan pas // rgya rgod du (11) [---] gsol te / gsol ba bźan (read: gźan) du mdzad nas / rgod du phyuṅ ste // sṅun g.yuṅ khams
na mchis pa’i tshe (PT 1091:10-11)
“We, the humble ones, requested [that one does not (?) send] the Chinese to braves. [The authorities] processed [our]
request differently. Hence, having sent [the Chinese] to bravelings, at the time when there were weaklings in the region
before [...].”
We can suppose that the passage contains a complaint about delegating some Chinese citizens, who were earlier working
as weaklings (g.yuṅ), to braves (rgod), thus, leaving the community without sufficient manpower. For a different
translation see IWAO 2012:71.
3
I understand bran in this context as a legal term describing a condition of an agricultural labourer being bound to lord’s
(źaṅ lon or dmaṅs) estate and devoid of personal freedom. As opposed to bran, rgod and g.yuṅ would enjoy, to some extent,
personal freedom.
4
Compare hereto an interesting phrase from PT 1294v: bdag cag ni rgod gyi ’baṅs “We [are] the subjects of the braves.”
Alternatively, one could reconstruct *rgod sde (cf. rgod gyi sde in PT 1166v) “a military district” or *rgod stoṅ sde “a military
chiliarchy” for rgod as TAKEUCHI has done in his translation (2013:104n8).
 157

34 (rgyal) thag brgyad

[V] rgyal tag brgyad (PT 1134:119; PT 1289:v3.6; deaspiration)
LALOU.1952:356: les huit rgyal thag; STEINRA.1971:494n44: [thag brgyad and gru bźi - JB] sont plutôt des métaphores pour une
aire délimitée; DOTSON.2008:53: [thag brgyad - JB] “eight cords”; used to describe a structure in funeral rites, which seems to
be some sort of tent, or soul-house that acts as a microcosm and houses the deceased or his effigy; DOTSON.2011a:91n22:
usually described as a structure associated with funerary rites that marks off an “aire délimitée”.

[S] *thag brgyad “eight threads”

[E] *thag+brgyad “[having] eight threads”
[M] (A) eight-threaded (net)
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+NUM]
[A] For the proposed reconstruction of the first syllable of the formation rgyal < *rgya compare the
following glosses: rgyal skras ~ rgya skras “wooden stairs, wooden steps” (CDTD:1841; “*gya-śrás, gya-
śré̱ W., gya-ké̱’* C. a regular staircase as in European houses”, J:21b, s.v. skas ka); rgyal srid ~ *rgya srid1
“1government, reign” (J:109b).2 I understand the change from *rgya to rgyal as a case of folk
etymologisation motivated probably by the much more common usage and popularity of the latter
word after the rise of Buddhism to the position of the state religion. Moreover, it was the esteem
associated with the newly introduced word of great religious value that started the process of
redefining known concepts according to the demands of the new cultural system. This process can
be even better comprehended if one traces the history of some of those terms in later literature (for
few examples see below and BIALEK, forthcoming a).3

rgyal thag brgyad is glossed in this study as one term on analogy with se gru bźi (see s.v.) but also on
account of the fact that in OT documents thag brgyad occurs as an attribute solely in connection with

1
Reconstructed in CDTD:1864 as rgya srid on the basis of Balti rgjastrit “empire, kingdom”, Kargil rgjastrit “area, region”,
and Tshangra rgjastrit “small market town”.
2
An isolated case of a replacement of rgyal for *rgya is found in the phrase gtsaṅ rgyal chab kyi lu ma (SNELLGROVE 1967:194,
l.37) “a spring of pure wide water” (trsl. - JB). SNELLGROVE comments on rgyal here as an “unusual use describing water, ?”
(ibid., p.294).
Other possible candidates with rgyal- replacing another syllable to be included in this group are: OT dku rgyal “nobility”
(for details see s.v.); rgyal dkar “*gyal kár* window” (J:108b; < *rgya dkar “white extent”); rgyal sgo “principal door, entrance-
door, gate” (J:108b; *”large door”); rgyal thog “2story (of a building)” (Gs:262a; < *rgyas thog “broad upper surface”); rgyal gur
“a king’s pavilion” (Cs:18b; < *”large tent”); rgyal khams “1kingdom; 2realm, dominion of Buddha, the world” (J:108b; < rgya
khams “vast territory”, a form actually attested in ITJ 751:41r3).
3
The reconstruction of the discussed formation as *rgyal po’i thag brgyad ”eight threads of a king” is dismissed for three
reasons. First of all, the parallelism between *rgya thag brgyad and se gru bźi, that co-occur in OT texts on funeral rituals,
would be broken. Second problem emerges when interpreting the semantic function of the GEN in the given context of
funeral rituals; should *rgyal po’i thag be read as “a thread for a king” (genitivus possessivus) or “a thread for the sake of a
king” (genitivus commodi)? In either case mentioning of a rgyal po in the given contexts would seem to be out of place.
Lastly, according to PT 1134 (see the Text section), a priest called rgya (sic!) bon was responsible for spreading the eight-
threaded net. When juxtaposed with *rgyal bon, rgya bon would with certainty be the lectio difficilior.
All OT occurrences of rgyal thag brgyad as well as rgyal sgo, forms assumed to have resulted from the replacement of
*rgya(s)- by rgyal, are attested exclusively in Dunhuang texts. None of them, as far as I am aware, occurs in a document
unquestionably composed in Central Tibet, like, e.g., inscriptions. This is a significant remark because, even though our
knowledge about the popularity of Buddhism at the court of Tibetan btsan pos is rather scarce, we can with certainty state
that the religion of Buddha Śākyamuni flourished at that time in the Central Asiatic oasis which might also have been the
region in which the change took place for the first time. However, as modern words such as rgya(l) skras and rgya(l) srid
prove, the same process occurred independently in various areas and at different times.
 158

rgyal-.1 The phrases *rgya thag brgyad and se gru bźi are characterised by the same morphological
structure ‘Head Noun#[Head Noun+Numeral]’.2 Moreover, both terms possessed highly lexicalised
meaning forming in OT lexemes and not NPs anymore3.

From the passages quoted below, we learn that *rgya thag brgyad could be spread (’bres in PT 1068, PT
1134 and gchor in PT 1194)4 and was an essential accoutrement in funeral rites. The spreading of
*rgya thag brgyad was preceded by dyeing the net: bas la ni rgyal (read: rgya) bsgos (PT 1068:114; < *bas
la ni rgyal thag brgyad bsgos?) “[One] dyed the net on purlieus.”5, although, according to PT 1134:120,
the dyeing followed the spreading. Furthermore, PT 1134 mentions,
among others, a rgya bon (< *rgya thag brgyad kyi bon po), lit. “a Bon
po of an eight-threaded net”, who was responsible for performing
the ritual of spreading *rgya thag brgyad and preparing the grave (se
gru bźi; see below).6

Fig.6 Tibetan thread-crosses mdos
in Leh (HOFFMANN 1950, Fig.6)
As the term *rgya thag brgyad itself was obviously meant to describe
outer features of an item - “a net [that is woven] of eight threads” -
I suppose that it was employed instead of a taboo word which
originally denoted that kind of ritual utensil. A similarly
constructed ritual object is known in later Tibetan religious
practices as mdos “thread-cross” (see Fig. 6)7 - a word not attested
in OT documents so far. NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ describes mdos in the

1
The sole exception concerns the use of thag brgyad as a place name: rma/smra yul thag(s) (b)rgyad “Thag brgyad, the
country of Rma/Smra” (PT 1052:r123; PT 1285:r16; ITJ 731:r97, 120; ITJ 739:14r1). This is only one example from among
many where a term obsolete and not understood anymore by the contemporaries was subsequently redefined and re-used
in mythological context, compare rṅegs yul/smo/śul gru bźi (PT 1285:r24, 90, 178; smo probably < *se mo, cf. s.v. se gru bźi)
“Gru bźi, the country/smo [of] Rṅegs”, but also the usage of an OT administrative measure khram as an attribute of diverse
Buddhist deities of later times as discussed s.v. khram skya. Those lexemes have acquired new lifes in later literature where
we find, e.g., gśan yul thaṅ mo gru bźi, yul gśen yul thaṅ brgyad, smra yul thaṅ brgyad (STEIN.RA 1988:48) and skos yul thaṅ brgyad
ma (LAUFER 1900:33, l.79 who translates it as “die acht Ebenen (vielleicht auch entsprechend: acht Provinzen) des Landes
Skos”, ibid. p.48).
2
Other OT formations of analogical structure can additionally be quoted: dbuH skas sten dgu (PT 1287:15) “a nine-stepped
head-ladder” and śiṅ gdaṅ bźi (PT 1068:115) “a four-stepped piece of wood”.
3
This is additionally supported by the variant reading rgyal tag brgyad in which the onset of the second syllable underwent
deaspiration - a popular sound change occurring word-internally in compounds.
4
Cf. hereto ’bre “pf. and imp. bres to draw over or before, to spread, to stretch, a net, a curtain, a canopy, awning” (J:402a).
5
For the proposed translation of bas cf. bas pa “ended, terminated, spent” (Cs:92a), “1spyir ’dzad pa daṅ mtha’ dag pa yoṅs
su rdzogs pa; 2dben pa” (DSM:533b); bas mtha’ “ein Land am äussersten Ende; ein Grenzland od. Ort” (Sch:367a). This
lexeme could possibly be cognate to ba in ba gam “a parapet, a small wall” (Cs:90b), “a certain part of the timber work of a
roof, something like pinnacle, battlement” (J:362b) and bad in bad ni gser “der Rand ist Gold” (Sch:365b). Whether this word
family should be related to CT pha “beyond, onward, farther on” (J:338a) and its derivatives remains to be clarified. Rolf
STEIN (1971:519) renders bas as “les terrains vagues”. In PT 1289:v3.6 (see the Text section) it is juxtaposed with thaṅ “plain”
and luṅ “valley”. Thus, one can assume that it too originally referred to some kind of landscape formation or a
geographically delimited terrain.
6
An officiant called rgya bon is mentioned also in PT 1285:r138 and ITJ 734:8r350 where this function is ascribed to a
certain Leg taṅ rmaṅ ba and Leg daṅ rmaṅ ba (obviously one and the same person), respectively. An hypothesis could be
put forward that rgyal (not rgyal po!) mentioned in PT 1042 and denoting a kind of ritual specialist should actually be
reconstructed as *rgya bon as well. The text in the version transmitted to us contains numerous scribal errors that hinder
its interpretation and translation. For more details on this rgyal see s.v. khram skya.
7
For detailed descriptions of different mdos rituals (through metonymy: “mdos (utensil)” > “mdos (ritual in which mdos-
utensil is used)”) see NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:369ff., HOFFMANN 1950:181ff., BEYER 1988:318ff and NORBU 1997:77ff.
 159

following words: “The basic form of a mdos is made by two sticks which are bound together to form a
cross; the ends of the sticks are then connected with coloured thread so that the object assumes
finally a shape similar to a cob-web.” (1956:369). According to the same author, a mdos is usually
installed on a base of four steps and a wooden stick that is used as its vertical axe is called srog śiṅ or
mdos śiṅ (1956:371 and fn.7)1. Now, we learn from PT 1068:115-6 that a śiṅ gdaṅ bźi “a four-stepped
piece of wood” was placed accompanying the preparation of *rgya thag brgyad. It is possible that the
words *rgya thag brgyad and mdos referred to similar or perhaps even identical ritual objects though
in different periods and in varying cultural contexts.

The custom of erecting thread-crosses on graves as recounted in OT sources resembles closely the
practices of the contemporary Naga tribes, description of which is conveyed by KAUFFMANN (1939; cf.
Fig. 7 depicting thread-crosses on a grave of a
woman from Angami Naga tribe).2 He mentions the
usage of thread-crosses also among other Tibeto-
Burman-speaking tribes in South-East Asia. Some of
them make use of thread-crosses in funeral rituals as
well. In all of the reported cases, a thread-cross is
said to guard either the deceased in his journey
through the afterworld or the community against Fig.7 Thread-crosses of Angami Naga (KAUFFMANN
hostile spirits (ibid., p.194b-5a). 1939:193)

[T] bśan lug brtsi ba ni / se gru bźi la / (92) lug bźi // rgyal thag brgyad la lug bźi // ʼdi rnams ni graṅs la
ma gtogso (PT 1042:91-2)
“As regards bśan-sheep that were counted: four sheep for the grave, four sheep for the eight-
threaded net - these did not belong to the amount.”
rgyal thag brgyad ni ’bres / śiṅ gdaṅ bźi (116) ni btsugs (PT 1068:115-6)
“[One] spread the eight-threaded net [and] erected the four-stepped piece of wood.”

Interestingly, mdos is derived by means of the collective suffix -s from mdo “1the lower part of a valley; 2aphorism, short
sentence or rule, axiom; 3Skt. sūtra” (J:273b; < *”thread; that which runs through everything like a thread”, cf. hereto skud
pa glossed with mdo in BDSN, apus MIMAKI 1992:482, and the meaning of Skt. sūtra, MW:1241c) and, like *rgya thag brgyad,
refers to the material from which the ritual utensil itself is made, i.e. threads.
1
Cf. also BEYER 1988:325 on a contemporary mdos ritual: “First there is made a four-tiered “Mount Meru,” constructed of
earth or of zen - barley flour mixed with water - placed upon a supporting wooden framework.”
2
According to him, “Bei den Ao hängen überall mittelgroße, viereckige, in einem Falle auch sechseckige Fadenkreuze
(called here: “Schild-gebundene-Figur-aufgestellt”, “Sonnen-Schatten-Geber”, “Fliegen-abhalten” oder “Fliegen-
vertreiben” - JB) an den Bestattungsplattformen.” (ibid., p.193a). Lotha Nagas (KAUFFMANN: Lhota) cultivate the custom of
erecting two thread-crosses (Ongyen = “Spiegel”) in front of each grave, “Das zweite Fadenkreuz dient als Geschenk für den
grimmen „Seelenprüfer”, ein Gespenst, das den Seelen am Totenpfade auflauert.” (ibid., p.193b). Rengma Nagas call
thread-crosses “Samhü” (meaning unclear) and raise three of them on graves of rich people (ibid., p.194a). Among Angami
Nagas the ritual object under consideration is called “Faden-Viereck”, i.e., its name parallels the reconstructed Tibetan
*rgya thag brgyad. It is founded in pairs on graves of women after a great funeral feast was held there. Six thread-crosses - a
device called “Toten Mannes-Sieb” (cf. Tibetan rgya “net”) - are affixed to a grave of a deceased man; one is thought of as a
gift for a psychopomp, the other five are supposed to be used by the deceased one in straining rice-beer in his afterlife
(ibid., p.194a). The terms cited in KAUFFMANN’s report and denoting thread-cross are clearly descriptive and resembling in
their semantic motivations the Tibetan *“eigth-threaded-net”.
 160

se ’brum bźi ni bgrod rgyal thag brgyad ni gzigsde (PT 1068:121)

“Having crossed the grave, [they] regarded the eight-threaded net.”
rgya bon brim taṅ gis / rgyal tag brgya(120)d / ni / gnam las (read: la) / bre (read: bres) se gru bźi ni / sa la
/ bchas (PT 1134:119-20)
“Brim taṅ, the Bon po [priest responsible for the eight-threaded] net, spread the eight-threaded net
in the sky [and] prepared the grave on the ground.”
rgyal [thag] brgyad ni (19) bas la bchas / se gru bźi ni luṅ du brtsigs (PT 1136:18-9)1
“[One] prepared the eight-threaded net on purlieus [and] built the grave in the valley.”
rgyal thag brgyad gchor ’don no (PT 1194:77)
“[One] spreads the eight-threaded net and raises [the structure].”
rgyal tag brgyad ni bas las (read: la) bres / gur kar luṅ du phubste boṅ steg ye ni thaṅ la / (v3.7) brtsigs (PT
1289:v3.6-7)
“[One] spread the eight-threaded net on purlieus [and], having pitched a white tent in a valley, built
an eight-stepped base (? boṅ steg ye2) on a plain.”

35 ṅan źan
BYD:118b: bsam pa ha caṅ gdug rtsub can.
DTH:133: faible; ZEISLER.2004:405: enjoy the evil (lit. had the evil as his food)3; DOTSON.2013a:274: wicked and weak.

[E] *ṅan la źan “(to be) mean and wicked”

[M] (A) (to be) mean and wicked
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[A+A]
[A] Both reconstructed forms, ṅan and źan, are richly attested in OT documents (see OTDO).4 For the
proposed meaning of źan as referring to mental and not physical qualities compare the dialectal data
on źan, źan pa and źan po in CDTD:7111-3, but also its cognate gźan “adj. and sbst., other, the other,
another” (J:479b) - in its origins apparently a derogatory term.

[T] jo bo ziṅ po rje ṅan źan te // (128) ji la yaṅ log pa gśin pyogs ñes dgur byed pas // yul gyi srid kyaṅ
dmaʼs so // (PT 1287:127-8)
“Due to lord Ziṅ po rje who, being mean and wicked, was maliciously making, for whatever reasons,
the wrong ones the good ones (lit. party of the good ones), also the srid of the country diminished.”

36 ṅam len
[V] ṅam lend (PT 1047:54)
BDN:57n9: rṅam len te rṅam brjid daṅ ldan pa’i don.
DTH:160: prendre les berges abruptes; STEINRA.1985:110: ravins; DOTSON.2007b:5: majesty; DOTSON.2013a:296: conventions;
p.349n12: This may be a contraction of ṅam par len pa, and have the meaning of “taking a matter forcefully in hand”.

1
The same sentence is repeated in l.59 of the document. Its second occurrence has been taken as the basis for the
reconstruction of *thag in rgyal [thag] brgyad, l.19.
2
I assume that boṅ steg ye is a corrupted form of another phrase. The first two syllables could be tentatively reconstructed
as *baṅ sten; cf. hereto baṅ rim bźi (NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1956:371) “four-stepped base” (trsl. - JB) or dbu skas sten dgu “nine-
stepped head-ladder” (PT 1287:15). Thus, *sten brgyad > *ste gye > steg ye - this process, however, would presuppose that the
then pronunciation has already received its traits known from modern Central Tibetan dialects. An hypothesis more than
problematic.
3
ZEISLER reads ṅan zan instead of ṅan źan, ibid., p.404.
4
For an analogously formed synonymic compound compare CM eremdeg ǰemdeg”mean-bad” (AALTO 1964:75).
 161

[S] *[ṅam grog]O len “to catch ravine’s torrents”

[E] *ṅam grog (< *ṅam gyi grog po) len pa “one catching ravine’s torrents”
[M] (N) ravine, gorge
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[[N+N]+VV1]
[A] Even a cursory look at the passage from PT 1287 cited in the Text section suffices to notice the
parallelism between the following phrases and clauses:
bla na ʼog na
rje sgam na blon ʼdzaṅs na
khri sroṅ brtsan stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ
rje ni blon po ni
gnam ri pywa ʼi lugs sa ʼi ṅam len gyi tshul
Apparently, the lord (Khri sroṅ brtsan) and his attributes are here juxtaposed with the councillor
(Stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ) and his personal qualities. From this comparison we can infer that the phrase
gnam ri pywa ’i lugs was meant to parallel sa ’i ṅam len gyi tshul:
gnam ri pywa ’i lugs
sa ’i ṅam len gyi tshul
Unfortunately, in the process of textual transmission, this parallelism has been broken in case of the
first expression. We can assume that originally it possessed a structure similar to *gnam gyi ri pywa ’i
lugs. However, in consequence of erroneous word analysis, it has been divided into *gnam-gyi-ri and
*pywa-’i-lugs and subsequently the first part has been associated with the name of btsan po Gnam ri
slon mtshan. One linguistic trait reveals to us that the passage in question is of later date, written
most probably some time after the fall of the Tibetan Empire. Namely, btsan po Khri sroṅ brtsan is
called here rje - a word reserved during the royal period to either feudal lords subordinated to btsan
po or foreign rulers.1 The formation ri pywa has, in all likelihood, resulted from a misspelling too.
This hypothesis is justified in so far as *ri pywa2 has not been attested in any other OT source yet.3
Thus, the reconstructed version of the phrases is question would be:
*gnam gyi ri-X ’i lugs
sa ’i ṅam len gyi tshul
Before analysing the compound ṅam len, I would like to examine closer the lexemes lugs and tshul
which form the heads of the juxtaposed expressions.

The semantic analysis of phrases and contexts in which lugs and tshul occur in OT documents allows
us to assign to them the following meanings:

1
For more details on rje see s.v. rje dbyal.
2
Or any of its theoretical variants, i.e. *ri phywa(’), *ri pya or *ri phya.
3
Its counterpart, ṅam len, on the other hand, is documented at least in PT 1047:54, see the Text section.
 162

lugs:
1
“custom established in earlier times (sanctified by tradition, still cultivated)”: śid nag po’i lugs
(PT 239:r7.5) “custom of black funeral rites”; myi dkar po’i lugs (PT 239:r8.4) “custom of white
people”; sṅar bcad pa’i lugs (PT 1089:r35) “earlier established (lit. decided) custom(s)”; yab myes kyi
lugs bźin (’Phyoṅ 6) “according to the ways of [his] father and forefathers”; lugs rabs bgyi (PT
1194:55) “customs and lineages are maintained”; sri źu daṅ bkur sti’i lugs (ST Treaty W 48) “a
custom of [paying] reverence and respect”; deṅ bos (read: thos1) ni skyid pa’i lugs (ITJ 738:3v5);
2
”way of proceedings (in concrete offices); taught rules”: lho bal gyi to dog / (22) daṅ stoṅ zlar bskos
pa’i rnams // dpon sna gñug ma’i goṅ du mchis pa’i lugs daṅ zla dpe (PT 1089:r21-2) “customs and
exemplars of those who, appointed as to dog and stoṅ zla of foreigners, came before different
kinds of native masters”; bdagi bu yaṅ de’i lugs bslab (PT 1283:365) “These customs should be
taught also to my son.”; blon che ’i lugs slob pa ’i ’og pon (PT 1287:106) “’og pon who teaches the ways
of proceedings of a grand councillor”; rjes ’baṅs kyi lugs (Źwa W 22) “manner of courtiers”;
3
“way of being; nature (of natural phenomena)”: dbyar bźin ni char gi lugs (ITJ 739:1r7) “nature of
rain like summer[-rain]”; gnam sa’i’i lugs daṅ ’thun pa (ITJ 751:36v1) “agreeing with the nature of
the sky and the earth”;
4
“laws according to which supernatural beings act”: lha’i lugs ma mñam ste (ITJ 751:36r2) “being
unlike the laws of gods”; lha’i lugs daṅ ’thun/mthun pa (Khri 7; ST Treaty E 52) “agreeing with the
laws of gods”; ’phrul gyi lugs daṅ ’thun ba (ITJ 751:36r1) “agreeing with the law of ’phrul”.
tshul:
1
“the way of doing sth.”: sdom bas bsdams pa’i tsul (PT 16:23r2) “way of having been bound by an
oath”; chaṅ thuṅ ba’i tshul (PT 126:44) “way of drinking chaṅ”; myi dran smyo ba’i tshul (PT 126:62)
“way of getting dead drunk”; yoṅ yaṅ ma phrad pa’i tshul (PT 1283:287) “way of not meeting again
and again”; bod ’baṅs dpa’ sran la stend pa’i tshul bźin du (ITJ 751:39r3) “according to the way
Tibetan subjects rely on firm heros”;
2
“the way in which sth. is”: bu tsha’i gnod pa’i tshul (PT 1283:252) “manner of harm done by [one’s]
son”; chos tshul gñis kyaṅ / (20) gna’i gtsug lag’i chos bzaṅ po ltar byasna (ITJ 733:19-20) “if [one]
practiced both, customs and manners, according to good customs of principles of ancient times”;
dgra zun gyi tshul (ST Treaty E 50) “conduct of hostility”; ’phrul gyi tshul (ST Treaty E 52) “manner
of ’phrul”; phyi naṅ gñis su legs daṅ chab srid che ba’i tshul (Khri 10-1) “the way in which [everything]
was good both within and without and the chab srid was great”;
3
“behaviour; way/manner of being (of humans and anthropomorphic beings)”: ṅan pa’i tshul (PT
126:66) “manner of bad [people]”; ya rabs gyi tshul (PT 1283:81) “way of being of high class
people”; rgan gźon daṅ dpon g.yog daṅ rje gol gyi tshul yod (PT 1283:204) “to have manners of old and
young ones, masters and servants, lords and subjects”; tshul yod (PT 1283:209) “to have manners”;

1
For deṅ thos cf. deṅ thos dag skyid pa’i ltas (PT 1051:12), deṅ thos ni ma lags te (ITJ 738:3v108), and deṅ thos ni skyid pa’i rtags
(ITJ 739:7r6). Its meaning remains unknown.
 163

myi tshul (PT 1287:6) “manner of human”; dgra’i tshul (ITJ 730:28) “way of being of an enemy”; lha’i
tshul (ITJ 738:3v56) “way of being of gods”; gñen ba’i tshul bźin du (ST Treaty W 47) “according to
the manner of relatives”; dbon źaṅ gñis kyis tshul (ST Treaty E 3) “manner of both, nephew and
uncle”;
4
“taught rules; taught ways of behaviour”: bu ñid gyaṅ de’i tshul bslab (PT 1283:362) “the son shall
be taught these rules”; dge sloṅ gi tshul (Źwa W 22) “the rules of bhikṣus”;
5
“established custom”: gtsug lag khaṅ thams chad tshul bźin mdzad pas (ITJ 751:36r4) “because all
temples were made according to the customs”.
Although the semantics of lugs and tshul seems to agree to a great extent, meanings specific to each
lexeme can still be ascertained. However, the most important conclusion we can draw from the
above elucidation is that neither lugs nor tshul could be qualified by a word denoting an abstract
notion. Thus, the interpretation proposed by BDN (p.57n9) and adopted by DOTSON (2007b:5) which
identifies OT ṅam len with CT rṅom brjid “splendour, stateliness, majesty” (J:135a) cannot be
maintained.1

Now, turning back to ṅam len, the following meanings of -len2 in OT and CT compounds may be
discerned:
1
“catching, grasping, seizing”: skyar mos ña len “carrying out one’s work efficiently, skillfully [Lit.
egret catching a fish]” (Gs:69a); kha len “1look after, taking care; 2sharpening a knife on a leather
strap; 3to round up livestock, to bring back from grazing; 4to lead an animal” (Gs:109b-c; lit.
“seizing the mouth”);
2
“taking”: skyed len “Zinsforderung” (WTS.6:329a; lit. “taking the profit”)3; mgo len “accepting
submission, receiving surrender” (Gs:233c; lit. “taking heads”); ṅo len “sm. sne len” (Gs:307a)4; ’jab
len “sm. ’jab rkun” (Gs:394a; ’jab rkun “thief”, Gs:393c); brje len “exchanging, substituting,

1
BDN (ibid.) glosses ṅam len also with rṅam len - a variant that I was unable to trace in any available lexicographic sources.
2
The attested variant reading, ṅam lend (see PT 1047 in the Text section), clearly points to a deverbal character of the
second member of the compound.
3
Cf. also skyed len byed pa “auf sich nehmen, (Aufgaben etc.) übernehmen” (CÜPPERS 2004:32).
4
Thomas translates ṅo len as “regard” (1957:129) with literal rendering “face-take” (ibid., p.153n2). The compound occurs
in:
mo ’d[i] n[i] khy[i]m phya daṅ srog phya la btab na gdon ch[e] [cho ga daṅ ṅo len] legs par [...] (ITJ 738:3v1; trslr. after THOMAS
1957:120)
“If this mo is cast for phywa of house or phywa of life: the demon is great. [If] a ritual and ṅo len [are not performed] well,
[it is bad].” (In my translation, I have reconstructed the part missing from the text on the basis of the line 3v17: nad pa la
btab na gdon che // cho ga legs par ma byas na ṅan ’o)
nad p[o] la btab na gdon ch[e]d po yod pas // cho ga daṅ [ṅo] len gyis źig // (ITJ 738:3v2; trslr. after THOMAS 1957:120)
“If [this mo] is cast for a sick person: because there is a great demon, perform a ritual and ṅo len!“
nad pa la btab na myi lha daṅ the’u raṅ stoṅ źiṅ ’dug // cho ga daṅ ṅo len (OTDO: lon) drag tu gyis cig // (ITJ 738:3v70; trslr. after
THOMAS 1957:124)
“If [this mo] is cast for a sick person: myi lha and the’u raṅ are thousands. Promptly perform a ritual and ṅo len!“
ṅo len (OTDO: lon) cho ga bzaṅ du gis la nem nur ma byed cig // (ITJ 738:3v143; trslr. after THOMAS 1957:128)
“Perform well ṅo len [and] a ritual [and] do not hesitate!”
da’ ltar ’tshos pa lta (271) bo / bdag po sṅa ma ṅo lendu stsal tam / (ITJ 740:270-1)
“Now, considering the provider, is [she] given as a ṅo len to [her] earlier master?”
The form ṅo lon (a variant spelling of ṅo len: -e- > -o- / -oσC_) - is documented twice in ITJ 739: ṅo lon byos la bag zon bya /
(6v1) “Perform ṅo lon and be careful!”; ṅo lon gyis (14v10) śig / (14v9-10) “Perform ṅo lon!”.
 164

replacing, interchanging” (Gs:404b); ñis len “1taking sth. twice, taking sth. a second time; 2a
traditional treatment involving the draining of blood” (Gs:418a); gdoṅ len “2sm. sne len” (Gs:561a);
brdal len “1gźan gyi dṅos zog skyel ’dren bya rgyu blaṅs nas gla cha len pa; 2gla cha len mkhan”
(BTC:1486a); sna len “sm. sne len” (Gs:634b); sne len “reception, hospitality, entertainment”
(Gs:638c; lit. “taking the lead, i.e., initiative”); phyir len “taking back” (Gs:695c); byin len “taking
whatever is given” (Gs:735a); sbyin len “giving and taking” (Gs:780b); ’og len “1estimating,
guessing; 2castrated” (Gs:982c); g.yo len “defrauding, taking sth. by guile, deceit” (Gs:1015b),
“Betrug” (CÜPPERS 2004:89); sral len “(yul) gzab gzab byed pa’i bya spyod” (BTC:2973a); ha len
“Eintreibung (von Schulden)” (CÜPPERS 2004:97); lhur len “taking responsibility” (Gs:1184a);
3
“(fig.) taking sth.”: ñams len “a memorial verse, a rhyme or verse serving to retain things in
memory” (J:186b; lit. “taking sth. to heart”), “1practice (as opposed to theory), application;
2
experience” (Gs:411b); mñam len “experience” (CDTD:3075; lit. “taking (i.e. treating) evenly”);
phyag len “1h[onorific] of lag len” (Gs:689a); lag len “1putting into practice, implementing; 2custom
of doing” (Gs:1063c; lit. “taking sth. in one’s hands”);
4
“taking over”: ’khur len “Übernahme von Lasten” (CÜPPERS 2004:35)1; ’gan len “1responsibility”
(Gs:236c); span len “’gan len” (DSM:453a; < *sban len “taking over the power”?; cf. sban sban pa
“rgyun rags la śugs che ba’i miṅ ste”, DSM:608b); rtsis len “taking over possession, assuming
control over” (Gs:861c)2; sa rgyu gźuṅ len “land and property confiscated by the government”
(Gs:1114c);
5
“accepting”: khas len “1guaranteering, promising, agreeing; 2acceptance, consent, agreement,
recognition” (Gs:119a)3; ṅos len “confession, acknowledgement” (Gs:308c)4; daṅ len “sm. daṅ du len”
(Gs:525c; daṅ du len “1va. to assume, bear, undertake a task or responsibility voluntarily, to
volunteer; 2va. to accept, recognize”, Gs:525a); ’dor len “spaṅ bya ’dor ba daṅ. blaṅ bya len pa’i
bsdus miṅ” (BTC:1423a; lit. “refusing and accepting”); sdud len “sm. bsdu len” (Gs:594b; bsdu len
“enrolling, admitting”, Gs:599b); ’pho len “las ’khur rñiṅ pa ’khyur nas gsar pa rtsis len pa”
(BTC:1785b), “transfer of officials (new official taking over for the old one)” (Gs:705c, s.v. ’pho lan;
lit. “changing and accepting”); g.yar len “= khas len promise” (D:1151b);
6
“obtaining”: bcud len “1extracting nutrients (from foods, plants, etc.)” (Gs:241c)5; śugs len chu rags
“a dam across a river” (Gs:1100a-b; lit. “energy obtaining/gathering dam”); gnas ṅan len “ltuṅ ba
daṅ bag chags ṅan pa sogs kyi miṅ ste” (DSM:409b);

1
Cf. khur len “the charge of” (D:149a).
2
Cf. also rtsis sprod rtsis len “handing over and taking responsibility” (Gs:861b).
3
In OT, “a guarantor, one who gives his promise” (COBLIN 1991c:90); cf.:
khas len gyi sug rgya daṅ / sug yig tshad kyis btab // (PT 1290:r3; PT 1297.1:11)
“[One] sealed [it] with the private seal of a guarantor and a signature.”
rta bdag daṅ khas len gi sug rgyas btab pa (PT 1297.3:11)
“sealed with the private seal of the horse owner and guarantor”
4
Cf. also kha g.yo ṅos len “pretending to agree” (Gs:108a).
5
Cf. also rde’u bcud len “a Tibetan ascetic practice whereby a practitioner can subsist through chewing stones that have
been blessed with tantric mantras” (Gs:586b).
 165

7
“receiving”: rgyugs len “giving an examination, test” (Gs:269c; cf. Ger. Prüfung abnehmen); gtad
len “sm. sprod len” (Gs:447b); gtoṅ len “1receiving and sending, transmitting; 2in religion or
meditation: to give happiness to others and to receive suffering” (Gs:454b); sprod len “1giving and
receiving; 2supply and demand” (Gs:671b); bag len “wedding, marriage” (CDTD:5215); bogs len “sa
źiṅ daṅ. rtswa kha. gnas khaṅ sogs gźan dag nas bogs mar len pa” (BTC:1844a); źu len pa
“interrogator” (Gs:934b; < *źu len “receiving questions”); bśer len “hearing a case” (Gs:1111b); bsu
len “1sm. bsu ma; 2receiving, taking an in-marrying bride” (Gs:1167b; bsu ma “welcoming,
receiving, meeting guests”, Gs:1167b);
8
“acquiring”: rim len dṅul bun “a loan acquired over a period of time” (Gs:1041c);
9
“what seizes, catches sth.; sth. catching sth.”: khab len “magnet” (Gs:115b; lit. “what seizes a
needle; needle-catcher”)1; glo len “sm. glo thag” (Gs:212c; glo thag “cinch strap”, Gs:212a; lit. “what
seizes a girth”)2; rṅul len “undershirt, thin cotton shirt worn by monks under their robe” (Gs:319a;
lit. “what seizes (i.e. absorbs) sweat”); char len “the coping or water-tile of a wall” (Cs:45a); chu len
“water-carrier” (CDTD:2625)3; dur len “(lit. that takes away from the cemetery) a sort of vampire”
(D:631b; lit. “what seizes at the cemetery”); dri len “(mṅon) 1sna; 2rluṅ” (BTC:1330b; lit. “what
catches odours”); spur len “sm. spos śel” (Gs:658a; spos śel “amber”, Gs:660c); sbur len “sm. spos śel”
(Gs:778c); me len “1fire tongs; 2a type of branding iron” (Gs:818b);4
10
“what takes away, removes”: nad len “medicine (?); what removes illness”5; ’bur len “a
carpenter’s plane” (Gs:764a; lit. “what removes the surface irregularities”); bśaṅ len “(mṅon) byi
la” (BTC:2879b);
11
“what takes over”: ’gan len “2guarantee, pledge” (Gs:236c); zad len “having a spare ready for
when sth. wears out” (Gs:956a; lit. “what takes over (the function) of the finished/worn-out
one”);
12
“(fig.) what takes”: ñer len “the original cause of sth.” (Gs:421c; < ñe bar len pa “what takes one
near (the source)”).
There is yet another group of compounds the second member of which, in all probability, is a
phonetic variant of len, namely, compounds ending in -lon6: kha lon “rta’i srab la’aṅ” (GC:75a; lit.
“what seizes the mouth”; cf. CT kha len); chu lon “chu ’dren pa’i ched du chu kluṅ ’gog ste sa rdo
brtsegs pa lta bu’o. zam pa’aṅ zer snaṅ” (GC:265a; lit. “what seizes water”; cf. chu len); sna lon “’dren

1
Cf. also rdo khab len “magnet” (Gs:587a).
2
Cf. glo “3cinch strap” (Gs:211c), “2saddle-girth” (J:82a).
3
Although CÜPPERS glosses the compound with “Wasserholen” (2004:48).
4
This usage of -len reminds one of CT rten in its meaning “2receptacle” (J:213b).
5
Cf. myi las nad len ’di lagso (PT 1285:v97) “This what takes away illness from men is good.”
6
Compare JÄSCHKE: “= len pa” (554b; s.v. lon pa). Its still another variant is nen “col[loquial] for len pa, to take, lay hold of,
seize; to take out, off, away; to hold” (J:306b), cf. also CDTD.V:715.
 166

pa’i don la’aṅ. sna ’dzin” (GC:487b; cf. sna len); bu lon “debt, loan” (Gs:722b)1; źaṅ lon, lit. “[one] taking
the źaṅ[-position]”, (see s.v.).2

By grouping together cognates and derivatives of ṅam the following meanings have been discerned:
1
“ravine”: “4ravine, canyon” (Gs:298a)3; ṅam pa “1a ravine” (D:351a); ṅam grog “durch Uferabsturz
am Fluß entstandene Ausbuchtung” (Corff.1:57a, 230.1); “ravine, canyon” (Gs:298a), “grog po sal
sul la’aṅ ’jug ste” (DSM:130a)4; ṅam roṅ “a narrow passage way, gorge” (Gs:298a);
2
“narrow passage (of water or land); neck”: ṅam “a torrent, a brook” (Cs:40b), “ein Wassergraben
od[er] Kanal, eine ausgespülte od[er] eingesunkene Uferstelle” (Sch:128b); ṅam ’brog “brag ’phraṅ
ṅam grog roṅ gi miṅ ste” (DSM:130a);
3
“wilderness, area difficult to access due to ravines“: mya ṅam “a fearful dessert” (J:420b), “dgun
duṅ ṅam chu med dben sa’i miṅ ste” (DSM:650b), “sand-desert” (THOMAS 1957:155)5; źugs ṅam gyi
ltoṅs “lam gyi g.yas g.yon mi med thaṅ stoṅ” (BYD:470b)6.
4
“neck, throat”: ṅam rgyag “vi. to get sick of a particular food (due to eating it all the time)”
(Gs:298a; cf. also ṅam la rgyag, ibid.); ṅam dur can “given to gluttony and drinking” (J:126b); ṅam
nag “angry look, expression” (Gs:298a; lit. “black throat”, cf. Pol. czarne podniebienie); ṅam ru “a
throat disease” (Gs:298a); ṅam śugs “reluctantly” (J:126b), “naturally, automatically,
involuntarily” (Gs:298b; lit. “(by) the power [of] throat”, i.e. “gag reflex”, in all likelihood,
denoting primarily an action that happens involuntarily and automatically);
Their common semantic denominator seems to be “a narrow passage; neck”. One could propose the
following lexemes to be cognate to the analysed ṅam: rṅam “to breathe; esp. to breathe heavily, to
pant; to rush upon, fly at, throw one’s self on; to rage, to be in fury; to destroy or murder in a state of

1
For the usage of the terms bu “son” and ma “mother” when referring to parts of a divided document compare khram bu,
lit. “child-tally” (cf. Eng. foil), and khram ma, lit. “mother-tally” (cf. Eng. stock); cf. also TAKEUCHI 2004:55a.
2
Cf. also the alternation ṅo lon ~ ṅo len in OT texts cited above.
3
In OT texts it occurs in a description of Khyuṅ luṅ rṅul mkhar, the royal residence of Źaṅ źuṅ:
pyi bltas ni ṅam daṅ brag // “When viewed from outside - ravines and rocks.
naṅ bltas ni gser daṅ dbyig (PT 1287:408) When viewed from inside - gold and riches.”
4
In the following OT passages: bar du ṅam / grog chen pho źig gis chod / (PT 1047:281) “[It] is cut across in the middle by
great ravine’s torrents.”; ṅam grog gis chod (PT 1047:284) “[It] is cut across by ravine’s torrent.”.
The etymological meaning of ṅam grog (< *ṅam gyi grog po) seems to have been *“ravine’s torrent”; cf. the dialectal
meanings of grog po glossed in CDTD:1337. For the semantic development “torrent” > “ravine” compare Eng. ravine
“F[rench], ‘mountain torrent, ravine’, fr[om] O[ld] F[rench] ravine, ‘rapide, robbery; rapidity, impetuosity; rush of water,
torrent’” (KLEIN 1966:1305b).
5
For OT mye ṅam, cf.:
mye ṅam bye ri rgyud ched/chen po (PT 1283:581, 600)
“a great range of sand-mountains of wilderness”
mye ṅam bye ri rgal (609) ba’i chu (PT 1283:608-9)
“a river that crosses a sand-mountains of wilderness”
mye ṅam bye ri rgyud gyi pha rol na (PT 1283:624)
“on the other side of a range of sand-mountains of wilderness”
mye ṅam ched (3v76) po la skal mas nas ’dug pa las / gnam gi lhas char phab nas / skom rñed pa daṅ ’dra // (ITJ 738:3v75-6)
“[He] is like one who, upon staying (skal mas nas?) in a great wilderness, acquires drink after rain was sent by the gods of
the sky.”
The OT form mye ṅam *”a narrow passage through fire[-land]” (?) seems to be the original one. The CT variant mya ṅam
developed most probably through vowel assimilation (-e > -a / _σ-a-) triggered additionally by mya in mya ṅan.
6
źugs ṅam seems to be an equivalent of OT mye ṅam.
 167

fury; to call out in a arge” (J:134a), “1vi. to desire, to want, to hunger, thirst for; 2vi. to be/get angry”
(Gs:318b)1; rṅab “1to desire earnestly, to crave” (J:134a); rṅam pa “1splendour, magnificence, majesty”
(J:134a; < *”(what is) breathtaking, stunning”); dṅom pa “brightness, splendour” (J:131a); rṅams
“height” (J:134a).

Thus, one could put forward two hypotheses concerning the underlying structure of ṅam len:
1
*ṅam len pa “one catching ravines”;
2
*ṅam grog len pa “one catching ravine’s torrents”.
Both lexemes, ṅam and ṅam grog, are documented in OT sources although only the latter is attested
in PT 1047 in which also the analysed ṅam len occurs. Additionally, the semantic proximity of the
second variant to other compounds formed with -len that denote various forms of FLUID-CARRIERS (cf.
rṅul len, char len, chu len mentioned above) speaks in favour of the latter interpretation. Moreover,
the depiction of Tibet as a land of great ravine’s torrents (ṅam grog che) is well known from later
literature as well, e.g.:
ṅo mtshar che ba’i gliṅ kha ba can bod kyi rgyal khams ni / srin mo gan rkyal du ’gyil (read: ’gyel) ba daṅ
’dra ste / ṅam grog che / ’dre srin maṅ / ri nag la (?) rtsub / mun pa’i smag rum yin no (GLR:3r5)
“The kingdom of Tibet, a continent clad in snow [and] of great marvels, being similar to a
demoness tumbling on [her] back, is [a country of] great ravine’s torrents, multiple ’dre and srin
[demons], wild black mountains [and] obscure darkness (lit. obscure womb of darkness).”2
Accordingly, ṅam len, lit. *“carrier for ravine’s torrents”, would be a metaphor for either Tibet or,
what is perhaps even more probable, a gorge or ravine as a landscape formation (a “carrier”)
through which torrents flow. Tibet is often referred to in Tibetan literature as, among others, a land
of valleys and mountains. The word for “a mountain”, ri, occurs indeed in the very passage from the
OTC. Thus, one could gather that whereas Stoṅ rtsan yul bzaṅ’s way of being (tshul) resembles that
of gorges of the earth (sa ’i ṅam len), the btsan po is attributed with the manner (lugs) of mountains of
the sky (*gnam gyi ri). It is perhaps more apparent now that the attested ri pywa has, in fact, replaced
another compound that might have denoted either mountain summits (*ri rtse), high mountains (*ri
mtho)3, or still another object, although, in any case, it should have been a term contributing to a
picture of sky-high mountains.

1
Cf. hereto Eng. choke “prob[abaly] formed fr[om] intensive pref[ix] a- and a Teut[onic] base appearing in O[ld] N[orse]
kok, ‘gullet’” (KLEIN 1966:280a), from which the verb to choke “1have severe difficulty in breathing because of a constricted
or obstructed throat or a lack of air” (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/choke?q=choke; 19.06.2014)
derives.
2
Cf. SØRENSEN’s translation: “The Continent of Great Marvel the Kingdom of Snow-clad Tibet, has the shape of a rakṣasī
lying on her back and it is a [country] with deep ravines, being densely populated by demons and spirits, [covered with]
rough black mountains, [a country] dark and obscure.” (1994:48).
On ṅam grog che Rerich notes: “poet. Tibet (lit. the country of deep ravines or narrow valleys” (2:343a, s.v. ṅam grog).
3
The compound ri mtho is, in fact, documented in OT sources, cf. PT 1134:111 and PT 1286:36 (in the famous phrase ri mtho
sa gtsaṅ).
 168

[T] rdzoṅ roṅ ti tshe / (54) / jo bo jo mo stord pha las ṅam lend gyis bstand te / bye ma ron gyi ge śel śag gi /
(55) / ’prul skugsu sbas pha las rje gol prad de / rdzoṅ roṅ gyis / li byin ke ke gar śel śags / (56) / paṅ du
blaṅs te gnam du gtaṅ rag bthaṅ ba’i ṅo / (PT 1047:53-6)
“The sign of: Rdzoṅ roṅ ti tshe, the lord [and] lady, upon being lost, were guided by the ravines;
upon having concealed the magic power of ge śel śag of bye ma ron in a skugs1, lord and servants met
together; Rdzoṅ roṅ, having taken Li byin Ke ke gar śel śags into [his] lap, offered thanksgiving to the
sky.”2
bla na rje sgam na / khri sroṅ brtsan / ʼog na blon ʼdzaṅs na stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ / (447) rje ni gnam ri pywa ʼi
lugs // blon po ni sa ʼi ṅam len gyi tshul // mṅaʼ thaṅ chen po ʼi rkyen du / ji daṅ jir ldan te / pyi ʼi (448) chab
srid ni pyogs bźir bskyed // naṅ gi kha bso ni myi ñams par lhun stug / (PT 1287:446-8)
“Above, if the lord is profound, [it is] Khri sroṅ brtsan; below, if the councillor is wise, [it is] [Mgar]
stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ. As for the lord, [his] custom of the *mountain peaks*3 of the sky, [and] as for the
councillor, [his] nature of the ravines of the earth, ?adding everything to everything? as bases for
(lit. of) great authority, extended chab srid of the exterior in four directions [and] (made) the
prosperity of the interior grand so that [it] was inalienable.”

37 mṅa’ thaṅ
D Western Drokpas “powerful, influencial”, Dingri “power” (CDTD:2154); Ladakhi “prosperity, social power” (LEU:68),
“might, power” (NH:44).
YeŚes:140b: lu yaṅ ge śig; ’u ner; ’a gā hu tshuṅ; ’ag hu tshuṅ; gaṅ saṅ; Ts:42a1: ridhibala; SR.1:526.3: ba la; ridhi; buyan
kesig; auγ-a erke küčün4; GC:213b: dbaṅ thaṅ bsod nams can; BTC:682b: 1dbaṅ thaṅ; 2dge tshogs bsod nams; BYD:123b: loṅs
spyod.
DUṄDKAR:763a: stobs śugs.
Cs:139a: wealth, opulence, income; Sch:133a: Wohlstand, Reichthum, Ueberfluss, Macht; J:132a: power, might; D:361b:
power, might; Schr:258a: subjects, people; a realm, a kingdom, a country, a principality; Desg:278b: richesse; B:142b: might,
power; R.2:372b: сила, мощь, могущество; богатство; power, might; wealth; Gs:314c: 1power, might; 2prosperity;
WTS.15:52b: Macht.
TLTD.3:127a: authority; EMMERICK.1967:119b: power, might; RICHARDSON.1985:163: power; STEINRA.1985:97: pouvoir;
LI/COBLIN:389: power, authority; COBLIN.1991b:525b: power, authority; TAKEUCHI.1998.2:196: power; DOTSON.2007b:5: majesty;
BELLEZZA.2008:257n159: This term can sometimes just mean “dominion” or “innate royal power” as in the kingly control of
a country. Here, however, this word has a wider scope, encompassing not only the idea of sovereignty but all aspects of the
life of a nation, including its religion, culture and society; ZEISLER.2011:181: a register of chattels; p.182: register of
possessions; DOTSON.2013a:296: majesty.

[E] *mṅa’i thaṅ “extent of power”

[M] (N) 1extent of power; 2authority
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] mṅa’ dbaṅ / thaṅ khram / dbaṅ thaṅ
[A] mṅa’ and its cognates. The word family of mṅa’ is assumed to include the following lexemes: ṅa
“I, we” (J:124a; < *“I; self”)5; ṅad “śugs” (BYD:118a), “2effect” (Gs:295b), “1nus pa” (BTC:625a)1; ṅan

1
More details on skugs are provided s.v. dgra zin.
2
The passage is more than obscure and its translation should be treated as tentative.
3
For this tentative reconstruction see the analysis above.
4
CM buyan kesig “luck, fortune, riches” (Less:132b); auγ-a “power, strength; powerful; mighty; gigantic” (Less:59a); erke
küčü “power, force, strength; privilege, right, licence, prerogative, authority” (Less:328b).
5
For this meaning compare the reconstructed PTB form *ŋa-y “1st person pronoun, self”, STC:406, MATISOFF 2003:605 and
STEDT (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/2530; 08.03.2015).
The derivative ṅed could be a clipping from *ṅa+ñid, cf. hereto FRANCKE 1907:950. The predicted form *ṅid (see the pattern
(2) of clipping in the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan) could have been blocked since the vowel i does not seem to be
allowed following the guttural stem consonant ṅ-. As a matter of fact, only a few lexemes with the stem consonant ṅ- and a
 169

“1evil, mischief, misfortune; 2curse, imprecation” (J:126a)2; ṅan pa “bad; mean, miserable; poor,
humble, low; wicked; noisome, pernicious” (J:126b); dṅan pa “mthu; anubhāva” (Ts:41v3, s.v. dṅan),
“1mthu” (BTC:670a), “1Kraft, Macht” (WTS.15:42a); mṅa’ “Iresp. for dbaṅ, might, dominion, sway;
II.1
resp. for yod pa; to be, to have; 2adj. being owned by, belonging to; 3having, owning” (J:132a), “2to
exist, to be; to have, to possess; 3power, might, dominion” (Gs:314b)3; mṅad “IcED to wield power over
sth./so.; IIpower” (?); mṅan “mthu” (LCAṄSKYA 2006:269)4; mṅan pa “to curse, execrate” (J:132a); rṅan
in rṅan chen “contempt, disdain” (J:133b).5 Assuming that their etymon was *ṅa “I; self”, the
following derivative processes could be reconstructed together with the etymological meanings of
the lexemes:
ṅad *“potency” (-d - nominal suffix)6
ṅan *“having potency, potent” (-n - nominal suffix)
dṅan *“that what comes/originates from ṅa or ṅan (?)”7
“possession” > “power”
mṅa’ *“to own” > (m- - human being prefix?)
8
“to have”
mṅad *“Ito wield power; IIpower” (-d - active voice suffix)9
mṅan *“powerful; powerful-one” (-n - nominal suffix)1

front vowel, in this case e, are glossed in JÄSCHKE: ṅed, ṅes pa, rṅe’u, and sṅe’u; the latter two are diminutives. One could
wonder whether ṅes has not resulted from a clipping as well.
1
Also in: ṅad yal dus “drod yal dus sam śugs yal dus” (BYD:118a). Cf. Kargil ŋattʃan, Trangtse ŋa̱ttɕān “strong” (WT *ṅad can,
CDTD:2073). Compare hereto Lepcha ṅat “to have strength (as spirit, tea), to be efficacious, to have force as spirit, speach
etc.” (MG:70a), which could, in fact, be a loanword from Tibetan.
2
Cf. hereto Kyirong ŋɛ̱̃ː cāp (WT *ṅan rgyab) “to do bad things with supernatural power” (CDTD:2074) and Dzongkha ṅan
“1black magic, black art; 2evil, bed (sic!)”, ṅan rkyab “use black magic” (DED; file://localhost/G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/04-00-NGA.html; 21.06.2014).
3
For details on grammaticalisation of H-POSSESSION (i.e., expressed by the verb have) > EXIST see HEINE/KUTEVA 2002:128.
4
Cf. also mṅan bgraṅ “skyon nas brjod pa” (LCAṄSKYA 2006:276).
5
Two further lexemes could probably be incorporated into this word family as well: rṅan pa “a reward, fee” (Cs:246b),
“1gift, present, tip; 2bribe, gift” (Gs:318a), “pf. und fut. brṅan belohnen, bestechen” (WTS.16:74a), and its derivative brṅan pa
“(rñiṅ) = mchod to honour; to worship” (D:376b), “Geschenk, Bestechungsgelder, Speiseopfer” (WTS.16:99a). The alleged
original meaning connecting them to the above mentioned group of lexemes would be *“to exercise one’s power (in order
to benefit from sth.); means of applying power”.
If rṅan does not belong to this word family one can nevertheless prove that already during Tibetan Empire it alternated
with mṅan, cf. Skt. khambhīra-patiḥ “rṅan bdag ~ mṅan bdag” (Mvy:3702). On the other hand, from the phrase mṅan kyi
mṅan lag (PT 1071:r251, r266), lit. “mṅan-assistant of a mṅan”, it is obvious that mṅan in mṅan lag cannot refer to the office
but rather to the particular duties done by a mṅan. Thus, the original meaning of mṅan lag would be *”assistant in
exercising power”. Furthermore, later Tibetan historical sources describe rṅan dpon (= OT *mṅan dpon) as an official
collecting rṅan (cf. DOTSON 2007a:240f.) and thus, associate his duties with rṅan and relate the lexemes etymologically to
each other.
6
The process of word formation by means of suffixes –d and –n was still productive in OT, cf. rku “to steal, to rob” ~ rkud
“stolen goods; theft” (PT 1071, PT 1075, ITJ 753) ~ rkun “stealing one, thief”. For details on suffixes -d and -n in CT see SIMON
1977.
7
Two different explanations can be offered in reconstructing the derivative processes that culminated in the form dṅan:
1
dṅan < *d+ṅan; the base form = ṅan.
2
dṅan < *d+ṅa+n; the base form = ṅa.
For the derivation by means of the affixes d- and -n compare, for instance, dpon < pho, dbon < *bo, or dman < ma.
8
For more details on grammaticalisation to possessive constructions see HEINE 1997.
9
The following verbs are assumed to have been derived by means of the active voice suffix -d: skyed < skye; ’khrid
< ’khri; ’gyed < ’gye; rgyud < rgyu; ’bud < ’bu; ’byid < ’byi; ’byed < ’bye. This suffix is deemed to be identical with the
reconstructed PTB *-t that according to STC was a causative or directive suffix (p.100). Cf. also VAN DRIEM’s remark: “[...]
suffixation of TB *-t more often acts to transitivise an intransitive verb and occassionally add one of several possible
‘directive’ meanings to it.” (1988:160).
 170

Semantics of thaṅ. In order to ascertain the exact scope of meanings of thaṅ, a detailed survey had to
be carried out based mainly on lexicographic sources.2 The following meanings could be isolated:
1. “flat open landscape, area; plain, plateau, flat valley”: thaṅ “1flat country, a plain, steppe” (J:228a),
“sthalī; sthala; dhanvan” (Mvy:5277, 6987, 6988), “IIsa cha ri med pa’am sa thaṅ lta bu thaṅ dbye
źes snaṅ” (GC:365a), “1plain, steppe” (Gs:485c); thaṅ khul “a flat area, a plain, steppe area”
(Gs:486a); thaṅ khruṅ “1bastard” (D:568b; lit. “born on a plain”, cf. thaṅ bu below); thaṅ ’go “2the
upper part of a plain, steppe” (Gs:486a); thaṅ rgod “a flat wasteland” (Gs:486a); thaṅ chen “1a large
plain, steppe” (Gs:486a); thaṅ chen ma “sa gźi” (GC:365b); thaṅ ’jug “the end, edge of an open space
or plain” (Gs:486a; < *thaṅ mjug); thaṅ ther “2open space” (Gs:486b); thaṅ bde mo “an even or level
plain, open space” (Gs:486b); thaṅ sde “sm. thaṅ ther” (Gs:486a); thaṅ pa “dweller of the plain”
(STEIN.RA 1972:24); thaṅ bu “sm. byi phrug” (Gs:486a; byi phrug “1illegitimate child”, Gs:734b; lit.
“baby of the plain”, cf. thaṅ khruṅ above); thaṅ braṅ “an encampment on the steppes, plains
(where there are no people)” (Gs:486b); thaṅ dbye “a remote field, plains” (Gs:486b); thaṅ myul
“letting animals wander freely (untethered) to graze” (Gs:486b); thaṅ tshwa “salt obtained from a
dry place, quarried salt” (D:568b); thaṅ źiṅ “cultivated land on a plain or on flat, level area”
(Gs:486c); thaṅ gźal “= thaṅ ’jal survey; map or plan of a place” (D:569a); thaṅ gźuṅ “steppe, plain,
flat area” (Gs:486c); thaṅ g.ye “sa cha ri med pa’am sa thaṅ lta bu thaṅ dbye źes snaṅ” (GC:365b);
thaṅ la “= bkram pa spread over” (D:569a); thaṅ sram Nubra “otter (of brownish colour, living on
the ground)” (CDTD:3484); kluṅ thaṅ “a plain, a valley” (Gs:16c); rkyaṅ chu thaṅ Nubra “Indian
Changthang”, “lit. plain (where the) lake of the wild horses (is located)” (CDTD:296); rkyaṅ thaṅ
“kham ser sa thaṅ” (GC:36a), “a wide or flat ground, field, a plain, grassland area” (Gs:42c-43a);
gaṅs thaṅ Balti, Tshangra “glacier plain” (CDTD:1103); guṅ thaṅ “the abode of the gods” (HAARH
1969:221; lit. “sky-plain”); gram thaṅ “a fenny or swampy plain” (Cs:53a), “a field with many
pebbles” (Gs:199a), Western Drokpas “area covered in pebbles” (CDTD:1261); grwa thaṅ “Skt.
koṇasthala corner or nook in a plain” (D:239b); dar thaṅ “ice, icy surface” (CDTD:3793); sde thaṅ
“fields, plains” (Gs:595a); sder thaṅ “open space, open fields” (Gs:596a); na thaṅ “field, plain with
clumps of earth, vegetation” (Gs:601b); ne thaṅ “or ne’u thaṅ meadow, grass-land, sward” (D:742b),
“small meadow, grassland, lawn” (Gs:615a); spaṅ thaṅ “a green grassy plain or steppe, meadow,
prairie” (J:228a), Tabo “level mountain pasture”, Nubri “mountain pasture, meadow, alpine
pasture”, Dartsedo “meadow” (CDTD:4891); byaṅ thaṅ “flat plain”3; bye thaṅ “a sandy desert or
plain” (Cs:53a); dbye thaṅ “ri med thaṅ g.ye thaṅ yaṅ ’brog” (GC:596b), “sm. g.ye thaṅ” (Gs:759b);

1
The semantic proximity of mṅa’ to mṅad and mṅan allows us to assume that the latter two were derived from mṅa’ (by
means of the suffixes -d and -n respectively) and not directly from ṅa.
2
The morpheme thaṅ occurs in OT documents in manifold contexts and phrases the greatest part of which comes from
ritual texts which are hardly intelligible.
3
The common meaning of byaṅ thaṅ “the northern steppes or plains of Tibet” (J:228a) is secondary and resulted from a
metonymy used when referring to a geographical region by its main characteristic, i.e., a (relatively) flat plain. Even in
modern Tibetan the common name byaṅ thaṅ “[...] is commonly employed to point out all areas of high plateau,
characterised by flat valley covered with grass (rtswa thaṅ), where nomads keep their livestock and agriculture is not
possible.” (BOESI 2005:36b).
 171

’brog thaṅ “1sm. ’brog khul; 2pastureland” (Gs:774a; ’brog khul “nomadic or pastoral area, region”,
Gs:773c); sbaṅ thaṅ bkrams pa “gos chu la sbaṅ nas thaṅ la bkram pa” (BYD:383b); mya ṅam thaṅ “a
deserted place, a poor, difficult area” (Gs:822a); rtswa thaṅ “grassy plain, grassland, pastureland”
(Gs:866c), “flat valley covered with grass” (BOESI 2005:36b); ’ol thaṅ “a meadow” (Cs:53a), “ground
covered with (snail-)clover, pasture ground, grassy plain” (J:228a); g.ye thaṅ “dben gnas thaṅ gi
miṅ ste groṅ las ’dom lṅa brgya phan chad soṅ ba’i sa char dgon pa daṅ. de las riṅ bar brgal ba na
g.ye thaṅ zer” (BTC:2626b); g.ye thaṅ kha “thaṅ chen po” (DSM:869a); ri thaṅ “mountains and
plains” (Gs:1033b); ri ma thaṅ “an area not quite mountainous and not quite a valley” (Gs:1034b);
luṅ thaṅ “luṅ pa’i ri med thaṅ” (GC:861a), “plain, plateau” (Gs:1078a); śag thaṅ “a gravelly plain”
(Cs:53a), “gravelly plain” (CDTD:8489); sa thaṅ “sm. thaṅ” (Gs:1116a); bsil thaṅ “1sa cha kha yaṅs pa
bsal po yod sa” (BTC:3046b); a chen thaṅ “thaṅ chen” (BTC:3117b)1;
1a. ”desolation, void area”: thaṅ stoṅ “eine Wüste, Wildniss, wüst und leer” (Sch:228a), “uninhabited,
desolate; wilderness” (J:228b); thaṅ ther “1virgin land, previously untouched, uncultivated land”
(Gs:486b); thaṅ du ’gyur bar “to be laid waste” (Cs:53a); thaṅ du byed par “to make a havoc of”
(Cs:53a);
2. “flat area of clearly delimited space”: thaṅ chen “2a square, a plaza” (Gs:486a); thaṅ ther “3a square,
a plaza” (Gs:486b); gnam gru thaṅ “airfield” (Gs:619c); khrom thaṅ “1marketplace” (Gs:151c);
2a. ”field”: thaṅ lcags “plow” (BELLEZZA 2008:448); lci thaṅ “field where dung is dried” (Gs:346c);
3. “flat indoor surface, floor”: thaṅ Themchen “floor” (CDTD:3468); thaṅ ’thor “scattered on the floor,
ground” (Gs:486b); *ma t’aṅ* “W[estern Tibet] the unfloored bottom of a room” (J:228a); ma thaṅ
’og nas so tshig byed “mar mnan pa’i ’og nas so ’thams ’thams byed” (DSM:621b); g.yul thaṅ “a
threshing floor” (D:1154b);
4. “spread one, sth. spread”: g.yu thaṅ “surface with turquoises” (CDTD:7844);
4a. “piece of cloth”: nam thaṅ “n. of a kind of serge of great breadth which the Tibetan monks wrap
round their bodies” (D:738b); nem thaṅ “a raw silk type of shawl that is woven in Bhutan”
(Gs:615b); par thaṅ “par taṅ daṅ ’dra’o” (BYD:301a; par taṅ “mtha’ sne rta’i ze rṅog daṅ ’dra ba’i
gdan źig”, BYD:301a); spar thaṅ “par taṅ daṅ ’dra’o” (BYD:313a), “thags ma’i stan riṅ” (DSM:454a);
bar thaṅ “bar taṅ daṅ ’dra’o” (BYD:350a; bar taṅ “stan ’bol lam ’bol gdan gyi miṅ”, BYD:350a); log
thaṅ “a kind of linen” (D:1223a);
4b. ”thangka”: thaṅ ka “image, painting” (J:228b)2; thaṅ sku “thaṅ ga gzugs brñan; sku thaṅ”
(GC:365a); thaṅ ’go “1the upper part of a thanka” (Gs:486a); dkyil thaṅ “gzugs brñan thaṅ ga”
(GC:24a), “a thanka that is hung midway between other thankas” (Gs:23a); sku thaṅ “ri mo’i thaṅ
ka la’aṅ” (GC:42a), “thanka (h.)” (Gs:57a); gos thaṅ “an appliqué thanka” (Gs:192c); bris thaṅ “thaṅ
ga’am sku thaṅ” (GC:578a); źal thaṅ “sku thaṅ” (GC:734a), “h. of thaṅ kha” (Gs:925c);

1
Additionally, thaṅ in this meaning is attested in many place names, old as well as classical ones.
2
Cf. HOFFMANN: “the Sanskrit equivalent of the Tibetan word thaṅ ka is paṭa (lit. “a piece of cloth”)” (1975:227).
 172

4c. ”sheet of paper”: “5= bka’ thaṅ order, command” (J:228b; < *bka’ thaṅ yig?); thaṅ khrims “laws by
decree (?)” (STEIN.RA 1972:144), “the prescribed funerary activities; a set of laws or prescriptions”
(BELLEZZA 2008:381); (bka’) thaṅ yig “decree” (J:228b), “sa nas bton pa’i dpe cha” (GC:365b),
“1biography; 2will, last testament; 3history” (Gs:486c), “record” (DOTSON 2007b:51), “kha chems”
(BYD:225b; lit. “letter [written] on a flat sheet [of paper]”); spor thaṅ “= nag rtsis the black-art, the
art of divination” (D:803a; cf. Eng. balance sheet)1;
4d. ”piece of hide, leather”: thaṅ khug “rtsam pa’i pags thaṅ” (GC:365a), “skin bag in which Tibetan
tsamba is mixed with tea and kneaded for eating” (Gs:485c); thaṅ śa gcod ”va. to stretch leather”
(Gs:486c; lit. “to cut off the flesh from hide”); spags thaṅ “leather pouch used for kneading”
(Gs:655b);
5. “spreading one”:
5a. ”wing”: thaṅ (ma/po) “in Verbindung mit gśog pa (can) genannt, Name unbekannter mythischer
Wesen” (LAUFER 1900:48; lit. “winged-one”, i.e. “bird”); thaṅ dkar “Iwhite winged (A); IIwhite-
winged one (N)” (see s.v. thaṅ kar), “der weissgeschwänzte Adler” (Sch:228b), “1white-tailed
eagle” (D:568b), “1Tibetan white vulture” (Gs:485b); thaṅ khruṅ “Trappvogel” (Sch:228b); thaṅ nag
Chiktan “black variety of vulture” (CDTD:3478); thaṅ prom “white-winged one” (see s.v. thaṅ
prom), “thaṅ dkar” (DSM:286a); thaṅ phrom dkar po “white henbane” (Gs:486b; lit. “white [plant] of
vultures”?); thaṅ phrom nag po “black henbane” (Gs:486b; lit. “black [plant] of vultures”?); thaṅ bu
“sm. byi phrug” (Gs:486a; byi phrug “3baby bird”, Gs:734b); thaṅ smug “1a kind of dark purple,
blackish vulture” (Gs:486c); bya rgod thaṅ nag “a type of black vulture” (Gs:729b); (bya) rgod thaṅ
smug “(a type of) brown vulture” (Gs:729b, 251a);
5b. ”tree with spreading branches; cedar, pine”: thaṅ dkar “2white pine (a species of pine tree)”
(Gs:485b); thaṅ khrag “cedar used medicinally; thaṅ rag colloq. of thaṅ khrag” (D:568b), “sap from a
pine tree” (Gs:486a); thaṅ khruṅ “2thaṅ chu” (D:568b); thaṅ sgron “pine lantern (made from pine
wood which stays lit because of its sap)” (Gs:486a); thaṅ chu “resin, gum” (J:228b), “thaṅ śiṅ gi
tshi’am rtsi’am bcud” (GC:365b), “resin, gum, sap (of pine trees)” (Gs:486a); thaṅ nag “black pine (a
species of pine tree)” (Gs:486b); thaṅ ’bru “Cedernüsse” (Sch:228b); thaṅ mar “(lit. tree-butter or
oil) a balsam” (D:568b); thaṅ dmar “red pine (a species of pine tree)” (Gs:486b); thaṅ smug “2a type
of pine tree” (Gs:486c); thaṅ tshi “pine tar, sap, resin” (Gs:486c); thaṅ rag “die Ceder” (Sch:228b);
thaṅ śiṅ “fir, pine” (J:228b), “gsom śiṅ” (GC:365b); me thaṅ Kyirong “pine torch”, Jirel “longish
pieces of pine that contain resin (burned for light)” (CDTD:6328); me thaṅ śiṅ Tshochen “pine”
(CDTD:6329);
5c. ”torch” (< *”pine torch”): me thaṅ Yolmo “torch” (CDTD:6328); smyug thaṅ “bamboo torch”,
Kyirong “dry bamboo sticks used as firewood” (CDTD:6512);
6. “extent”:

1
Cf. also spor thaṅ khra mo “bod du dar ba’i rgya nag gi rtsis” (DSM:462a) and spor thaṅ rtsis “nag rtsis” (GC:510a).
 173

6a. ”a particular degree to which something is”1: thaṅ khram “a tally of jurisdiction” (see s.v.); thaṅ
mñam “thob thaṅ mñam pa” (DSM:286a); thaṅ du “in the opinion of” (D:569a; lit. “to an extent”);
ṅo thaṅ “a person’s standing with regards to respect and honor” (Gs:304c); che thaṅ “immense”;
’jon thaṅ “capability, ability” (Gs:399b); thob thaṅ “thob staṅs” (GC:378a; thob staṅs “thob pa’i thabs
rnam pa’am bzo ’dra”, GC:378a), “1rights; 2qualification, status” (Gs:508a), Balti, Tabo “reward,
prize” (CDTD:3643; lit. “extent of achievements”); ’don thaṅ “means of living, food (h.)”
(CDTD:4243); sdud thaṅ “collected things” (CDTD:4397); dbaṅ thaṅ “prerogative” (see s.v.); bźes thaṅ
“bsod nams can dbaṅ thaṅ che ba” (GC:754a); za thaṅ “(a person’s) capability of eating” (J:228a),
“1good fortune; 2arc[haic] salary” (Gs:954a)2; yin thaṅ “most probably it is, seems to” (Gs:1000a; lit.
“the extent of being [like that]”); yod thaṅ “durchaus, offenbar, klar” (Sch:533a), “that existing”
(D:1147a), “probably” (Gs:1008a);
6b. ”rate”: gla thaṅ “gla staṅs” (GC:138a; gla staṅs “gla rṅan gyi thaṅ gźi staṅs. skal ba la’aṅ”, GC:138a),
“abbr. of gla cha’i thaṅ gźi” (Gs:209; gla cha’i thaṅ gźi “the prevailing rate of wages, fees, fares”,
Gs:209a); stoṅ thaṅ “the amount, rate of the compensation for killing a person” (Gs:474a); dpya
thaṅ “the amount of tax one has to pay” (Gs:653a); yoṅ thaṅ “1income, profit; 2= yon tan talent,
natural gift, faculty” (J:228a); lo thaṅ “yearly tribute” (J:228a; < *lo dpya’i thaṅ “rate of yearly
tribute”), “lo dus kyi rgyal po la ’bul pa’i dpya’am” (GC:868a), “1the tribute given during an
annual audience; 2yearly grain tax; 3yearly income” (Gs:1085a)3; gsos thaṅ “rma ’jal gyi khrims śig”
(DSM:1001b), “rate of reparation, restitution for injury” (Gs:1163b);
6c. ”valuation of property; value, price”: thaṅ “2price, value” (J:228a), “lo thaṅ lta bu” (BYD:225a);
thaṅ gźal “va. to set a price, value” (Gs:486c); thaṅ gźi “market-price” (J:228b), “market rate, price”
(Gs:486c); skor thaṅ “price or rate; also interest on anything in kind; in grain given as loan”
(D:95b), “1exchange rate” (Gs:64b); khrom thaṅ “2market price” (Gs:151c); goṅ thaṅ “value, price”
(Gs:188c); spus thaṅ “Qualität” (CÜPPERS 2004:65); zog thaṅ “sm. zog goṅ” (Gs:963a; zog goṅ “price (of
goods, merchandise)”, Gs:963a); ’os thaṅ “suitable, appropriate value” (Gs:984c); yul thaṅ “local
price” (D:1141a); rin thaṅ “price, value” (J:228a), “value, price, worth” (Gs:1040a); ris thaṅ “value”
(TAKEUCHI 1995:52);
7. “extension”: rabs thaṅ Dingri “generation, lineage” (CDTD:7973; lit. “the extension of the family”;
cf. Eng. extended family);
8. “spread” (A):

1
A very special usage of this meaning is encountered in the following passage from the OTA:
dpyid blon chen po maṅ źam gyis / zlor bsduste / mṅan gyi thaṅ sbyard / khab soʼi khrald pa bskos (ITJ 750:241)
“In the spring, grand councillor [Rṅegs] maṅ źam [stag tsab], having summoned [the council] at Zlo, fixed the
jurisdiction of mṅans [and] appointed the tax-collectors for (lit. of) khab so.”
Here, thaṅ seems to refer to the extent of power, i.e. jurisdiction of an official. However, the form could also have resulted
from a scribal error of writing thaṅ instead of, e.g., mṅa’ thaṅ, dbaṅ thaṅ, or a similar compound.
2
Cf. also za thaṅ ’phel “bsod nams ’phel ba’am za ba’i dbaṅ thaṅ ’phel ba” (GC:755a).
3
Cf. also lo thaṅ gcod pa “to fix, to order yearly tribute” (J:228a).
 174

8a. ”flat, even”: thaṅ sñoms “flach, gleich, eben” (Sch:228b); thaṅ ma “bkram pa” (GC:365b); thaṅ źu
“źwa mo źig” (GC:365b), “a hat worn by monks in the traditional Tibetan government” (Gs:486c);
8b. ”even, equal”: thaṅ ma “2even, equal (usually pertains to grain)” (Gs:486b); ñin thaṅ “the whole
day; usual, a every day” (CDTD:2962); pho thaṅ “pha tshab” (DSM:486a); pho thaṅ ’brug “dragon”
(Gs:684c); bu thaṅ “sm. mag pa” (Gs:721b; mag pa “bridegroom who resides at marriage
matrilocally, adopted bridegroom”, Gs:789b); rlig thaṅ “testicles” (Gs:1052c);
9. “plain, clear”: “3W[estern Tibet] for dwaṅs clear, serene” (J:228a), “5lightness; 6vi. to become clear”
(Gs:485c); ja thaṅ “ja ma bsrubs pa. ja dwaṅs” (GC:286a), “black tea (i.e. tea without milk or
butter)” (Gs:387b); nam thaṅ “a cloudless sky, fine weather” (J:228b), “nam dwaṅs mi ’thibs pa”
(GC:465a), “vi. to have the sky clear up” (Gs:612a); gnam thaṅ “1abbr. gnam gru ’bab thaṅ; 2clear sky,
good weather” (Gs:620b; gnam gru ’bab thaṅ “sm. gnam gru thaṅ”, Gs:619c); dmar thaṅ “rñog med
gsal dwaṅs dmar po” (GC:656a); sa ris thaṅ gsal “clear for all to see” (Gs:1120b; < saσris#thaṅσgsal, lit.
“plain and clear (i.e. visible) place”);
10. “stretched; stretched tight, tense”: thaṅ thaṅ “strained to utmost” (D:569b); thaṅ po “enduring,
able to stand fatigue; able and hardy, strong, tense; fig. tight, firm, also tenseness” (D:569a);
“2taut, tight, tense” (Gs:486b); thaṅ śa gcod pa “to strain, to stretch” (J:228b); “to the utmost of
one’s muscles” (D:569b); thaṅ lhod “tight and loose; the fit of clothing” (D:569a), “1tight and loose;
2
(for work) hastily and slowly” (Gs:486c); śa thaṅ “ṅal ba’am sku mñel ba thaṅ chad pa lta bu”
(GC:873a); śa thaṅ thaṅ “nach Kräften, nach Vermögen” (Sch:228b), “śa zad zad“ (DSM:927b); śa
thaṅ ba “bka’ ṅal che ba daṅ śa zad pa” (DSM:927b);
10a. ”firm; hard; strong”: thaṅ pa Western Drokpas “strong, powerful” (CDTD:3479); khraṅ thaṅ “sra
brtan (nas) nam mkhraṅ po” (GC:91b); spyaṅ a thaṅ “a wolf in the prime of its life” (Gs:661a); sra
thaṅ “fest, solide” (CÜPPERS 2004:96); hra thaṅ thaṅ “sm. hra tag tag” (Gs:1176b; hra tag tag “good,
well, solid”, Gs:1176b; ~ sra thaṅ);
10b. ”healthy”: thaṅ po “gzugs po bde po’am thaṅ po lta bu” (GC:365b), “1healthy, well, fit” (Gs:486b),
“healthy” (CDTD:3480); thaṅ ma “1healthy, well” (Gs:486b); thaṅ med “unhealthy, unwell”
(Gs:486b); mkhraṅ thaṅ “physically well and strong, hale and hearty, healthy” (Gs:157b); go thaṅ
“healthy” (Gs:186b);
10c. ”strength”?: thaṅ gcod pa “to tire, to fatigue” (J:228b); thaṅ chod/chad pa “to be tired, wearied”
(J:228b); yid thaṅ chad “1vi. to be discouraged, disappointed, sad, down, dismayed; 2vi. to be fed up”
(Gs:998b); sems thaṅ chad “sm. yid thaṅ chad” (Gs:1129a);
11. “to stretch”: rkaṅ thaṅ “1on foot; 2= rkaṅ dmag a foot soldier” (D:73b; lit. “stretching the leg”), “on
foot” (Gs:38a); rkaṅ thaṅ du/la “on foot” (J:228b); baṅ thaṅ thaṅ “baṅ rgyug pa. mgyogs por ’gro ba’i
don” (BYD:348b), “baṅ rgyug pa” (DSM:528a); źabs thaṅ “rkaṅ thaṅ” (GC:732a), “h. of rkaṅ thaṅ”
(Gs:923a);
 175

12. “to extend”: ye ma thaṅ ba “sṅar ma myoṅ ba” (DSM:851a).1

As further members of the word family the following lexemes could be considered: daṅ “meadow”
(J:249); daṅ tse “W. a field-terrace” (J:249b; < *daṅ rtse?); gdaṅ “to open wide mouth and nostrils”
(J:265a)2; gdaṅ “clothes-stand, rack or rail for hanging up clothes” (J:265a).3

Contextual analysis of mṅa’ thaṅ. In passages in which attributes of a btsan po are discussed, mṅa’
thaṅ, juxtaposed with his mighty helmet, is repeatedly described as being great (che). The
immemorial customs followed by the lord and his councillor constitute the foundation of mṅa’ thaṅ
(PT 1287). We can infer from this that only if rulers act according to the established tradition, that
harmonises with the natural laws of the sky and the earth, can mṅa’ thaṅ become great. The
culmination is flourishing and increase of chab srid. chab srid, on its part, determines mṅa’ thaṅ (ITJ
751). In a ritual narration of PT 1042, mṅa’ thaṅ, similarly to dbaṅ thaṅ, is controlled by an officiant.

To conclude, from our semantic survey on thaṅ we learn that the word can be combined with words
connoting abstract notions to form compounds likewise with abstract meanings. This is, however,
possible only with the meaning “extent”. Thus, the etymological meaning of mṅa’ thaṅ could be
proposed to have been *“extent of power”, i.e., “authority”.

[T] 1 de nas rgyal (read: rgya bon) gyis / mṅaʼ thaṅ daṅ / dbaṅ taṅ bcad (PT 1042:13)
“Thereafter, the bon priests [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets4 determined the extent
of power and prerogatives.”5

1
Compounds containing thaṅ which could not be included in any of the above groups comprise: thaṅ so re skyes “phran bu
re skyes” (DSM:286b); skyin thaṅ “der Hagel” (Sch:27a), “hailstorm” (Gs:71b), “ser ba daṅ. than pa la’aṅ go” (BYD:34a; OT
skyin ’daṅ, which seems to be the original form, is attested in PT 126:40, PT 1285:v32, ITJ 733:6, 15, 16, 39); skyin thaṅ chu “glo
bur du ’oṅs pa’i chu ’jigs pa can” (GC:51a), “flood after a hail storm” (Gs:71b), “ser ba babs kyi chu log gi miṅ” (BYD:34a);
skyin thaṅ dus “se ra bab pa’am than pa mu ge’i dus sam ston thog med pa’i dus lta bu” (GC:51a); ’dren thaṅ “(mṅon) thab ka
ba” (BTC:1428b). bla thaṅ glossed with “= stod smad upper and lower; also = phyi naṅ within and without” (D:900a) is
probably a distorted form of *bla mthaṅ.
2
Cf. also Balti ɣdaŋ ~ bdaŋ “to stand with legs apart”, Kargil ncA “to open wide (door)”, Nurla cEA “to open wide, to fling
open”, Tabo cEA “to open wide, to gape” (CDTD.V:608).
3
For possible TB cognates compare: Lepcha 1daṅ “the low ground, the vallies” (MG:169b), 2daṅ “to stretch out, to pull out;
to elongate; to open wide, to gape with (as eyes, mouth)” (MG:169b); Rongpo daŋ “a rope used for keeping clothes” (SUHNU
2001a:239a), thaŋga “plain level” (SUHNU 2001a:251b); Byangsi taŋbu “a big snake, python” (SUHNU 2001b:323b), taŋmo “to
press” (SUHNU 2001b:323b), taŋʃimo “to be pressed” (SUHNU 2001b:323b), thaŋ “flat ground or land” (SUHNU 2001b:324a);
Darma thəŋ “ground” (SHREE 2001a:387b), thəŋ-mo “built (sic!), construct (v.)” (SHREE 2001a:387b), thang “floor, ground”
(WILLIS 2007:585a), thang “price” (WILLIS 2007:585a); Chaudangsi təŋ-bu “python” (SHREE 2001b:435a); Rabha deŋ “v.t. untie,
loosen, set free, open” (JOSEPH 2007:733a), deŋ-ga “wide-mouthed vessel carved from wood used for serving food at
marriages” (JOSEPH 2007:733a), tɨŋ-tɨŋ “tight, taut” (JOSEPH 2007:841b); Chepang dheŋ “va. be straight” (CAUGHLEY 2000:154b),
dheŋ.kə- “vt. stretch, spread out (esp. gum from pot)” (CAUGHLEY 2000:154b), dhyaŋ.gay “wide open (mouth or flower)”
(CAUGHLEY 2000:156a).
The question whether ’diṅ “to spread on the ground” (J:276a), ldiṅ “to make flat by pressing” (CDTD.V:678), ’thiṅ “to
spread” (CDTD.V:569), mchiṅ “2dbus sam dkyil” (DSM:185b; lit. “broad one”), as well as their derivatives should be included
here as well, has to remain unanswered for the time being, although Lepcha 6tiṅ “the plains, flat country” (MG:128a) and
Rongpo thiŋ “vt., to spread” (SUHNU 2001a:251b) could support the hypothesis of the vowel alternation *taṅ ~ *tiṅ in the
PTB stem.
Similarly, the assumed etymological relationship of thaṅ, on the one hand, and tha ma “the last” (J:226b), thag “distance”
(J:227a), mtha’ “end, ending” (J:239b), and mthaṅ “the lower part of the body” (J:239b), on the other hand, needs further
investigation (cf. SIMON 1940:374-5). The evidence gathered so far, however, seems to contradict SIMON’s hypothesis.
4
On the reconstruction of rgyal as *rgya bon see s.vv. khram skya and (rgyal) thag brgyad.
5
For mṅa’ thaṅ bcad and dbaṅ thaṅ bcad as “determined the extent of power” and “determined prerogatives”, respectively,
compare sa bcad and [m]tshams bcad “to set boundaries” (DALTON 2011:299).
 176

rgyal (read: rgya bon) gyis kyaṅ / mṅaʼ thaṅ bcad mṅaʼ thaṅ du ʼdus so (PT 1042:53)
“The bon priests [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets determined the extent of power.
[They] gathered as authority.”
mdad śid rgyal (read: rgya bon) gyis mṅaʼ thaṅ bcad de // gtad tu gnaṅ baʼi rnams / (102) bdud gcado (PT
1042:101-2)
“The bon priests of burial [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets determined the extent of
power. Demons were averted [from objects] that were allowed to be delivered.”
slad dro rgyal gyis / (110) mṅaʼ thaṅ bcad nas // rgyal la yaṅ gtaṅ phud dbul (PT 1042:109-10)
“Later in the afternoon, the bon priests [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets determined
the extent of power. Thereafter, a first-fruits gift was given also to the bon priests [responsible for
preparing] eight-threaded nets.”
2
sku tshe riṅ la / mṅa’ thaṅ che (PT 16:28v2, 29v1-2)
“During [his] lifetime, [his] authority was great.”
dbu rmog brtsan mṅa’ (33v2) thaṅ che ba’i byin kyis (PT 16:33v1-2)
“through the splendour of the mighty helmet [and] great authority”
rgyal (read: rgya bon) gyis kyaṅ / mṅaʼ thaṅ bcad mṅaʼ thaṅ du ʼdus so (PT 1042:53)
“The bon priests [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets determined the extent of power.
[They] gathered as authority.”1
bla na rje sgam na / khri sroṅ brtsan / ʼog na blon ʼdzaṅs na stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ / (447) rje ni gnam ri pyva ʼi
lugs // blon po ni sa ʼi ṅam len gyi tshul // mṅaʼ thaṅ chen po ʼi rkyen du / ji daṅ jir ldan te / pyi ʼi (448) chab
srid ni pyogs bźir bskyed // naṅ gi kha bso ni myi ñams par lhun stug / (PT 1287:446-8)
“Above, if the lord is profound, [it is] Khri sroṅ brtsan; below, if the councillor is wise, [it is] [Mgar]
stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ. As for the lord, [his] custom of the *mountain peaks* of the sky, [and] as for the
councillor, [his] nature of the ravines of the earth, ?adding everything to everything? as bases for
(lit. of) great authority, extended chab srid of the exterior in four directions [and] (made) the
prosperity of the interior grand so that [it] was inalienable.”
thugs rje chen po daṅ ldan bas ni ’greṅ myi (36v1) ’o chog la / gnam sa’i lugs daṅ ’thun par / bkab ciṅ bkur te
/ chab srid gyi mṅa’ thaṅ chen po dard ciṅ rgyas pa’i dus su / chab srid kyi blon po yaṅ ’phags pa dag chig /
mṅa’ thaṅ du byuṅ ste // blon chen po (36v2) źaṅ khri sum rje daṅ / chen po źaṅ lha bzaṅ po gñis kyis /
dgra’i śed smad de / chab srid kyi phaṅ bsṅod nas (ITJ 751:36r4-v2)
“At the time when the one possessing great thugs rje (i.e., btsan po Khri gtsug lde brtan) offered
protection over us, the upright men, in agreement with the custom of the sky and the earth, and
showed [them] respect, and when great authority of chab srid was spreading and increasing, also
councillors of chab srid, the exalted ones, appeared as authority. Grand councillor Źaṅ khri sum rje
together with grand [councillor] Źaṅ lha bzaṅ po, both, having diminished enemy’s power, blessed
the highness of chab srid.”
bod rje blon ’khor daṅ bcas pha sku tshe daṅ mṅa’ thaṅ g.yuṅ druṅ du grub la (ITJ 751:40v4)
“May the lords and councillors of Tibet together with [their] retinues be fulfilled in [their] eternal
lifes and authority!”
btsan po lha sras / ’o lde spu rgyal // gnam gyi (2) lha las myi’i rjer gśegs pa // chos lugs bzaṅ po (3) ni gźar
gtsug (read: gtsug lag) myi ’gyur // mṅa’ thaṅ chen po ni nam źar (4) kyaṅ byin myi ñam ste (Khri 1-4)

1
For the expression mṅa’ thaṅ du ’dus compare dbaṅ du ’dus in TLTD.2:112, text 21:10, translated, however, by THOMAS as
“brought under control” (TLTD.3:162a).
 177

“The btsan po, the Divine Son, ’O lde spu rgyal, who came down from the gods of the sky as a ruler of
men; concerning [his] good customs and manners, [their] principles will never change; concerning
[his] great authority, [its] splendour will never decay either.”
g.yuṅ druṅ gi gtsug lag chen po (6) bźin du // btsan po lha sras khri lde sroṅ brtsan myi’i rje[r] (7) mdzad pa
// lha’i lugs daṅ mthun par ni mṅa’ thaṅ che / (8) gnam gyi chos daṅ mtshuṅs par ni / bka’ brtsan te (Khri 5-
8)
“In accordance with the great principles of perpetuity, btsan po, the Divine Son Khri lde sroṅ brtsan,
who acted as the ruler of men: [his] authority, being in agreement with the laws of gods, was great;
[his] orders, being similar to the custom of the sky, were mighty.”1

38 mṅa’ dbaṅ
BTC:683a: dbaṅ cha; Negi.3:1007a: vaśaḥ.
Gs:314c: rule, power, control; WTS.15:53b: Macht.
LALOU.1952:355: privilèges du pouvoir; BELLEZZA.2008:211: mastery.

[E] mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ “extent of power and extent of power”
[M] (N) domain
SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[[N+N]+[N+N]]
[R] mṅa’ thaṅ / dbaṅ thaṅ
[A] In its sole occurrence in OT sources, mṅa’ dbaṅ, marked with LOC, functions as a predicate
complement of mchis “to be, to be there, to exist” (J:165a). Compare the argument structure of mchis
in another example from the same text:
chibs (25) slad logs na mchis paʼi rnams (PT 1042:24-5)
“horses that were behind the lines (lit. on the back side)”
Thus, it appears that mṅa’ dbaṅ referred rather to a sphere of existence in which something could be
located. The same document mentions earlier on the morphemes mṅa’ and dbaṅ together in another
context, namely:
rgyal (read: rgya bon) gyis / mṅaʼ thaṅ daṅ / dbaṅ taṅ bcad (PT 1042:13)
“The bon priest [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets2 determined the extent of power
and prerogatives.”
Defining and delimiting different spheres of existence is a preliminary act in many religious rituals.
In funerary rituals the sphere of the deceased one must be separated from the sphere of living ones.
This rite is accompanied by attaching certain objects to concrete spheres. In my opinion, that is
exactly what is meant in the passage from PT 1042 quoted below: animals were assigned to different
domains of existence and for this reason could not be used in the ritual. Thus, I consider mṅa’ dbaṅ
as a compounded form of the phrase mṅa’ thaṅ daṅ dbaṅ thaṅ. Should this reconstruction prove
correct, this would mean that the head elements of the original compounds (i.e. -thaṅ) have been
elided in the process of formation of a new lexeme: *[N1+N3] daṅ [N2+N3] > N1+N2. We can surmise that

1
Two further mentions of mṅa’ thaṅ may be found in Or.15000/466:2 and Khrom chen inscription, l.l3 (see the
transliteration on OTDO). However, both passages are too fragmentary to be meaningfully translated.
2
On rgya bon see s.vv. khram skya and (rgyal) thag brgyad.
 178

the compound was subsequently re-analysed and re-defined as a coordinate compound of the
underlying structure *mṅa’ daṅ dbaṅ.1 This re-interpretation is evidenced by the meanings glossed in
CT lexicographic sources (see above).

[T] gśin la gtad du myi ruṅ baʼi spu la // rta nag po lhiṅ nag / rta khra bo / g.yag rog po kham pa / (88)
mdzo kham pa daṅ stag re ru yur // g.yag dkar po thal kar // ʼdi rnams g.yen dgu lastsogs te // (89) mṅaʼ
dbaṅ so so na mchis pas // gtad kyaṅ mchir myi btub ste / myi sman no (PT 1042:87-9)
“For the hair of those that were not suitable to be delivered to the deceased one, [the hair of] a black
horse, a completely black horse, piebald horse, black yak, brownish [yak], brownish mdzo, re ru yur
tiger, white yak [and] whitish-grey [yak were collected]. Because these, being gathered from among
nine [kinds of] g.yen, exist in separate domains, even if delivered, not being able to come, [they] are
not useful.”

39 rṅo thog
YeŚes:143a: cha dal tha’i; SR.1:538.6: bya nus; čidaqu anu üiledün čidaqu (s.v. rṅo thog); čidaqu (s.v. rṅo thog pa); GC:218b:
thub pa’i don (s.v. rṅo thogs); LCh:213b: śakyate; BTC:699b: 1phan thogs pa; 2nus pa’am phan pa; Negi.3:1067b: I.1śaknomi;
2
śakyate; IIśaktaḥ; BYD:126a: nus pa’am phan pa (s.v. rṅo thog pa); p.126b: nus pa’am thub pa’i don (s.v. rṅo thogs).
BTK:114n3: nus pa’am ʼjon pa la’o; DUṄDKAR:771a: rṅo thogs pa ste phan thogs pa’am nus pa.
Cs:247a: a being able, capable (s.v. rṅo thog pa); v.n. to be able, to dare (s.v. rṅo thog par); Sch:137b: können, vermögen,
dürfen; ein Könnender, Fähiger (s.v. rṅo thog pa); J:134b: = rṅo ba to be able; Desg:283a: capable; B:145a: to be able, be
capable (s.v. rṅo thog pa); R.2:392a: 1мочь, быть в состоянии; to be able, to be capable; 2способный, могущий; able,
capable (s.v. *rṅo thog pa); Gs:319a: 1vi. to be able, to be capable (of); 2useful (s.v. rṅo thogs); WTS.16:78a: auch rṅo thog fähig,
geeignet, imstande, in der Lage sein, können (s.v. rṅo thogs).
TLTD.3:127a: capable (s.v. rṅo thog pa); EMMERICK.1967:120a: to be able; TAUBE.1980:59: Wort der “eleganten Sprache” für nus
pa; p.151a: Fähigkeit, fähig; RICHARDSON.1985:163: capable; LI/COBLIN:176: Li: ability; Coblin: to be capable; COBLIN.1991c:72: to
be able, capable.

[S] *rṅo thog *“to reach power/the strength”

[E] *rṅo thog pa “reaching power/the strength”
[M] (A) capable (to do official service), competent
[F] V2 rṅo thogs
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[A] As the passages quoted below clearly demonstrate, rṅo thog developed as a compound owing to
the lexicalisation of the verbal phrase *rṅo thog in which rṅo functioned as a direct object of the verb
thog:
bar du yaṅ tse weṅ bro nad kyis b[ta]b ste / brda’ ba’i rṅo ma thog (PT 1078:r3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1995:180)
“In the meantime, Tse weṅ, having become ill, was not able to call in [a loan]2.”

soṅ tig tig gi skya źiṅ dor pye daṅ gñis / kham cuṅ na mchis pa (r2) dṅos rmo ba’i rṅo ma thog te // waṅ
hwa tshe daṅ thun śas phyed mar rmed de (PT 1115:r1-2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:209)

1
For the semantic analyses of mṅa’ and dbaṅ see s.vv. mṅa’ thaṅ and dbaṅ thaṅ, respectively.
2
Contrary to TAKEUCHI (1995:182) who identified brda’ with brṅa < CT rṅa “to mow, to cut, to reap” (J:133b), I assume it to be
cognate to CT bda’ “1to drive, to drive out; to chase, to put to flight; 2to carry away, along, or off, to hurry off; 3to call in,
collect, recover; 4to reprove, rebuke, accuse” (J:269a).
 179

“One and a half dor of crop field of Soṅ tig tig, that is located in Kham cuṅ, could not be ploughed
personally [by him]. [Thus, he] tilled [the field] together with Waṅ hwa tshe as a half [of] a share
(thun śas).”

gum chad gñis / rṅo ji thog gis ʼtshal źiṅ mchis so (PT 1287:426)
“I do wish both, [my] death and extinction, above all (lit. to the utmost [of] what is possible).”

[...] mchi ba’i rṅo myi thog na [...] (Or.15000/116:v3)

“If [he] is not able to go [...]”

bdag ṅan pa rje blas gyi rṅo thog myi thog (vol.56, fol.72:27; trslr. after TLTD.2:24)
“Am I, the humble one, capable for service or not?”

yar gtaṅ du ni mchi ba’i rṅo myi thog ci[ṅ] (v3) mchis (ITN 1120:v2-3)
“[I] was not able to go to ?Yar gtaṅ?.”1

so la mchi ba’i rṅo mi tog nas ko (v1) na stoṅ sde naṅ du sña śur slog ta daṅ so sṅa pyir sde (v2) brjes (ITN
2013:r2-v2)
“After [he] was not able to go to the spot2, [he] changed the district for the earlier and later spots
with those attached (ta) to Sña śur[-members] who were turning to the thousand-district Ko na.”

cibs rta blaṅs na mchi ba’i rṅo yaṅ myi tho[g] [...] (ITN 2053:r1)
“If [we] took a riding horse, [it] would not even be able to go [...]”3

As can be inferred especially from phrases like rje blas gyi rṅo thog (vol. 56, fol. 72:27), rṅo [y]aṅ thog
(ITN 547:v2), or rṅo ji thog (PT 1287:426), we are dealing here with object incorporation in which the
direct object rṅo, following lexicalisation of the verbal phrase, started to be treated as a
constitutional part of a new formation - the compound rṅo thog. Most of the passages quoted above
exhibit, however, the same sentence structure:
V1+NPRCGEN rṅoABS thog “to be able to V”, lit. “to reach rṅo of V-ing”4
The compositional character of rṅo thog is evident particularly in sentences like:
’dzaṅs rṅo thog go (PT 1287:207)
“[He] is wise [and] capable.”
where rṅo thog forms a coordinate compound with ’dzaṅs.

1
Alternatively, one could also render the first part of the sentence with “to go to give yar”. The meaning and function of
yar gtaṅ are not clear.
2
Literally, “to go on the spot”. THOMAS translates the phrase so la as “on service” (TLTD.2:454). I assume that so refers here
to a place where so pas, lit. “spotter”, were stationed.
3
Further fragmentary occurrence is: [r]ṅo [y]aṅ thog (ITN 547:v2).
4
For an analogous contruction with similar modal meaning compare rigs “necessary, also proper, suitable, right, suited to
its purpose, in the earlier literature gen[erally] with the genit[ive] of the infin[itive], sometimes with the termin[ative] of
the infin[itive], and in later times with the root of the verb” (J:528a). The construction of rigs with genitive of a
nominalized verb is widely attested in OT sources, for examples see OTDO.
 180

rṅo-. The morpheme rṅo is found only scarcely documented in lexicographic sources, first of all in
rṅo ba “nus pa, the state of being able, capability” (Cs:247a), “= nus pa, capacité, pouvoir” (Desg:283a),
“čidan” (SR.1:538.6; čida- “to be able, capable; to be able to overcome or vanquish”, Less:176b1).
Besides, it is attested in few other phrases and compounds, like, e.g.: rṅo ci thog2 “yaγun činege ber
küčü kürgekü. čidan tai” (SR.1:538.5)3; rṅo ma thogs pa “ma thub pa” (GC:218b)4; rṅo mi tog “rṅo mi
thogs te mi nus źes pa’i don te” (DSM:140a); rṅo mi thogs “haśākya (read: na śakya); dṅom mi ’os pa’i
don” (Ts:43v2), “mi thub” (GC:218b), “1not useful; 2incapable, unable” (Gs:319a), “1phan mi thogs pa;
2
mi nus pa” (BTC:699b), “na śakya; rṅo mi thogs pa ste mi thub pa; ülü čidaqu” (SR.1:538.5)5; rṅo yis
khyer ba “ham pas khyer ba” (DSM:140a)6; rṅo myi “mi ṅo ma daṅ bdag po” (BYD:126b); lus kyi rṅo ba
“force ou beauté du corps” (Desg:283a).7

All these formations as well as the aforementioned passages from OT texts, which contain the verbal
phrase rṅo thog, indicate that rṅo was originally a noun. The alleged verb rṅo glossed in dictionaries
as “to be able” (J:134b) is in all likelihood a back-formation derived from rṅo thog. Of special interest
in this context are the explanations given by SUMATIRATNA who conveys the following meanings in
connection with the morpheme rṅo:
čidan < čida- “to be able, capable; to be able to overcome or vanquish” (Less:176b);
činege “strength, power, capacity, ability; size, quantity, prosperity, affluence, opulence”
(Less:188a);
küčü(n) “power, force (also military), strength; effort; energy; validity” (Less:496a).
On these grounds we could postulate for *rṅo the meaning *“force, power, strength” to have been
the original one. Even though this reconstruction does not seem to receive much support from
Tibetan lexicographic sources, it is nevertheless possible to demonstrate its adequacy by analysing
further OT occurrences of rṅo, cf.:

1
The suffix -n in čidan forms nouns from verbs, cf. POPPE 1964:49, §175.
2
Cf. the phrase rṅo ji thog in PT 1287:426 cited above.
3
CM yaγu(n) “what? what kind of? which?” (Less:424b); činege “strength, power, capacity, ability; size, quantity,
prosperity, affluence, opulence” (Less:188a); -ber NOM; küčü(n) “power, force (also military), strength; effort; energy;
validity” (Less:496a); kürge- “to cause to arrive; to send, deliver, dispatch, convey, transfer; to accompany, take home; to
deliver, conduct the bride to the home of her husband; to give as a present” (Less:505a; kürge- is a causative from kür- “1to
reach, to arrive at; to touch; to amount to; 2to be sufficient; 3idiomatic usage: to feel, suffer; to begin, to become”,
Less:503b-4a; cf. also küčü ülü kürkü “for the strength not to suffice”, Less:504a, s.v. kür-); čida- “to be able, capable; to be
able to overcome or vanquish” (Less:176b); -tai “adjectival suffix”, GRØNBECH/KRUEGER:101b.
4
In: rtag du sñuṅ gsol ba’i rigs na / bar du rṅo ma thog pa (PT 981:350; trslr. after DE JONG 1989:72) “If it is proper to always
require after health, [I], being in the meantime not able [...]” (DE JONG’s translation: “I should continually have required
after your health, but I could not even do that”, ibid.).
5
CM ülü “negation preceding verb” (Less:1006b); čida- “to be able, capable; to be able to overcome or vanquish”
(Less:176b).
6
Cf. hereto rṅos khyer “3gewaltsam enteignen” (WTS.16:80a) and rṅos “ṅan śugs” (DSM:140b).
7
Cf. also Ladakhi *ṅób c̀e* glossed in JÄSCHKE (134b, s.v. rṅo ba), which could be reconstructed as *(r)ṅob che < *rṅo che “great
(r)ṅo” - -b being a linking element (see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan). Due to back formation, the form *(r)ṅob
started to be used subsequently in Ladakhi as an independent morpheme rṅob “to be able” (J:135a).
Three further compounds could be quoted here although their actual historical relationship to the ones mentioned
above remains uncertain: rṅo pag “(rñiṅ) ’dod chags” (BTC:699b), “Begierde” (WTS.16:78b); rṅo bag “shine, brightness,
lustre; awe” (Cs:247a), “rṅom bag, rṅom brjid - gzi brjid, gloire, magnificence, respect” (Desg:283b), “nus pa gzi brjid lta bu”
(GC:218b), “Erfolg” (WTS.16:78b); rṅo yas “n. of a number” (D:369b).
 181

dgra rṅo brugs la dgra bla rjed cig (PT 1051:64)

“Make the enemy’s power spout forth and forget about the enemy’s god!”

gśin yul / ’brem daṅ / ri ro (read: roṅ) sgam (184) la / chab myig rṅo bzaṅs / (PT 1134:183-4)
“In ’Brem daṅ, the land of gśin, the mountain valleys were deep and the force of water springs
good.”

chu myig rṅo cuṅ ni / rgya mtsho ’i rtsi ’o (ITJ 730:42)

“A spring of little force is the essence of an ocean.”1

myi ji raṅ then na // myi ñan raṅ / then / ñan ji raṅ th[en na] ñan chab (7r273) raṅ then / chab ji raṅ
then na chab gźuṅ raṅ then / gźuṅ ji raṅ then / na gźuṅ rṅo [r]aṅ th[e]n / rṅo ji (7r275) raṅ then na / rṅo
’ga tsam daṅ na’ brag mkhar rtse myi rñil / dbugs chab tsam śur na chab (7r276) sṅon mo2 rṅo myi skams
/ (ITJ 734:7r273-6)
“Whenever man ?pulled? himself, the ñan of the man ?pulled? itself. Whenever ñan ?pulled?
itself, the chab of ñan ?pulled? itself. Whenever chab ?pulled? itself, the essence of chab ?pulled?
itself. Whenever the essence ?pulled? itself, the forces of the essence ?pulled? itself. Whenever
forces ?pulled? themselves, like some forces, [they] do not destroy the top of the rock-stronghold
on the meadow; like the chab of breath, the force [of] the blue river does not dry up in the
ravine.”

I understand dgra rṅo in PT 1051 as referring to physical strength of an enemy. The last three
passages mention forces of watercourses, indicating that rṅo could denote forces of nature as well.3
Although the meaning of the fourth cited fragment still remains to a great extent obscure, the
passage seems to provide us with a kind of hierarchy of concepts: myi “man” > ñan “physicality” (?)4
> chab “power” (?) > gźuṅ “essence” > rṅo “natural forces”, in which each element depends on the
element to its right; rṅo being the source on which all the other rely.5

1
THOMAS translates rṅo cuṅ once as “little resources” (1957:110), once as “of little capacity ?” (ibid., p.112n42).
2
The omission of mo would render a sentence structurally analogous to the preceding one, with similar construction and
the same number of syllables.
3
It is probable that in the context of watercourses rṅo denoted actually *“current”.
4
According to DOTSON, ñan is “the physical aspect of the ransom rite, the effigy itself. As such, it appears to be similar to
the effigy or “figurine” (ṅar / ṅar glud) employed in the ransom rites of the institutionalized Bon” (2008:58n46).
5
rṅo forms a part of another compound, kha rṅo (ba), which is used either atttributively in connection with official duty
(rje blas) or in contexts in which official duty is also mentioned (compare hereto the phrase rje blas gyi rṅo in vol.56,
fol.72:27 cited above), cf.:
bde blon gis khye stug bskoste // khye stug dguṅ lo lṅa drug tsam na gum na // da ltar kha rṅo bar // (11) blon koṅ gsol ba’ // rje
blas ’di blon koṅ spad gyis źo śa phul ba’i bka’ drin sgor gtshigsu gnaṅ ba / (12) ma lags te // myes po led koṅ gi bu tsa rṅo thog pa
las bsko ’o źes ’byuṅ ste (vol. 56, fol. 72:10-2; trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
“When, after councillors of Bde [khams] had appointed Khye stug, Khye stug died after roughly five or six years, now
[we] request councillor Koṅ as [being] kha rṅo ba: ‘This duty, that was granted in a charter due to (?sgor) the źo śa’s favour
offered to councillor Koṅ by the children [of Khye stug], not being good, [one] should be appointed from capable ones
among the descendants of the ancestor Led koṅ.’”
da ltar rje blas kha rṅo ba ’dir yaṅ bdag / (18) cag gaṅ bskos na rṅo thog ciṅ blar dpen pa’ // dbon ’a źa rje chis la gthogs (vol. 56,
fol. 72:17-8; trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
“Now, whichever of us is appointed to this very kha rṅo ba duty, [he], capable and impeccable to the authorities, belongs
to ?lord’s administration? (rje chis) [of] the nephew ’A źa.”
 182

Additionally, rṅo is attested twice in ITJ 753 in the phrase rṅo ’thon du1:

ño ño ba noṅs gyis / mdzo[d] (v2) sruṅs sam / rtse rgod gyis rṅ[o] ’thon [du btshoṅs] [...] (ITJ 753:v1-2;
trslr. after THOMAS 1936:278)
“Because the purchaser made a mistake, the treasury-guard or rtse rgod sold [it] ?urgently?.”

[rtse rgod] daṅ mdzod sruṅs gyis / rkus te / gźa[n] źig la / btshoṅs na / myi pha rol mo / ños pa ’des gyaṅ
(v5) [---] [gźan] źig la / ṅo ’thon du btshoṅs te / dbaṅ rgya mchis na (ITJ 753:v4-5; trslr. after THOMAS
1936:278)
“If rtse rgod and treasury-guard, having commited a theft, sold [the object] to another person,
[and] if also this purchaser, still another man, having sold [it] ?urgently? to another person,
[who] possessed a dbaṅ-seal [...]”
In both passages rṅo ’thon du is an adverb qualifying the verb btshoṅs (CT btsoṅs = V2 < ’tshoṅ “to sell”).
THOMAS renders it as “openly” (1936:282) supporting his translation with the phrase ṅo mthon pa “=
nan gyis earnestly; pressingly; with persistence” (D:256a; THOMAS 1936:285n2). He also refers to the
dictionary of TSHE RIṄ DBAṄ RGYAL and the gloss ṅo (THOMAS erroneously: rṅo) ’thon du rendered there
as “prasabham” (Ts:41v2; “forcibly, violently; exceedingly, very much; importunately”, MW:697a)2.
This compound can be perceived as another instance of lexicalisation: the verbal phrase *rṅoABS ’thon,
lit. “force sets out”, developed through subject incorporation to the compound rṅo ’thon “forcible;
violent”.3 The change from rṅo ’thon to CT ṅo mthon demonstrates that the first member of the
phrase has been replaced in the process of folk etymologisation by the much more common ṅo
“1face, countenance, air, look; 2side; 3self; 4likelihood, prospect of” (J:128b-9a).

Further CT lexemes that, due to their semantics, could be considered cognates of *rṅo include: ṅo
brgyud “Intervention” (WTS.15:31b); ṅo chen “a man of influence interceding for another person”
(J:129b; < *”(one of) great power”), “sb. of influence, power, a patron” (Gs:304b), “Fürsprecher”
(WTS.15:31b); ṅo ma “the master, the main family members” (Gs:306a; cf. dbaṅ po < dbaṅ)4; ṅo mig
“boldness” (J:129b; < *rṅo dmigs (?), lit. “fancy of power”); ṅo mtshar “2wondrous, wonderful,

Unfortunately, none of the explanations of the phrase offered so far (“have opportunity”, TLTD.3:116b, “las don sgrub
mkhan dkon po yod pa”, BYD:42b, “appropriate (p.71); opportune, favorable (?)”, COBLIN 1991c:89) seems to be satisfactory.
kha rṅo ba occurring in one passage with rṅo thog reminds one of two other verbal phrases, namely, kha btog and rṅu btog
that are attested in the following, though not fully intelligible, fragment:
mo ṅan gi sris ni / kha btog rṅu btog (18) la zad do // (ITJ 730:17-8)
“The sris of a bad woman is consumed upon [she] has reached kha, [upon she] has reached rṅu.” (THOMAS’ rendering: “A
bad woman’s devil: give a kiss or make her smart and it is all over.”, 1957:109)
Even though one might feel that there existed some semantic connection between rṅo thog, kha rṅo, kha btog, and rṅu btog,
for the moment being no meaningful interpretation can be offered to the last three.
1
THOMAS (1936:278) reads rṅo ’thon du, but according to OTDO it is ṅo ’thon du.
2
Cf. Mvy:6858: prasabham “nan gyis sam ṅo ’thon”.
3
Cf. mgo thon Tabo, Kyirong “successful”, Nangchen “success, getting through” (CDTD:1580) and some dialectal meanings
of the verb ’thon that resemble the semantics of *thog (cf. below): Balti ncA “to arrive”, Themchen ncA “to arrive, to get”,
Mkharmar, Rkangtsha, Chabcha, Labrang, Rngaba, Mdzorganrabar, Arik ncA “to arrive” (CDTD.V:582).
4
Derivatives of ṅo ma include: ṅo ’khor “master and servant, head and servants, retinue” (Gs:303c); ṅo ltos “= dpon g.yog
master and his servant” (D:356a); ṅo ’baṅs “the estate owner, lord and the subjects or serfs” (Gs:305c); ṅo ma g.yog “master
and servant” (J:129b); ṅo tshab “= sku tshab a representative; a proxy” (D:357a); ṅo g.yog “ṅo ma daṅ g.yog po = dpon g.yog
master (himself) and servant” (D:357a); ṅo las “the leader and the staff, officials” (Gs:307a).
 183

marvelous; strange, ridiculous; 3wonder, surprise, astonishment” (J:456a, s.v. mtshar ba; < *”unusual
power”).1

-thog. The above analysis has shown that -thog in rṅo thog was originally a verb. As I have already
mentioned, OT *thog “to reach, to arrive; to touch”2 is assumed to have been a cognate of MT gtog
*”to reach (for sth.)”3. Furthermore, both seem to be related to CT thogs “to strike, stumble, run
against; to be hindered, impeded, delayed” (J:238a), ’thog, btogs, btog, ’thogs Jirel “to peck; to strike (of
a snake); to harvest by cutting or picking” (CDTD.V:581) and possibly ’thogs “to take, to seize, to take
up” (J:245b). Besides, gtog and *thog seem to have resembled semantically to a great extent CT gtug
“to reach, to touch” (J:207b) and thug “1to reach, arrive at, come to; 2to meet, to light upon; 3to touch,
to hit or strike against” (J:232b) which too, on account of their morphology and semantics, could be
perhaps included in this word family. I tentatively assume that the meanings glossed for thog “Iwhat
is uppermost; IIthunderbolt, lighting; IIIfruit, produce” (J:237a-b) can be traced back to the original
deverbative thog *”the upper end” < *“to arrive at, to reach”.4 The etymon of the word family is
supposed to have been *tho “high”5.

The following compounds are assumed to have been formed analogically to rṅo thog: skye thog
“lifetimes, rebirths” (Gs:74a), Tabo “growing, growth” (CDTD:449); khrom thog in: khrom thog chod “vi.
to get or become famous, well known” (Gs:151c); grwa thog “the date when a monk joined the
monastery” (Gs:208b); ṅo thog “1real, true, actual; 2really, trully, actually” (Gs:305a), “rṅo thogs sam
phan thogs” (BYD:120a); ṅos thog “real” (CDTD:2016)6; chos thog “1a period of studying, debating in a
monastery (like a semester), the period when dharma grove (chos ra) is in session; 2a practice of
some monks moving from place too (sic!) place over the year to debate and study religion; 3running
away from (home, school, monastery)” (Gs:377b); dus thog “1on time, according to schedule,
punctually; 2opportunetely, the right time” (Gs:535a); ’dod thog “desire, wish”7; phan thog “useful”;
nad thog “clinical” (Gs:609c); ma thog Dzongkha “unless, only if” (CDTD:6109); sman thog “beneficial”;
źabs thog “service rendered to superiors” (J:472a), Tshangra “help (h.)” (CDTD:7117); las thog
“present, current, the one in office, the incumbent” (Gs:1071c); srog thog in: srog thog khrims gcod
“capital punishment, execution” (Gs:1144c), srog thog ñes chad “sm. srog thog khrims gcod” (Gs:1144c),
srog thog ñes spyod “capital crime” (Gs:1144c), and srog thog gtoṅ “va. to execute” (Gs:1144c). The
derived meaning of -thog in these compounds could perhaps be compared with the Ger. suffix -reif,

1
To these one could add the derivative rṅod pa glossed with ’phen pa in Brda gsar rñiṅ gi rnam par dbye ba of Dbus pa blo gsal
(apus MIMAKI 1992:483).
2
Cf. Lepcha t’ók2 “vb.t. to reach the height, to come to full maturity” (MG:158b).
3
CT gtog “also btog pa, ’thog pa, to pluck off, gather, crop, tear out” (J:208b; < *“to reach (for a fruit)”).
4
The following meanings are glossed under thog in GOLDSTEIN’s dictionary: “1on, on top of; 2through, by, by means of; 3in,
inside of; 4in addition to, on top of; 5during, at the time of; 6concerning, with regard to, about; 7roof; 8lightning” (503a).
5
Cf. Lepcha t’o1 “high, great, exalted” (MG:155b).
6
Occurs only in the reprint from 2008, the 2013 version does not contain this lemma.
7
In: ’dod thog ’dod bźag “having one’s wishes fulfilled” (Gs:578c); ’dod thog smin “va. to realize, to get one’s desires, wishes
fulfilled” (Gs:578c); ’dod thog la rta rgyugs pa “realizing, getting one’s desire or wish completely fulfilled [Lit. riding a horse
on one’s wish]” (Gs:578c-9a).
 184

“2drückt in Bildungen mit Substantiven aus, dass die beschriebene Person oder Sache so weit
gediehen, entwickelt ist, dass sie die Qualifikation für etw. hat, für etw. tauglich, geeignet ist”
(Duden:1376a).

rṅo thog, like all attributive verbs in OT, could receive inflectional suffix -s to mark off the past tense
yielding rṅo thogs (Or.15000/529:9; ITN 1495:r1). Similarly, we find in OT documents past tense forms
phan thogs “useful” (< *phan thog) and sman thogs “beneficial” (< *sman thog).

The argument structure of rṅo thog in affirmative sentences required subject in ERG (PT 1287:205; PT
1287:284; Or.15000/309:v2; Or.15000/338:r3; Or.15000/502:2; Tib 119v8; ITN 1495:r1). Besides, one
finds in OT documents a negated variant rṅo myi tog (Or.15000/164:3). Apart from that, a derivative
rṅo thog pa, lit. “one who is rṅo thog”, is attested plenty of times in OT sources (ITJ 848:v5; ITJ
856(A):12; Or.8212/1924:r2; Or.15000/33:5-6; Or.15000/150:5; Or.15000/222:r2; Or.15000/265:v6;
Or.15000/439:v5; Or.15000/464:v3; Or.15000/497:v5; Or.15000/513:r3; Tib 120:2; vol.56, fol.72:8-9, 12,
13, 14, 19, 26, 31, 39; Źol N 18, 19, 44) accompanied by its negated variant rṅo ma thog pa, lit. “one who
is not rṅo thog” (Or.15000/188:r4; Or.15000/497:v5; vol. 56, fol. 72:14).

Concerning the semantics of the lexicalised rṅo thog, we find an interesting description of rṅo thog pa
in Źol N 17-20. The passage states, namely, that one was acknowledged as being rṅo thog (i.e. as a rṅo
thog pa) as soon as he has been rṅo thog for carrying out duties (rje blas). This example demonstrates
that in a context of official duties, rṅo thog could have been a legal term meant to signify
“competent, capable of doing service”. This conclusion is confirmed by official documents that seem
to contain petitions to authorities for giving orders due to the lack of a responsible person on-site
(cf. Or.15000/529 and ITJ 856(A), Or.15000/33).

[T] ʼuṅ nas rje (204) blon yoṅs su ʼdus te // dags po lha de dgug pa ʼi bkaʼ gros mdzad nas / dmag pon sus
bya źes blod na // (205) seṅ go myi chen gyis // kho bos rṅo thog ches khas blaṅs so // (PT 1287:203-5)
“Thereafter, lords and councillors, having gathered together (lit. as a whole), made the decision of
subjugating Lha de [of] Dags po. Hence, when [they] were considering who should be made general,
Seṅ go myi chen claimed ‘I am capable.’.”
khyo ʼdaʼ / (207) btsan po ʼi snam pyi par bkaʼ stsal nas // lo du ma źig lon na // ʼdzaṅs rṅo thog go źes //
myi chig gis / (208) bstod pa kho bos ma thos na // (PT 1287:206-8)
“[He] said: ‘In many years that have passed since you, Sir, were ordered [to act] as a snam pyi pa of
the btsan po, I have not heard a single man praise [you saying] ‘[He] is wise [and] capable.’.”
ma ñes (284) pa źig gis rṅo thog na // bskyuṅ re smad re // (PT 1287:283-4)
“If those who did not commit any offence are capable, [they] shall never be weakened, [they] shall
never be degraded.”
bdag [ṅ]an pa [rṅo] thog na (Or.15000/93:6; reconstructed after TLTD.2:207)1
“If I, [your] humble one, am capable [...]”

1
The text seems to be more damaged today than it was when THOMAS prepared his publication and thus does not allow me
to verify the readings given in TLTD; cf.
http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_scroll_h.a4d?uid=76867884017;recnum=25225;index=1; 25.6.2014.
 185

[b]dag ṅan pa lha źig gis rṅo thog[s] (Or.15000/502:2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:215, text 619)
“I, Lha źig, a humble one, was capable.”
rṅo thogs ma mchis par bka’ luṅ sñan pas bro rmas ba // (10) glo dga’ // da ltar bro ma ’tshal źiṅ mchis //
(Or.15000/529:9-10; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:224, text 648)
“There being no one capable, [I], having asked for a wish1 [of yours], on account of the fact that
[your] orders are well-sounding, am happy [in] my heart. Right now, [I] do not have any wishes.”
bka’ drin / (16) stsalpa daṅ sbyar na // led koṅ gi bu tsa las rṅo thog ciṅ // (vol.56, fol.72:15-6; trslr. after
TLTD.2:23)
“If [it] agrees with the favour given [to us], [one] from among the descendants of Led koṅ is
capable.”
da ltar rje blas kha rṅo ba ’dir yaṅ bdag / (18) cag gaṅ bskos na rṅo thog ciṅ blar dpen pa’ // dbon ’a źa rje
chis la gthogs (vol.56, fol.72:17-8; trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
“Now, whichever of us is appointed to this very kha rṅo ba duty, [he], capable and impeccable to the
authorities, belongs to ?lord’s administration? (rje chis) [of] the nephew ’A źa.”
bdag lta ṅan pas rṅo thogs [...] (ITN 1495:r1)
“A humble one like me was capable [...]”2

40 sṅo sa
BTC:714b: dbyar sa dgun sa (s.v. sṅo sa skya sa).
Gs:324c: sm. dbyar sa dgun sa (s.v. sṅo sa skya sa; dbyar sa “summer dwelling place”, Gs:757a; dgun sa “winter residence,
winter site”, Gs:221a); WTS.16:93b: Weide, Grünland.
DTH:43: les terres vertes; DOTSON.2009:108: the summer lands.

[E] *sṅo’i sa “land of green(s)”

[M] (N) land with unripe crops
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NLOC+N]
[R] skya sa / rje sa / rjes ’baṅs / dog mon / dog yab / dog srin / sa dog
[A] The morpheme sṅo in sṅo sa can be understood as referring to green (i.e., still unripe) crops, as
opposed to skya- in skya sa “ripe crops” (see s.v.)3; cf.: sṅo tog “unripe fruit” (Gs:324a); sṅo thog
“1unripe, green (vegetables, fruits and crops); 2the stage when crops are green seedlings” (Gs:324a);
sṅo rtswa “green grass” (Gs:324b).

An alternative hypothesis could be put forward as well. To wit, sṅo sa, lit. “land of green(s)”, could
denote green pastures (see WTS cited in the Lexicographic section) juxtaposed in sṅo sa skya sa with
crop fields as bases for the livelihood of nomads and peasants, respectively. However, as long as no

1
I understand bro here as a noun related to bro “I.1to taste, to smell; 2to desire, to wish” (J:382b) for which JÄSCHKE quotes
also nominal meaning bro (ba) “IItaste, savour, flavour” (ibid.); cf. also “disposition à” (Desg:691a), “3gal gyi miṅ ste”
(DSM:568a), and phrases: dga’ bro “porté à rire” (Desg:691b; perhaps an error for dgod bro?); dgod bro (ba) “funny, humorous,
laughable” (Gs:224c); ṅu bro “vi. to feel like crying” (Gs:301c); gñid bro “vi. to feel sleepy” (Gs:426a). The common semantic
denominator for these phrases could be proposed as *“willingness”.
2
Further fragmentary occurrences include: rṅo thog (Or.15000/282:2); bdag ṅan pas rṅo thog (Or.15000/309:v2; trslr. after
TAKEUCHI 1998.2:134, text 410); bdag ṅan pas rṅo [...] (Or.15000/338:r3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:145, text 440); rṅo thog
(Or.15000/366:3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:152, text 468); dag ṅan pas rṅo tho[g] (Tib 119v8; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:64, text
12).
3
I was not able to find any lexemes connoting sṅo with summer - a connection suggested by some authors, see the
Lexicographic section.
 186

other lexemes can be quoted that would associate sṅo- with pastures (for which generally the term
’brog is used), I prefer the first interpretation.1

For more details on the passage from ITJ 750 and some special terms used therein see s.v. skya sa.

[T] ʼbon da rgyal daṅ blon chen pho (189) khri gzigs gyis / dbyar ʼdun zu spugi rkyaṅ bu tsal du bsduste / lṅa
brgya bskos / sṅo sa skya sa / kha bstand (ITJ 750:188-9)
“’bon da rgyal and grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having summoned the summer
council at Rkyaṅ bu tsal of Zu spug, nominated [heads] of five hundred [districts and] regarded lands
with unripe and sunburnt crops.”

41 gces spras
D Mdzorganrabar tɕiɸʈʂi “respect” (CDTD:2329).
YeŚes:152a: ’eṅ here’i leg seṅ; Corff.1:338b-9a.14953: sich vereinigen, sich zusammentun, eine Einheit bilden (s.v. gces
sbras/spras); BTC:745a: mthoṅ chen nam ca ga dag po; Negi.3:1136a: ādaraḥ.
Schr:26a: an affection for animate and inanimate things; D:389b: esteem (s.v. gces spres (sic!))2; B:156b: to love, hold dear,
esteem; to exert oneself (s.v. gces spres byed pa); R.3:31: уважение, почтение, почитание; esteem; Gs:338a: 1taking care of,
looking after; 2loving, revering; WTS.17:141b: Bewertung, Ehrerbietung, Unterstützung.
TLTD.3:128b: earnest (s.v. gces spros); esteem, exert (s.v. gces spres); EMMERICK.1967:121a: honour, esteem;
RICHARDSON.1985:170: regard, esteem; LI/COBLIN:392: love, esteem, high regard; CÜPPERS.2004:46: Beachtung, Wertschätzung.

[E] *gces pa’am spras pa “magnified or understated”

[M] I(A) esteemed or understated; II(N) respect
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(alternatively) coordinate: adjectival; antonymous; IIgeneric: abstract;
STRC
[VAV2+VA V2]
[A] gces-. As the passages quoted below demonstrate, gces- in OT documents was used with
reference to officials like councillors and envoys, but also in describing Buddhist teachings (chos).
Moreover, from the contexts in which it appears, we can infer that gces pa3 referred to a positively
valued trait, semantically close to phaṅs pa, that characterised people of high esteem in the society:
’thab mo myed pa ni gces par byas nas bod rgyal khams gcig (26v1) ’baṅs mtho dma’ gñis che chuṅ gñis la
so so’i sgo sgor bde skyid pa’i drin kyis ma khyab pa yaṅ myed (PT 16:26r4-v1)
“[The fact that] there was no fighting, was respected. Hence, [in] the Tibetan kingdom there was
no one, neither exalted nor mean subject, who would not be embraced by the kindness of those
who were ?directly? (lit. in front of each of them)4 happy towards both, great and small ones.”

sñiṅ chen pos kun la phan ’dogs pha ’di maṅ po kun la phaṅs śiṅ gces par // ’phags pa thugs rje can rnams
kyis kyaṅ thugs su chud (29r2) ciṅ mkhyen pa daṅ (PT 16:29r1-2)
“Also the exalted ones, who have compassion, realise and recognise [it] so that those who, by
virtue of [their] great heart, bring benefits to all are respecting and revering towards all.”

1
The reading *“green land”* would contradict the syntactic rules of OT; attributive sṅo occurs always as the second
member of a compound, e.g.: dguṅ sṅo “blue sky”; gnam sṅo “blue sky”; sprin sṅo “blue cloud”; śiṅ sṅo “green tree”, etc.
2
The attested variant gces spres (see also BUCK’s dictionary) is either a scribal error made by DAS or a variant form resulting
from vowel assimilation: -a- > -e- / -e-σ_.
3
CT gce ba has not been documented in OT texts so far.
4
DSM explains sgo sgor as “so sor ram phyogs re re la źes pa’i don te” (122a). One finds also sgo sgo glossed with “privat”
(WTS.14:471a).
 187

myed du ruṅ ba’i rnams gches par (436) ma byed chig // (PT 1283:435-6)
“?Those who are suitable to not possess? shall not be respected.”

blon po gces pa maṅ po (Khri 56)

“many esteemed councillors”

de bas na sems can la dam pa’i chos gces te (Ldan.1 16)

“For that reason, the religion of noble ones is dear to sentient beings.”

pho ña gces pa las // bka’ phrin sñan pa daṅ // dkor nor // (45) bzaṅ pos ni // rgyun du ’drul na // mjal
dum gyi mdo chen po gtsigs (46) bca ba lta bu yaṅ ma grub (ST Treaty E 44-6)
“Even though the esteemed envoys were constantly traveling with valuable (lit. good, beautiful)
goods and pleasant messages, the great text of agreement was not accomplished as a valid (lit.
completed) document.”
In connection with gces- we find the following lexemes and phrases glossed in lexicographic works:
gces Tshangra “love” (CDTD:2325); gces pa “gtso bo; pradhānam” (Mvy:2523; Skt. pradhāna “a chief
thing or person, the most important or essential part of anything; the principal or first, chief, head
of”, MW:680c), “brtson pa; dhuraḥ” (Mvy:7213; dhura “yoke, pole, burden, peg of the axle; having
anything as chief (foremost) part of ingredient, distinguished by”, MW:517b), “werth, lieb, geliebt”
(Sch:147a), “Ichéri, aimer; IIprécieux, excellent” (Desg:299b), “I.1dear; beloved; 2also precious; very
important; useful; IIeager; diligent” (D:389b), “brtse ba can nam phaṅs yod pa” (GC:234a), “I.1phaṅs
pa; priyaḥ, kāmyaḥ; 2gtso bo, mchog; jyeṣṭhaḥ, pradhānam, dhuryaḥ, sāraḥ; II.1dhur, dhuraḥ;
2
bahumānaḥ, dhāma; 4(sic!)*sāmarthyam” (Negi.3:1135b), “va. to love, to have affection for”
(Gs:338a), “(tha dad pa) brtsi mthoṅ ṅam gtsigs chen po byed pa” (BTC:745a), Balti “dear”, Kargil
“motherly love; dear, affection”, Tshangra “dear”, Chiktan “love, affection”, Sapi, Khalatse
“beloved”, Nurla “lovely, dear, love”, Leh “love”, Dingri “love” (CDTD:2327), Balti ncA “to love, to
have affection for”, Themchen cEA “to love” (CDTD.V:346); gces po “love, cherished” (Gs:338a), “gal
che ba’am gtsigs chen po” (BTC:745a); gces skyoṅ “taking care of with love, looking after, keeping
with love” (Gs:338a), “byams sems kyis skyoṅ ba” (BTC:745a); gces bsgrigs “collection, collecting”
(Gs:338a); gces dṅos “things that one loves, cherishes, treasures” (Gs:338a); gces stegs Wanla, Nurla,
Leh “honorific speech” (CDTD:2326); gces btus “~ gces bsdus; Lieblingsstellen, ausgewählte Stellen (aus
Büchern)” (Sch:147a), “ñer mkho rnams gcig tu btus pa” (GC:234a), “mkho che ba’am legs śos sñiṅ po
rnams bsgrubs pa” (BTC:745a); gces ldan “beloved, dear” (Gs:338a); gces bsdus “ñer mkho rnams ñuṅ
ṅur bsdus pa” (GC:234a), “selected, condensed, chosen” (Gs:338a), “gces pa’am sñiṅ po rnams phyogs
gcig tu bsgril ba ste rgyas pa ñuṅ du bsdus pa” (BTC:745a); gces nor “1a treasure, a precious
possession; 2a term of endearment for one’s children” (Gs:338a), “sñiṅ nor” (BTC:745a); gces phrug
“gces pa’i phru gu” (GC:234a); gces miṅ “brtse duṅ gis ’bod miṅ bla dwags” (BTC:745b); gces med
“phaṅs med” (GC:234b); gces ’dzin “gces ka byed” (GC:234b), “holding dear, loving, cherishing,
treasuring, esteeming” (Gs:338b), “rtsa ba chen por rtsi ba’am gtsigs chen po byed pa” (BTC:745b),
 188

“1bahu manyate; 2dhūrdharaḥ” (Negi.3:1136a); gces źen “love and loyalty, devotion” (Gs:338b); gces
laṅ “spoiling (behaviorally)” (Gs:338b), “gces drags nas chags pa’i ṅan goms” (BTC:745b); gces sems
“love, affection” (Gs:338b); gces sruṅ “loving and protecting, defending” (Gs:338b), “gces spras byas
nas sruṅ ba” (BTC:745b); gces gces “= byams po byams po byed pa to show more and more affection for
one; to love very much” (D:389a); gces ka byed “sems la phaṅs par byed. gces spras byed” (GC:234a);
gces pa gtoṅ ba “muktāsāraḥ” (Negi.3:1135b); gces pa sbyin pa “kāmyadānam” (Negi.3:1136a); gces par
byed pa “citrī-kāraḥ” (Mvy:1759; Skt. citrīkāra = citrīkaraṅa “making variegated, decorating, painting”,
MW:397c), “to esteem; to regard with affection” (D:389b); gces par bya ba “mānaḥ” (Negi.3:1136a);
gces su byed pa “pradhānaḥ” (Negi.3:1136b); rgyal gces “raṅ gi rgyal khab la śa źen” (BTC:550a); sñiṅ
gces gces “blo śin tu ñe ba’am byams pa” (BTC:1002b); bdag gces “gces spras” (BTC:1356b); bu gces
“1gces pa’i bu phrug; 2bu phrug la śa tsha byed pa” (BTC:1828b); ’braṅ gces pa “valuables, luggage”
(D:927b), “gal che’i ca lag” (DSM:601b), “(rñiṅ) spyad lag rtsa ba che ba” (BTC:1987a).

On this ground we can distinguish between the following meanings of *gces: “1beloved, dear; 2chief,
principal, foremost; 3cared for; 4precious, valuable; 5estemeed, respected; 6desirable; 7important;
8
favourite; 9grand”. It can be reasonably argued that gces- is a derivative of the well known stem che
“(to be) great”.

spras- occurs in OT documents as a verb in two types of construction:

1
XABS YERG spra “to embellish X with Y”:
dkon mchog gsum gyi rten sgu (read: sku) gzugs rin po ches spras pha daṅ (PT 16:24r4)
“[One] embellished the shrine of the Three Jewels with valuable images.”
2
XALLAT YABS spra “to inlay Y on X”:
gsar (read: gser1) la ni g.yus (read: g.yu2) spras źiṅ (PT 1051:39)
“[One] inlaid turquoise on gold.”

gser sbram ni g.yu (r48) spras źiṅ (PT 1052:r47-8)

“[One] inlaid turquoise on ?unwrought? gold.”

ma ’dzaṅs bu ’dzaṅs na ni / gser la g.yu spra la // ma ṅan bu ṅan na ni / khaṅ rul du lud spuṅ pa (19) daṅ
’dra ’o (ITJ 730:18-9)
“If a mother and [her] child are wise, turquoise is inlaid on gold. If a mother and [her] child are
mean, [their] house resembles heap of dung that is to get rotten.”
These meanings are confirmed by the glosses from later lexicographic works: spra “IIpf. spras, imp.
spros, 1to adorn, to decorate” (J:335b); spras pa “citrita” (in: citrito’ nuvyañjanaiḥ “dpe byaṅ bzaṅ po
rnams kyis spras pa”, Mvy:377), “pratyuptam” (Mvy:6054), “’phra bkod pa; khacita” (Mvy:6055),
“bkris pa (or: sriṅs pa) ’am bkod pa; racitam” (Mvy:6057), “rgyan gyis spras pa” (GC:515a), “brgyan
pa” (BYD:322b), “spud pa’am brgyan pa” (BTC:1686a), “va. to adorn, to decorate, to embellish, to
1
For this reconstruction compare ITJ 730:18 quoted below.
2
*g.yu > g.yus: Ø > -s / _#s- (in: spras). Cf. also the next two quotations that support the proposed reconstruction.
 189

dress up” (Gs:669a), “racanā; maṇḍitaḥ; citaḥ; khacitaḥ; nicitaḥ; racitaḥ; citritaḥ; vicitritaḥ;
saṃskṛtaḥ; pratyuptaḥ; protaḥ; cihnitaḥ; suruciraḥ; śobhī” (Negi.8:3437a-b); spras khog “ring worn
on the thumb” (Gs:669a); gzab spras pa “rgyan gyis brgyan pa’am legs par bgyis pa” (GC:769a); ’phras
spras pa “mit Schmuck verziert” (Sch:361a).

gces spras. Since none of the hitherto documented meanings of spras1 enables us to reconstruct the
semantics of the examined compound, we need to look closer at some similar formations in order to
determine the origins of gces spras. To wit, the following passages can be quoted from OT sources:
slad (5) kyis glaṅ ’di pe’u tig ’tshoṅ la myi dbaṅ źe’am bdag po źig gud nas byuṅ ṅam źal mchu gches phra
chi byuṅ [ba yaṅ] (6) pe’u tig mchid kyis ’tshal źiṅ (PT 1094:4-6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:138)
“Later on, even though an owner appears from a different place [maintaining] that Pe’u tig has
no right to sell this ox or a legal dispute, be it serious or minor, is filed, Pe’u tig by discussion
claims [the right to it].”2

glaṅ ’di la slad gyis la la (4) źig gis ṅo bzuṅ ṅam / źal mcu gces phras ci byuṅ yaṅ ruṅ ste / nu ku spoṅ mcid
kyis (5) ’tsal // (PT 1095:3-5)
“It being right, even though someone else recognised this ox later or whatever legal dispute, be it
serious or minor, has appeared, Nu ku spoṅ by discussion claims [the right to it].”3

rta ’di las źal mchu gces (4) ’phra ji byuṅ yaṅ ruṅste // lha brtsan mchid gyis ’tshal (PT 1297.3:3-4; trslr.
after TAKEUCHI 1995:155)
“It being right, even though there appeared a legal dispute, be it serious or minor, Lha brtsan by
discussion claims [the right to it].”4
Here, gches phra, gces phras and gces ’phra are obviously orthographic variants of one and the same
compound that is used as an attribute to źal mc(h)u “legal dispute” (COBLIN 1991c:103: “protest,
objection, suit”, TAKEUCHI 1995:140: “lawsuit”). It consists of two members: gces- “grand” (cf. above)
and -(’)phra(s), and is translated by TAKEUCHI as “great and small” (1995:140, 146, 156)5. The latter
morpheme is cognate to CT phra- as attested in the following lexemes and phrases: phra “rdo rje pha
lam gyi phra lta bu” (GC:539a), “1jewel, stone; va. -rgyag to inlay with jewels, stones” (Gs:700c),
“rgyan” (BTC:1767b); phra rgyab “phra btab pa daṅ rkaṅ pas gźus pa la’aṅ” (GC:539a); phra btab pa
“ga’u la rdo’am g.yu’i phra rgyab pa lta bu” (GC:539a); phra ba “od[er] phra rgyag pa einsetzen,

1
Related lexemes include (excluded are lexemes related to spra “monkey”): spra “rgyan daṅ spras pa brgyan pas so”
(GC:514b), “ornament” (THOMAS 1957:175b); spra ba “Zunder, Feuerschwamm; verzieren, decoriren, verschönern”
(Sch:337a), “Ispunk, German tinder; II.2gces spras Lex.?; 3to empty” (J:335b), “me lcags las me len pa’i spra ba” (GC:514b), “me
len nam me len pa’i rdzas” (BYD:322a), “1me len pa’i rdzas; 2sṅo źig” (BTC:1684b), “a plant from which the tinder that is
used with flintstones is made” (Gs:668c); spra spra “mthug po’am zab pa” (DSM:469b); spra ba byed “to love, to caress”
(J:335b); spra me “moxabustion” (Gs:668c); gtsaṅ spra “religious purity, śuci” (J:433: gtsaṅ sbra, sic!); gtsaṅ spra che ba “gtsaṅ
ma/ba ’am; śuciḥ” (Mvy:6479); ’dzin spras “bdag gces” (BTC:2345a), “Fürsorge, Obhut” (CÜPPERS 2004:81).
2
For a slightly differing translation see TAKEUCHI 1995:140.
3
For a different translation see TAKEUCHI 1995:146.
4
For a different translation see TAKEUCHI 1995:156.
5
Cf. also gces ’phra “che chuṅ” (DSM:157b). PT 1261, a Chinese-Tibetan glossary from Dunhuang, glosses gces phras byed pha
with “多有所作” (l.5; trslr. after LI 1961:247).
 190

einfassen (Edelsteine); schlagen, ausschlagen” (Sch:352b), “2Lt. a disease of children; 3thin, fine,
minute; little, small; trifling, little, slight; thin, high” (J:353a-b), “rags pa ma yin pa phra źiṅ phra
ba’am phra mo’i phra mo” (GC:539a), “1phra mo daṅ ’dra” (BTC:1768a); phra mo “źib mo; sūkṣma”
(Mvy:856, 2704), “klein, fein; gering, unbedeutend” (Sch:352b), “źib pa’am chuṅ ṅu” (BTC:1768b),
“1small, minor; 2thin, fine, narrow; 3minute, detailed, complex” (Gs:701a); phra po “thin” (Gs:700c);
phra sbom “thickness (lit. thickness and thinness)” (Gs:701a), “phra ba daṅ sbom pa” (BTC:1768a);
phra ma “Schimpf, Tadel, Verleumdung” (Sch:352b), “1calumny, slander, malicious rumors; 2edicts;
3
window” (Gs:701a); phra źib “detailed, minute” (Gs:701a); phra zin “Existenzgrundlage” (CÜPPERS
2004:68; < *”Existenzminimum; minimum income necessary to exist”?); phra los “thinness” (Gs:701b);
che phra “che ba daṅ chuṅ ba’i bsdus tshig” (BTC:818a); sbom phra “sbom pa daṅ phra ba”
(BTC:2021b); lus phra “(mṅon) 1nam mkha’i glog; 2bud med” (BTC:2795b). Thus, one could sketch its
semantic development as follows:
*“mean” > *“meanness” > “calumny”
“small, tiny; minor”
*“small thing” > “jewel”1
An obvious cognate of phra is ’phra, cf.: ’phra “fein, klein; Schmuck” (Sch:360a); ’phra bkod pa “spras
pa; khacita” (Mvy:6055), “arcita” (Mvy:6056), “phra rgyan btsugs pa” (GC:548b); ’phra men “lcags rigs
gñis las grub pa’i dṅos po źig” (DSM:519b); ’phra zin “genügend, hinreichend” (CÜPPERS 2004:68).

Thus, it appears that gc(h)es (’)phra(s) is an antonymous, coordinate compound *“great and/or
small”. As the passages quoted previously demonstrate (cf. the phrase źal mchu gces (’)phra(s)), the
syntactic relationship between its members is one of alternative coordination, i.e. the ultimate
translation should be “great or small”, although in connection with legal dispute “serious or minor”
seems to be a better rendering.

Now, I propose to interpret *spra (V2 spras) as another derivative of phra by means of the causative
prefix s-2:
“to empty”3
*“to make small”
1 2
phra “ tiny, small; jewel” > spra *”to clean [by removing]”
“to ornament, adorn”

1
Compare hereto Ger. Kleinod < *klein+ōti (Duden:963a).
2
Further derivatives of phra include: pra “small turkoises” (J:32b), “a type of divination using mirrors” (Gs:646a), “me loṅ
sogs kyi naṅ du ’char ba’i snaṅ tshul la bltas nas bzaṅ ṅan gyi phywa brtag pa’i cho ga źig” (BTC:1620:b); pra (mo) “od[er]
pra rtags das Loss; ein Zeichen, Vorzeichen; ein Bild, Bildniss” (Sch:322a), “1lot; 2sign, token, prognostic” (J:325b), “me loṅ
pra daṅ mthe boṅ pra źes pa’i mo” (GC:498a); phrad “particle” (J:354a); phran (bu) “little, small, trifling; 1part of the body;
2
knives and other small instruments used in surgery; 3phran raṅ in the polite epistolary style the person of the writer”
(J:354a).
3
Compare hereto also sra ba glossed with “2W[estern Tibet] to empty” (J:580b) which seems to be a spoken variant of spra
ba.
 191

As opposed to gces-, spra(s)- alone is not used in OT documents with reference to human beings.
Nonetheless, the fact that both members of the compound under consideration are derived from the
antonyms che “(to be) great” and phra “tiny, small”, respectively, allows us to reckon gces spras as a
coordinate compound. It is assumed that gces spras is an example of a process by means of which
antonymous words are joint together to form an abstract notion - their hypernym. Since spras- is a
deverbative, one should expect gces- to be it as well. This hypothesis is confirmed by the data from
modern Tibetan dialects cited above. Furthermore, if spra- is a causative formation with the original
meaning *“to make sth. being phra”, then one would expect the same to be the case with *gce (V2
gces)1, originally *“to make sth. being che”2.

Lexicographic sources on CT list some further phrases containing the compound under discussion,
cf.: gces spras byed pa “bahu-karaḥ” (Mvy:7062, 7595), “to hold dear; to love; to esteem; also to exert
one’s self” (D:389b, s.v. gces spres (sic!) byed pa), “sems la phaṅs par byed” (GC:234a), gces spras su byed
pa “exerted one’s self; made exertion” (D:389b: gces spres su byas pa, s.v. gces spres), gces spra ba
“neičilekü” (SR.1:580.6, Kow.2:630a; CM neičilekü “v.i. to be together, gather at one place; to have
common property; to be friendly, in accord”, Less:569b; “1être ensemble, de compagnie; être fort uni
avec quelqu’un, s’assembler, se réunir plusieurs dans un même lieu; 2avoir tout en commun, ne pas
faire la différence du mien et du tien”, Kow.2:630a-b). It seems that the occurrence of gces spras in
certain phrases has brought about a new figurative meaning, cf. gces spras su byed pa *“to work
toward respect” > “to exert oneself”.

To conclude, I propose to reconstruct the primary meaning of gces spras as *“magnified or

understated” > *”estimate (N)” > “regard, esteem”3. The latter meaning is attested in the Skar cuṅ
inscription (see the Text section) where gces spras is the head of an NP. However, this sense does not
seem to be appropriate in PT 16. The phrase gces spras sus bgyis so ’tsal kyaṅ from the latter document
can be juxtaposed with another clause from Skar cuṅ, namely, che chuṅ sus gsold kyis kyaṅ (l.33)
“whoever uttered [these words], be [he] great or small”. In both cases we have a coordinate
compound formed from two antonymous terms (gces spras vs. che chuṅ) followed by the pronoun su
in ERG. Due to the usage of the pronoun su in PT 16, we can be sure that gces spras refers here to
human beings. Hence, the following rendering with the etymological meaning of gces spras
“whoever gave (lit. made) [his assistance], be [he] esteemed or understated”.

1
Cf. gce ba “werth halten, lieben, geneigt seyn” (Sch:147a).
2
For a similar semantic development compare Pol. wielbić “to show so. respect and love” < Proto-Slavic *velъ(jъ) “great”
(BORYŚ 2005:693a) and Eng. magnify, < Latin magnificāre “to praise highly, magnify”, a compound of magnus “great” + ficāre,
from facere “to make, do” (KLEIN 1966:923a).
The prefix g- by means of which gce is assumed to have been derived from che could be idential with the causative prefix
d- described by the author in BIALEK, forthcoming b, with regard to verbs with the onset dk- that are presumed to have
been derived from *kh- stems.
3
Compare Pol. szacunek “respect, esteem; evaluation, estimate” (NKFD) < szacować “to estimate, assess, evaluate” (NKFD) <
Ger. schätzen (BORYŚ 2005:591a) but also Eng. cognates to estimate and esteem.
An analogously formed coordinate compound is attested in Tokharian A, cf. yärk erkāt “respect-disregard” (AALTO
1964:75).
 192

[T] I stoṅs mo bgyis pa’i rnams kyaṅ bsod nams kyi ’bras bu byed pa’i bdag po daṅ / ’dra’o źes ’byuṅ bas /
stoṅs mo (27r3) gces spras sus bgyis so ’tsal kyaṅ / chab myi ’tsal bar mtho ris lha’i khamsu bsod nams chen
po’i gzugs brñan ’byuṅ ba’i rgyu daṅ rkyen gtsug lag khaṅ brtsigs (27r4) dbus rnam par snaṅ mdzad (PT
16:27r2-4)
“Because it appears that those who assisted resemble masters who were accomplishing the fruit of
virtue, whoever gave [his] assistance, be [he] esteemed or understated, built the temple [and] made
[its] middle entirely visible due to the primary and secondary cause of the image of great virtue that
appears in heaven, the region of gods, ?so that chab was not wished for?.”
II
’di ltar // [yab (29) myes / gduṅ rabs rgyud kyis // dkon mchog gsum gyi rten (30) btsugs śiṅ / saṅs rgyas
kyi chos mdzad pa ’di]S // gces spras ci (31) la yaṅ / sdig go źe’am (= CT źes sam) / ma legs so źes / mo daṅ
rmyi ltas las (32) stsogs ste / ci’i phyir yaṅ ruṅ ste / myi gźig go / myi spaṅ ṅo (Skar 28-32)
“In this way, [should anyone say that] this shrine of the Three Jewels and the religion of the Buddha
erected and practised [respectively] by [my] father and ancestors, a line of generations, are an
offense against anything concerning respect1 or [that they] are not good, whatever being the
reasons [for these statements], the divination or dream-omens2, [they] shall not be destroyed nor
abandoned.”

42 chags ’og
UEBACH.1985:29: unter Herrschaft; LI/COBLIN:218-20: under the control (?); COBLIN.1991a:320a: under the sway of;
COBLIN.1991b:526a: sway, authority, a state of being attached to; WALTER.2009:116: under the rule; HILL.2013:172: beneath the
authority.

[E] *chags pa’i ’og “the lower side of the stepping one”
[M] (N) chags ’og du/na “at [sb’s] feet”
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] chags lham / bla ’og
[A] The compound under consideration is attested in two different constructions in OT documents:
1
chags ’ogINESS YABS mchis “Y exists/is located in chags ’og”;
2
XABS chags ’ogTERM ’dus “X gathered at chags ’og”.
Let us now have a closer look at other OT phrases that can take the place of TERM-argument in the
second construction. The greatest part of the documented expressions concerns place names in
which, according to the OTA, a council gathered.3 Apart from these, we find: bka’ ’og du ’dus (PT

1
For the construction ‘XABS YALLAT sdig’ “X is a sin against Y” compare:
[bod rgya gñis gaṅ gis]A [sṅar ñes (69) pa la sdig ciṅ // lan du dku sgyu ci]O byas kyaṅ (70) gtsigs bśig pa la ma gtogs so // (ST
Treaty W 68-70)
“Even though Chinese or Tibetans, whichever of these two, did what is a sin against the first offender (lit. one who is
offending first) or [what is] a trickery in reprisal, shall not be bound to the violation of the edict.”
For the phrase gces spras ci la yaṅ compare:
chos srid ci la yaṅ mkhas śiṅ gsal (ST Treaty E 35)
“[He] was skilled and bright in anything concerning religion and politics.”
The expression ‘X ci la yaṅ’ could be rendered literally as “against whatever [is] X”.
2
The terms mo “divination” and rmyi ltas “dream-omens” seem to allude to other, non-Buddhist, religious practices here.
3
Cf. glag gi pu cuṅ du ’dus (ITJ 750:61; Or.8212.187:46, 56, 62, 75); glagi ryu byer ’dus (ITJ 750:71-2); mdan du ’dus (ITJ 750:72);
śaṅs kyi rab kha tshal du ’dus (ITJ 750:88-9); śoṅ snar ’dus (ITJ 750:95, 111); bra ma thaṅ du ’dus (ITJ 750:95, 109); zu spug du ’dus
(ITJ 750:100); phul poe ña śa tshal du ’dus (ITJ 750:103); sre’u gźug du ’dus (ITJ 750:108); skyi gliṅ riṅs tsal du ’dus (ITJ 750:112);
rgyam śi gar du ’dus (ITJ 750:113); skyi stag tsal du ’dus (ITJ 750:114); bzaṅ sum tsal du ’dus (ITJ 750:115); dra’i gro pur ’dus (ITJ
750:119); brag sgor ’dus (ITJ 750:147-8); yol gyi rte’u dkyusu ’dus (ITJ 750:159); rag tagi rma roṅ du ’dus (ITJ 750:165); rag tagi ñam
pur ’dus (ITJ 750:169); mkhris pa rtsar ’dus (ITJ 750:171-2); ’on can dor ’dus (ITJ 750:173); gtse nam yor du ’dus (ITJ 750:174;
Or.8212.187:43); mkhris pha taṅ du ’dus (ITJ 750:175); zrid gyi ldu nag du ’dus (ITJ 750:248-9); mkar phrag du ’dus (ITJ 750:257); zol
du ’dus (ITJ 750:264, 267); zlor ’dus (ITJ 750:269); seb du ’dus (ITJ 750:270); sgregs gyi bya tsal daṅ cu bgoe rte’u mkar du ’dur (ITJ
 193

16:33v3, 34r2) “gathered under [so’s] orders”; mtsho mthar ’dus (ITJ 731:v13) “gathered at the lakeside
(lit. end of the lake)”; yar du ’dus (ITJ 739:13v3, 5) “gathered above”.1

As the following phrases demonstrate, compounds with the second element -’og were in OT
unambiguously nouns: bka’ ’og: bka’ ’og du chud “to put under orders” (PT 16:33v2, 3; ITJ 751:38v4,
39v3; Khri 54); chab ’og: chab ’og ’du (’Phyoṅ 22) “gather what was under [his] sway”; mchan ’og: mchan
’og g.ya’ g.yon (PT 1283:631-2) “the right and left armpit”, mchan ’og dkar ba (PT 1283:633) “white
armpit”; ñi ’og: ñi ’og lho byaṅ śar nub kyi rgyal khams (PT 16:26r1) “kingdoms [of] what is under the
sun, of the south, north, east, [and] west,”, ñi ’og gi rgyal po chen po (PT 16:33v2) “great king of [all]
that is under the sun”, rgyal pho ñi ’og gi ’baṅs (PT 1047:35) “subjects of the ?worldly? kings”, ñi ’og gyi
rgya khamsna (ITJ 751:41r3) “in the kingdoms under the sun”; gnam mtha’ ’og: gnam mtha’ ’og gun
(read: kun) du (PT 16:33v1) “towards all the places under the horizon”, gnam mtha’ ’og gi rjer (PT
1286:35) “as a lord of what is under the horizon”, gnam mtha’ ’og du (PT 1287:517) “below the
horizon”, gnam mtha’ ’og gi ’greṅ myi (ITJ 751:35v4-36r1) “men under the horizon”; bla ’og (see also
s.v.): bla ’og gñisu (PT 1283:366) “towards both, superior and inferior officials”, bla ’ogi bu londu (ITJ
740:251, 297) “as loans of superior and inferior officials”, bla ’og gźan gyis (Źwa E 32) “by other
superior and inferior officials”, yab sras gcen gcuṅ yum sras bla ’og (Źwa W 7) “fathers and [their]
children, elder and younger brothers, mothers and [their] children, superior and inferior officials”,
bla ’og kun gyi gzuṅs (Źwa W 16) “a hold for all, superior and inferior officials”; ma ’og: dguṅ sṅo ni ma
’og gi dog mon (PT 1287:457) “the dark earth below the blue sky”. From these it follows that the first
member of the compound had to be a noun. The fact that also ’og was originally a noun is
corroborated by, on the one hand, its function in postpositions of the type
‘N+GEN+’og+TERM/INESS/EL’, and, on the other hand, by the following dialectal data: Purik, Gertse
“lower side”, Shigatse “lower part, backside”, Derge “lower part”, Rmastod “underside”
(CDTD:7607).2

chags ’og occurs always in the context of royal authority where some other nations or kingdoms are
described as if treated from a higher position held by Tibetan rulers. Thus, contrary to COBLIN who
connects *chags to the word chags pa “to be attached to; attachment” (1991a:320a)3, I propose to
relate this morpheme to *chags pa *”foot” (see s.v. chags lham).

Accordingly, the original structure of the compound is proposed to have been *chags pa’i ’og with the
etymological meaning *“the lower side of the stepping-in one”. For similar formations compare rkaṅ

750:280); dra byer ’dus (ITJ 750:301); mal tro’i brdzen thaṅ du ’dus (Or.8212.187:42); ñas gyi źo thaṅ du ’dus (Or.8212.187:42); skyi
bur du ’dus (Or.8212.187:43, 47-8, 72, 78); dbu le’i lha ri mor ’dus (Or.8212.187:47, 77).
1
In clauses mṅa’ thaṅ du ’dus (PT 1042:53) “gathered as authority”,’baṅs su raṅ ’dus (PT 16:29v2) “gathered themselves as
subjects”, and yoṅs su ’dus (PT 1287:204) “gathered together (lit. as a whole)”, the phrases in TERM are modal adjuncts as
opposed to locative adjuncts of the earlier examples. Besides, their referents are animated beings.
2
Its cognates include: yog “below, down stairs” (J:514b) and possibly also g.yog “servant, man-servant” (J:519b).
3
In an earlier work, LI and COBLIN suggested that *chags in chags ’og could denote “attachment, an attached state, i.e.
inclusion, possession, custody, control (?)” (1987:218-20). UEBACH, on the other hand, read it as chabs (1985:29n102),
associating the latter term with chab.
 194

’og “(mṅon) 1sa gźi’am. sa cha; 2sa ’og gam. klu’i ’jig rten” (BTC:93b), “Unterwelt” (WTS.4:235b) and
gśam ’og “sm. gśam” (Gs:1107b; gśam “below, bottom, lower (of people and places), after”, Gs:1107a),
“’og rim” (BTC:2873a).

In analysing the morpheme chags- s.v. chags lham, I have noticed its occurrence in connection with
persons of higher social status. This observation would correspond well with the contents of the
passages quoted in the Text section below.

[T] btsan pa’i chab srid ni (26r1) // byin du che bas1 ñi ’og lho byaṅ śar nub kyi rgyal khams kyaṅ / bka’ luṅ
gus par mnos te / chags ’og tu ’dus (PT 16:25v4-26r1)
“As regards btsan po’s chab srid, since [his] splendour is great, also [all] the kingdoms under the sun,
in the south, north, east, [and] west, having humbly (gus par) considered [his] orders, gathered at
[his] feet.”
ril ’dus te // rgyal po ji’u ’bun waṅ gi bka’ gus par (112) ñan nas // ril chags ’og du ’dus so (PT 986:111-2;
trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:309a)
“All2, having gathered, listened humbly to the orders of the king Ji’u ’bun waṅ. Therafter, all
gathered at [his] feet.”
lho bal la stsogs te // rgyal khams thams cad chags ’og du ’dus nas // bka’ gus (134) par ñan to (PT 986:133-
4; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:310a)
“All the kingdoms, foreigners and the like, gathered at [his] feet. Thereafter, [they] listened humbly
to [his] orders.”
yoṅ lha sras gnam daṅ ’dra ba’i chags ’og na // [gnam kol du gnaṅ ba’aṅ ci bas źig]s3 mchis na / bdag (9) cag
lta źig / [...] / bde skyid ciṅ / chu srid g.yuṅ druṅ daṅ ’dra bar gnaṅ gis kyaṅ deṅ saṅ (10) du khab so dpon sna
dagis // khral kyi sna ’tshal te / gtses śiṅ mchis na // nam du’aṅ bde bar thugs bag mdzad pa’i // gtsigs tsam
źig ci gnaṅ źes (Rkoṅ 8-10)
“Now (yoṅ), when at the feet of the divine son, who equals the sky, there is only one who was
appointed as a servant of the sky4, although [...] we were [already] granted that [we] will be happy
and [our] chu srid will resemble svastika, when nowadays the leaders of khab so, desirous of [different]
sorts of taxes, come hassling, would [you] grant [us] a sole edict, that would pay regard to [our]
happiness for ever?”

43 chags lham
[V] chags lam (PT 1287:445-6; deaspiration?)
CT phyag(s) lham
BTK:69n7: phyags lham la’o. dbus gtsaṅ gi skad du cha daṅ phya gñis gdaṅs mthun pas so; BNY:152: rkaṅ lham mthil;
STK:184n39: chags lam. chags lham ste lham gyi miṅ yin pa.
DTH:160: chemin gelé (reads khyags for chags - JB); DOTSON.2013a:285: shoes.

[E] *chags pa’i lham “a shoe of the stepping one”

[M] (N) footwear

1
Since the phrase byin che/ched/chen is well documented in OT records, I take du to be a scribal error, plenty of which
occur in PT 16.
2
ril is glossed with thams cad in BDSN, apus MIMAKI 1992:490.
3
I follow here the text of RICHARDSON (1985:66). LI & COBLIN read [...] ’aṅ cis bas źig instead (1987:198).
bas źig seems to be a variant of CT ’ba’ źig, cf. also other OT forms: ’bas cig (PT 1217:7), ’ba’ śig (PT 126:16, 31-2; PT 239:v18.2;
PT 986:51; PT 1283:55, 359, 529, 563; ITJ 751:41r3; Źwa W 18).
4
I understand this phrase as referring to the ruler of Rkoṅ po who was a vassal of the Tibetan btsan po.
 195

SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NBEN+N]
[R] chags ’og
[A] The following OT passages confirm the meaning of lham as documented in later lexicographic
sources:
brgyags chad lham bugste / slar ma ʼi gan du ʼoṅs (40) nas / (PT 1287:39-40)
“[His] provisions being consumed, [his] shoes full of holes; [he] went back to [his] mother.”

bya ro ro na mduṅ gi rtse raṅ nig / yos ro ro na lham gyi goṅ ra (read: raṅ) nig (PT 1287:57)
“In every bird a lance-tip stays on its own. In every hare a tip (lit. the upper part) of a shoe1 stays
on its own.”2

glad pa la tshad blaṅs ste / (499) źwar drubs / rkaṅ pa la tshad blaṅste lham du drubs (PT 1287:498-9)
“Having taken the measure of (lit. for) the head, [I shall] sew [the straps] together as hats! Having
taken the measure of (lit. for) the foot, [I shall] sew [the straps] together as shoes!”

In lexicographic sources on CT, formations that morphologically as well as semantically resemble

chags lham are attested: phyag lham “3resp. for shoe” (J:153a, s.v. chag), “a kind of slipper which the
Buddhist monks in ancient India were permitted to wear” (D:833b); phyags lham “abanata (sic! = Skt.
upānat), bāduga (sic! = Skt. pādukā); γutul” (SR.2:113.3; CM γutul “boot(s), footwear”, Less:370b), “kwa
thwal (= CM γutul); phyag lham” (YeŚes:348b), “motsa (?), upanat (= upānat), pāduka (= pādukā)”
(Ts:107v:3), “h. of lham” (Gs:689a), “lham” (BTC:1737b); bcag lham “boot” (Gc:339b). The differing
forms of the first syllable (OT chags, CT phyag, phyags, bcag) demonstrate, on the one hand, the
uncertainty on the part of the later authors as to the origins of the term and, on the other hand, the
folk etymologisation of the term.

An hypothesis is put forward that OT *chags shall be relateḍ to the following lexemes and phrases:
chag “3resp. for shoe, also phyag (lham)” (J:153a), “treten, gehen” (WTS.17:192b); chag chag “IIto tread,
to trample; to clap the hands” (J:153a); chag nan/non “sandals” (SNELLGROVE 1967:296); chag pheb “=

1
Although compare hereto chag goṅ “ein Band an Sandaletten” (WTS.18:193a; < *chags goṅ: -s > Ø / -g_σg- - elision of the
fricative -s between two gutturals).
2
ZEISLER (2011:186) suggests that nig could be “a dialectal variant of the topic marker ni” and, in fact, we find it attested in
one case instead of ni, cf.:
kye bar snaṅ dag ya byi na / “Oh! On the heights [of] Bar snaṅ,
thaṅ ’phrom nig rgod ltiṅ (12v6) ba’ / a white-winged one, a soaring vulture,
rtsal bu ni źabs (read: źags) ’debs kyaṅ / although [one] throws a lasso [towards] the adroit one,
źags gyis (12v7) ni re myi zin (ITJ 739:12v5-7) [it] can never be seized with the lasso.”
However, as ZEISLER (ibid.) rightly observes, nig in the passage from the OTC occurs in place of an existential verb; cf. the
common construction ‘XINESS YABS COP (yod, mchis, etc.)’ “Y is located in X”. As pointed out by ZEISLER (ibid.), traces of such a
verb can still be found in some TB languages, cf. STEDT: http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/gnis?t=exist#;
29.06.2014. Compare also not glossed there Lepcha nyí “1to be T[ibetan] yin; 2to be in a certain place; 3to exist: to be sure, to
be certain; 7to have, to possess, T[ibetan] yod pa” (MG:105b-6a), nyí ~ nyím “v. to be” (PLAISIER 2006:221). The
grammaticalisation of copulas to focus markers is attested in various languages across the world, for other examples see
HEINE/KUTEVA 2002:95ff.
Concerning other possible cognates of nig the following lexemes could tentatively be quoted: ñig ñig “sm. ñigs” (Gs:415a);
ñigs “dregs, slags, residue” (Gs:415a); ñigs ~ ñigs to Tholing, Ruthok, Gar “dregs” (CDTD:2951); sñigs Tshochen “dregs”
(CDTD:3116). In these cases, the semantic development could have proceeded along the following lines: *”to exist” > *“to
be in a certain place” > *“to remain” > “remnant”. Further cognates are discussed s.v. pho ma.
 196

phyag pheb pa” (J:153a); chags pa “2sich aufhalten, wohnen, bleiben” (WTS.18:195b), “2vi. to become;
3
vi. to be located, situated (in a place)” (Gs:352c); chags phab “gegangen, gekommen” (WTS.18:198b; <
*chags pheb: pheb > phab due to vowel assimilation); ’chag “constitutional walk” (D:440b); ’chag can “in
colloq. trodden, stamped; solid, firm, compact” (D:441a); ’chag pa “IIalso chags pa, pf. bcags, fut. bcag,
(imp. ’chog?) 1to tread, to walk, to move, esp. when speaking respectfully or formally; 2like ’gro ba in
more general sense” (J:167b-8a), “źabs kyis bcags soṅ ba źabs kyis ’chag dgos lta bu”
(GC:282a); ’chag(s) sa “a place for walking” (J:168a); źabs cag “shoes (h.)” (Gs:922c); źabs bcags
“stepping in, putting one’s foot in” (Gs:922c); źabs ’chag “sm. źabs bcag” (Gs:923a1); źabs ’chag pa “źabs
bcags pa daṅ ’dra’o” (BYD:467a); źabs kyis bcags “phebs pa’am soṅ ba la’aṅ ’jug” (BYD:467a); źabs
kyis ’chog “źabs kyis bcags daṅ ’dra’o” (BYD:467a). As can be easily ascertained, some of the
mentioned formations possess an orthographic variant, cf.: chag pheb ~ phyag phebs “komm!
erscheine! erhebe dich!” (Sch:348a) ~ phyags phebs “coming, arriving” (Gc:689a); źabs cag ~ źabs
phyags “h. of lham” (Gs:923c). Similarly, we find chags, glossed as “1phyags daṅ ’dra ba’i lham gyi źe sa
ste” (DSM:168a), beside phyags “lham gyi źe tshig” (SR.2:113.1), “a synonym of lham” (D:1338a; s.v.
lham), “1shoes, boots” (Gs:689a), “lham gyi miṅ ste” (DSM:494a), “lham” (BYD:332b)2.

The word family is assumed to have developed from the pair of verbs *chag “to tread, to step”3 and
*chags “to be stepped in; to appear, to come”; -s being interpreted here as a resultative suffix4. The
semantic development of the word family could be sketched as follows:
“to appear; to become” (J:153b)
*chag “to tread” chags *”to be stepped in”
chags pa “stepping-in one” *”foot”5

Thus, the compound under consideration can be reconstructed as *chags pa’i lham “a shoe of the
stepping-in one”, i.e. “footwear”. It seems reasonable to assume that the form chags has been
replaced later by phyag(s) as the pronunciations of ch- and phy- merged and as the latter started to

1
źabs bcag is not listed in GOLDSTEIN’s dictionary. The gloss is meant probably to relate to źabs bcags.
2
Cf. also phyags dag “źabs phyags lham ko gñis” (GC:530b).
It is self-evident that in none of the phrases listed above the morpheme phyag(s) can be related to phyag “1resp. for lag,
hand” (J:347a) since the honorific terms referring to foot or the act of going are formed with źabs “2resp. for rkaṅ pa foot”
(J:472a), e.g. źabs lham “h. of lham” (Gs:924b).
3
Compare OT forms bchags (PT 1194:55; PT 1287:320, 444) and gchag (PT 1194:31).
4
Cf. hereto CT mchi “1to come, to go; to appear” (J:164b) and, apparently derived from the latter, mchis “to be, to be there,
to exist” (J:165a).
5
This word family could also be related to Lepcha tyak “v. tread” (PLAISIER 2006:223).
The original meaning could be traced also in the compound chags śiṅ “ein Ritualgerät der Bon-po und Attribut von
Gottheiten” (WTS.18:199a), “scepter” (BELLEZZA 2008:227), which is sometimes glossed as phyag śiṅ (< *phyags śiṅ: -s > Ø / _σś-
) “an attribute of idols, resembling a rod (birch) or besom” (J:348b) or chag śiṅ “wooden piece for a broken limb” (R.3:68b).
chags śiṅ (< *chags pa kyi śiṅ “piece of wood for stepping in”) is assumed to have denoted a rod with steps cut into it on
which a person performing a ritual enters the heaven (cf. axis mundi) - a motif well attested in many religious traditions
around the world. A picture of an utensil identical probably with chags śiṅ can be seen in KLIMBURG-SALTER et al. 2013:91b. A
similar ritual object is known from OT funeral texts where it is called śiṅ gdaṅ bźi (PT 1068:115-6), “four-steps tree”, and
seems to have been erected on tombs; for details see s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad.
For a similar semantic development compare the PIE *ste(m)p- in different IE languages, e.g., Pol. stąpać “to walk, to
tread, to step”, an iterative verb < noniterative stąpić “to step in; to arrive; to take the first steps”. The latter one is
assumed to have been derived from PS *stepti/stępǫ (BORYŚ 2005:577a) which gave rise also to Pol. stopa “foot” and stopień
“step” (BORYŚ 2005:578b). English step goes back to the same PIE root (KLEIN 1966:1510b).
 197

be widely used to form honorifica; *chags as a verb seems to have been used mainly in connection
with persons of higher social status.1

Other compounds formed from chags lham include: chag goṅ “ein Band an Sandaletten” (WTS.18:193a;
< *chags lham gyi goṅ ba); chags gos “footwear and clothes” (PT 16:22r4; < *chags lham daṅ gos) and
chags chen “Oberbefehlshaber” (WTS.18:197a; < *”chags lham chen po pa “one having big shoes” - an
expression referring to shoes as a status symbol).

[T] ʼtham ʼtham ni ʼdu ʼdu na /
ṅag rjes ni myis (268) myi brjod //
ʼgro ʼgro ni ʼcham ʼcham na //
chags lham ni chus myi snaṅ2 (PT 1287:267-8)
mol mol ni ʼcham ʼcham na //
bkaʼ mchid ni myis myi mñan //
ʼcham ʼcham ni ʼdrul ʼdrul (= CT ’grul) na /
chags (446) lam ni chus myi sbaṅ (PT 1287:445-6)
“When uniting, when coming together,
oral stories cannot be promulgated by men.
When going, when dancing,
the footwear cannot be soaked by water.”
“When conferring, when agreeing,
words cannot be heard by men.
When dancing, when walking,
the footwear cannot be soaked by water.”

44 chu rlag
DTH:126: celui qui est abîme dans le fleuve; HAARH.1969:404: the destroyed man who is wrapped (dbres - JB) in water;
HILL.2006:94: the destroyed water; ZEISLER.2011:107: the one destroyed by water [= Drigum]; DOTSON.2013a:268: the lost river;
p.319n13: Rkoṅ po flood area.

[E] *chu sri(n) rlag pa “a lost water-demon”

[M] (N) a lost water-demon
SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[[N+N]+VAV2]
[R] myi rlag
[A] chu rlag should be analysed together with another compound of similar morphology, namely,
myi rlag - both occur twice in the story of Dri gum (PT 1287:1-62). In order for the sentences to be
better understood I shall shortly relate the narration preceding and following the occurrence of our
fragments. It can be divided into the following three parts:
I
A male-child from the Spus[-clan], Ṅar la skyes, asks his mother about the whereabouts of his
lord and his father. The mother, although reluctantly, explains him that his father was killed by
the Rhya[-clan] and his lord, btsan po Dri gum, was killed by Lo ṅam; his remains, being placed in
the river Rtsaṅ po, disappeared in the stomach of the klu ’O de riṅ mo and his sons were expelled
to the land of Rkoṅ (ll.28-34).
[Here comes the first passage.]

1
For the last statement compare PT 1287:490-1:
rje chig ni maṅ po rje / “A lord, Maṅ po rje,
gśegs so ni maṅ po rje / came. Maṅ po rje,
bźugs kyaṅ ni ʼod myi dro / (491) although [he] lives [here], the light does not warm [him].
gśegs kyaṅ ni daṅ ma chags // Although [he] came, [he] did not appear ?as the first one?.”
In this obscure passage, two other honorific verbs are used in connection with Maṅ po rje, namely, gśegs and bźugs. For a
different translation see DOTSON 2013a:302.
2
I propose to read sbaṅ (V3 < sboṅ “to steep in water, to soak, to drench”, J:405a) instead of snaṅ. Compare hereto the next
passage. Compare also snal for sbal in l.462 of the same document.
 198

II
Ṅar la skyes meets two expelled sons of Dri gum, Śa khyi and Ña khyi, and the klu ’O de bed de.
The klu, being asked about the ransom for the king’s corpse, demands a person whose eyes are
like bird’s eyes. Without having found anyone who would fit this description, Ṅar la skyes
returns to his mother (ll.36-40).
[The second passage.]
III
Ṅar la skyes leaves his mother once more and goes to a place where he finds a child whose
appearance corresponds to the one described earlier by the klu. Its mother agrees to give the
child as a ransom for the btsan po’s corpse but imposes some conditions: Every time a btsan po or
his consort die respective funeral rites shall be performed. Ṅar la skyes agrees to that and takes
the child with him. He brings the child as the ransom to the klu ’O de riṅ mo and the sons of Dri
gum receive the btsan po’s corpse. They prepare a tomb and perform funeral rituals for their
father (ll.42-50).
Thus, although Ṅar la skyes asks his mother about his lord and his father, he goes on to look only for
the remains of Dri gum.1 Having met, in the second part, two sons of Dri gum and the water spirit
(klu), he goes back to his mother and states that he had followed the traces of myi rlag and had found
the dbres (see below) of chu rlag. It seems reasonable to assume that myi rlag refers to Śa khyi and Ña
khyi, whereas chu rlag denotes ’O de bed de - three characters he indeed meets in the second part of
the story.

Morphology. It is obvious that the compounds in question are intended to parallel each other in
their structure - an assumption strengthened by the close correspondence of the clauses in which
they occur:
[myi rlagi ni rjes]O gcod ~ [chu rlag gi ni dbres]O tshol
[myi rlag gi ni rjes]O chod ~ [chu rlagi ni dbres kyaṅ]O rñed
Both compounds consist of a noun (chu-, myi-) and a deverbative. Now, concerning their internal
structure, the following patterns could be proposed:
I 1
*chuS rlag pa “a lost river”
2
*chu na/ru rlag pa “one lost in a river”
II 1
*chuO rlag pa “a destroyed river”
2
*chusA rlag pa “one destroyed by a river”
The difference between groups I and II concerns the interpretation of the verb underlying the
morpheme -rlag. In the group I, -rlag is traced back to a non-controllable and intransitive verb “to
get lost, to be lost”, cf. CDTD.V:1216, s.v. brlag. Whereas the second group includes phrases with a
controllable and transitive verb “to destroy, to waste”, cf. CDTD.V:1212, s.v. rlog. As the examples

1
On this “inconsistency” in the plot see also DOTSON 2013a:171.
 199

below demonstrate, OT rlag is invariably the V2 stem of the intransitive verb as against brlag, which
is the V2 stem of the transitive *rlog (?)1:
myi myi śi ’i yul / na myi śis myed / (44) ba myi rlag gi yul na ba rlag gis myed (PT 1134:43-4)
“Because men died in a land where men died, there are no men [there]. Because cows are lost in a
land where men are lost, there are no cows [there].”

khug ron rmaṅ dar (r71) rkyaṅ ron rṅog bkra gñis yul byaṅ ka snam brgyad du phu rlag nu yis tshol du
mchi mchi na (ITJ 731:r70-1)
“When khug ron rmaṅ dar [and] rkyaṅ ron rṅog bkra, both, were going to the land Byaṅ ka snam
brgyad in order that the lost brother was looked for by the younger brother [...]”

rta ’aṅ rlag ste phyir ’oṅs nas mo ṅano (ITJ 740:221)
“[If] also a horse, being lost, came back, the lot is bad.”

myi phywa bros na g.yaṅ lon cig rta rlag (227) rtas ’tshol cig (ITJ 740:226-7)
“If a myi phywa fled away, catch the luck! Look for a lost horse on (lit. with) a horse!”

ziṅ po rje srid brlag pa ʼi blo laʼ / (203) gthogs te // zu tse glo ba ñe ʼo (PT 1287:202-3)
“Being engaged in a plan to destroy Ziṅ po rje[’s] srid, Zu tse was loyal.”

źaṅ źuṅ gi rgyal po lig myi rhya srid brlag ste // (434) źaṅ źuṅ thams chad ʼbaṅs su bkug go (PT 1287:433-
4)
“Having destroyed the srid [of] Lig myi rhya, the king of Źaṅ źuṅ, [one] bent all Źaṅ źuṅ-[people]
to subjects.”
Of special interest in this context are the compounds phu rlag and rta rlag in the second and fourth
passage. They have been formed beyond doubt from the deverbal *rlag pa “lost”. Unfortunately, I
was not able to find any OT compounds formed with *brlag as the second constituent. We find,
however, CT compounds formed with -brlag that in fact goes back to the intransitive *rlag2, cf.: rkaṅ
brlag “vi. to be bankrupt, broke, to lose one’s capital” (Gs:40a); skar ma źo brlag “skar ma gaṅ la bltas
nas źo gaṅ brlag pa ste bya ba chuṅ chuṅ la mgo ’khor nas chen po brlag ’gro ba’i dpe” (BTC:115a-
b); ’thor brlag “scattered and lost” (Gs:521c), “loss” (CDTD:3729); bor brlag “lost” (Gs:728c), “Verlust”
(CÜPPERS 2004:70), “loss” (CDTD:5591); rtsa brlag “1gźi ’thor ba daṅ. med par ’gyur ba; 2sñiṅ don śor
ba” (BTC:2213b); bzod brlag in yi mug bzod brlag for Skt. viphala-vāñchitāḥ (Śiṣyalekha 57d3); bsam brlag
“Skt. acetana” (Śiṣyalekha 23a).4 Compounds attested in later phases of the language that were formed

1
The sole occurrence of the syllable rlog that I was able to trace in OT sources concerns, in fact, a distorted variant of the
compound ’phrog rlom (see s.v.). In modern dialects one finds also gtor rlog “destruction” (CDTD:3231) that seems to be
dialectally identical with gtor brlag (cf. CDTD:3232).
2
The only WT compound with -rlag I was able to identify is bar rlag “Verlust zwischendurch” (CÜPPERS 2004:69).
3
The data quoted from Śiṣyalekha are based on an unpublished index to the work that I have prepared for prof. Hahn a few
years ago. The index includes glosses from the Sanskrit and collated Tibetan versions as well as from two Tibetan
commentaries: Śiṣyalekhaṭippaṇa and Śiṣyalekhavṛtti.
4
Compare also rlag bon “a derogatory term used for donkeys” (Gs:1051a); rlag mo “1sm. rñaṅ ma; 2delusion; 3derogatory
term for women” (Gs:1051a).
 200

from the transitive verb *rlog (V2 brlag) include: khoṅ brlag “Skt. arpita” (Śiṣyalekha 46d); khram brlag
“cheat, lie” (CDTD:864)1; gtor brlag “destroying, ruining, annihilating” (Gs:455a); stor brlag “sm. gtor
brlag” (Gs:477b); ’phro brlag “1wasting; 2spoiling, leading astray” (Gs:710b); ’phrog brlag “sm. ’phro
brlag” (Gs:710b), “waste” (CDTD:5396).2

The reconstruction of the second syllable as brlag does not seem reasonable. We have cited four
compounds (chu rlag, rta rlag, phu rlag, myi rlag) all of which contain the syllable -rlag. The elision of
the word internal b- appears very unlikely; it would have rather been attached to the preceding
syllables, all of which are open, resulting in *chub, *rtab, *phub and *myib. Compare hereto guṅ bkros
where the second syllable is deverbal and retains the prefix b- even despite the consonantal coda of
the first syllable.

In accordance with the above analysis, the first proposal could be to interpret chu rlag as *“a lost
river” and myi rlag as *“(a) lost man/men”. An additional hypothesis could nevertheless be
formulated concerning the meaning and morphology of chu rlag. Confronting it with the compounds
rta rlag “lost horse”, phu rlag “lost elder brother” and myi rlag “lost man”, one could consider to
interpret chu- in chu rlag as referring also to a living being - an assumption enhanced further by our
identification of chu rlag with ’O de bed de (see above) and by the fact that the story, as presented in
PT 1287, does not mention any river that would have been lost or disappeared. Thus, a more obvious
and logical approach would be to search for another compound behind chu-. In view of our
recognition of chu rlag as denoting the water demon (klu) ’O de bed de, the most obvious candidate
would be chu srin “a water- or sea-monster” (J:159a) - a compound occurring, as a matter of fact,
twice in PT 1287 (ll.517 and 518). Moreover, a variant form of this compound, namely chu sri, is
attested in connection with Dri gum in another context as well, cf.:
ʼon taṅ chu dgum sri dgum gyis / dri gum btsan por mtshan thog śig ches mchi nas // (PT 1287:5)
“[She] said: ‘Well then, because a water demon (chu sri) was killed, name [him] as Dri gum btsan
po!’”3

[T] ʼuṅ nas spus kyi bu ṅar la skyes (35) kyi mchid nas / ṅa myi rlagi ni rjes gcod / chu rlag gi ni dbres tshol
du ʼgro źes mchi nas / chaste soṅ ṅo (PT 1287:34-5)
“Thereafter, Ṅar la skyes, the son from (lit. of) the Spus[-clan] spoke: ‘I [shall] go to follow the traces
of the lost men, to look for the tracks4 of the lost water-demon.’ Having said that, [he] set out going.”

1
This lemma was included only in the draft version of the dictionary from the year 2008 and is omitted in the 2013
version.
2
Besides, THOMAS quotes a fragment from Rgyal po’i bka’i thaṅ yig where yul brlag rnams “destroyed countries” are
mentioned (TLTD.2:288).
3
I do not consider the reconstructed phrase *chu sri dgum as an equivalent to the discussed *chu sri(n) rlag. First of all,
dgum is the V3 stem of the transitive verb ’gum whereas rlag goes back to an intransitive verb, as was stated above. On the
other hand, shall we interpret *chu sri(n) rlag pa as “a destroyed water demon” then the question arises about the
identification of the event since the story remains silent about it. The last point to make in this connection concerns the
relation of chu rlag to the compounds myi rlag and rta rlag which obviously share their structure with it.
4
From the context it is obvious that dbres is to be taken as an equivalent of rjes. Since rjes denotes traces left on ground
and is used in our passages in connection with men (myi rlag) one could tentatively propose to interpret dbres as denoting
traces left on/in a watercourse by a water demon (chu srin). Tibetan authors give the term the following explanations:
 201

brgyags chad lham bugste / slar ma ʼi gan du ʼoṅs (40) nas / myi rlag gi ni rjes chod / chu rlagi ni dbres kyaṅ
rñed do (PT 1287:39-40)
”[His] provisions being consumed, [his] shoes full of holes; as [he] went back to [his] mother, [he
said:] ‘I followed1 the traces of the lost men. I found the tracks of the lost water-demon as well.’”

45 che phra
[V] che phrag (PT 1088:6; scribal error)
BTC:818a: che ba daṅ chuṅ ba’i bsdus tshig; Negi.3:1220a: <?> madhukarī.
R.3:110a: см[отри] che chuṅ; Gs:372a: large and small, of various sizes.
RICHARDSON.1985:165: great and ordinary; LI/COBLIN:395: great and small, high and low; DOTSON.2007c:9: greater and lesser.

[E] *che la phra “great and petty”

[M] (A) major and minor
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; antonymous; copulative; STRC[A+A]
[A] From the examples quoted below it appears that che phra was used in OT as an attribute
qualifying mainly objects and persons of great importance or higher social status, like gtsug lag khaṅ,
rgyal po, blon po, and źaṅ lon. Additionally, the compound is used to describe offence, ñes. As opposed
to che chuṅ, che phra is never used together with the numeral gñis. The former compound is found as
an attributive qualifying: 1animals: do ma, snam rta, grog “ant”; 2objects: phaṅ sga; 3emotional states:
myi dga’ ba “dissatisfaction”; 4geographical regions: tsoṅ ka. Thus, the groups of reference for che phra
and che chuṅ diverge. Is seems that che phra was understood in a more figurative way than che chuṅ
and this fact is also reflected in the proposed translation of the compound.2 Compare also the
definition of skandha as glossed in Sgra sbyor bam po gñis pa s.v. rūpaskandha:
skandha ni dus gsum gyi gzugs bzaṅ ṅan daṅ che phra yod do (trslr. after ISHIKAWA 1990:89-90, entry
266)
“As regards skandha, [it] possesses beautiful and ugly as well as major and minor forms of the
three times.”

“chu’i lam mam yur ba” (DSM:593b), “dbres sgaṅ ste chu bźur rjes kyi gram pa skya bo la’o” (BTK:98n4), “yur ba” (BSODDBAṄ
1992:80n140). The most enlightening hint comes, however, from SUMATIRATNA’s dictionary that lists two lexemes
containing the syllable dbres: dbres kyi mtshams “rgya mtsho’i rlabs; dalai-yin dolgiya“ (SR.2:311.4) and dbres pa “brjes pa;
tölükelekü” (SR.2:311.5; CM tölükele- “to represent, be a representative or delegate; to substitute for or replace someone,
take someone’s place”, Less:834b; cf. also “brjes pa’i skad dod gcig go” in GC:597b). Of special interest for our passages is
the second gloss and its Mongolian translation which allows us not only to connect CT rjes (*”what takes one’s place” >
“trace”) to the verb rje “to barter, to give or take in exchange; to change, to shift” (J:180b; < *”to replace”) but also to
explain dbres as *“something that takes one’s place”. This hypothesis is additionally supported by the gloss from Brda gsar
rñiṅ gi rnam par dbye ba of Dbus pa blo gsal where dbres is equated with rjed (cf. MIMAKI 1992:487). The latter word might be
either a derivative from the verbal stem rje or a misspelling for rjes. Interestingly, one finds also dpres pa (for *dbres pa)
explained as brdzes pa (LCAṄSKYA.2006:269; cf. also MIMAKI 1992:498). The semantic development to CT dbres pa “or dbre btsog,
dirt, filth” (D:916a) could have appeared through the intermediary *“something that remains when one is gone;
1
remnants; 2tracks”. For a discussion of dbres see also ZEISLER 2011:149f.
1
For this meaning of chod cf. Themchen ncEA “to keep up with” (CDTD.V:373).
2
A similar compound, gches phra, is found in PT 1094:5 as an attribute of źal mchu “lawsuit” (cf. TAKEUCHI 1995:139-40, text
1). An interpretation could be proposed according to which gches phra resulted from merging of two compounds, gces spras
(see s.v.) and che phra, both of which are applied with reference to the importance and/or social status of an object or a
person. Another phrase with a seemingly comparable formation is found in a metrical passage from PT 126 (l.101): rdzun
cen phra ma srid kyi gdon “a demon of the realm [of] great lies [and] slanders”. However, as my translation shows, we should
reckon in this case with two independent phrases: rdzun cen and phra ma.
 202

[T] ba slad gyi bla ’og nas źal ce che phrag (read: phra) ji ’byuṅ ’am (PT 1088:6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1995:149)
“Does a lawsuit, major or minor, appear from subsequent superior and inferior officials concerning
[this] cow [...]”
rta daṅ lugi lo la śa cu gtsug (18) lag khaṅ che phra nas / sku yon nar ma daṅ bla skyesu mdzad pa’i rgyur kha
bstan pa daṅ / (PT 1111:17-8)
“In the years of the horse and sheep, the reasons were inspected [for which (lit. of) those] were
given as continuous offerings and baksheesh from major and minor temples of Śa cu.”
’di yaṅ ñes che phra ’dra ba’ / chad pa ’gum spyug man cad (257) la thug pa / thugs dpag mdzad pe’i bka’ śos
gcad par gsol (ITJ 740:256-7)
“[They] requested that [it] would be decided by means of the statute of dice divination1 showing
[thus] mercy to those [of] similar major and minor offences sentenced to penalties from death and
banition downwards.”
[m]tha bźi’i rgyal po che phra kun kyaṅ bka’ ’og tu chud (Khri 54)
“Also all the major and minor kings of four borders came under [his] command.”
[g.ya] g.yo’i rgyal po che phra (Khri 56)
“major and minor kings of the right and left [sides]”
bod chen po’i blon po che phra mjal (2) dum gyi gtsigs ’dzin pa la gtogs (3) pa’i thabs daṅ myiṅ rus la (ST
Treaty N 1-3)
“Concerning the ranks, names and clans of major and minor councillors of Great Tibet, who were
among those concluding the official document of the agreement: [...].”
rgya chen po’i blon po che phra mjal dum gyi (2) gtsigs ’dzin pa la gtogs pa’i thabs (3) daṅ myiṅ [rus la] (ST
Treaty S 1-3)
“Concerning the ranks, names and clans of major and minor councillors of Great China, who were
among those concluding the official document of the agreement: [...]”
gcen mu rug brtsan daṅ / jo mo mched daṅ (49) rgyal phran rnams daṅ / chab srid kyi blon po man cad / źaṅ
lon che phra kun kyaṅ (50) mnas bsgagste / gtsigs g.yuṅ druṅ du gnaṅ ṅo (Źwa W 48-50)
“Having bound by the oath [all] downward from [my] elder brother Mu rug brtsan, [my] lady-
sister(s), petty kings, and councillors of chab srid - all the major and minor aristocrats - [one] granted
an edict in perpetuity.”

46 mchog gar
[V] mcho gar (PT 1287:484; haplography)
DTH:166: Mcho gar (proper name - JB); THOMAS.1957:36: [w]here best (mchog) or allowable (chog); BELLEZZA.2008:485: bow;
DOTSON.2013a:301: mcho gar.

[E] *mchog dkar po “white tip”

[M] (N) white tip
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[A] The comparison of the verses from PT 1287 quoted in the Text section reveals that they consist
of four couplets of the same structure: the first line lists main characteristic of living beings or

1
I tentatively take bka’ śo to be the honorific form of śo tshigs, “a statute of dice divination”. It might have referred to a
dice statute of a countrywide significance as against only regionally valid śo tshigs.
 203

objects which are named subsequently in the second verse. The first verse of each stanza states
additionally that although the beings and objects introduced possess some good qualities, none of
them is mkhas pa “wise, skilled, accomplished”. The semantic pivots of the stanzas are formed by:
mighty > Chinese and Turks
swift > śu ma and a mare
strong > mcho gar
sharp > iron arrowhead
As opposed to DTH (p. 166), I do not consider mcho gar to be a place name, but rather another object
analogous to the iron arrowhead listed in the last verse.

By analogy with the last verse of the fourth couplet (see s.v. mdo lcags), I understand the phrase ’broṅ
gi ru as an an attribute of mcho gar. Thus, the provisional translation of the sixth line would be “mcho
gar [with/having] a horn of a wild yak”.

Now, according to BTC:852b followed by BSOD NAMS SKYID and DBAṄ RGYAL (1992:90), mchog dkar is
another appelation for a bow, gźu. In GOLDSTEIN we find even a phrase gźu mchog dkar glossed with
“sm. gźu mchog” (944a; gźu mchog “a high quality bow”, ibid., p.944a). In SCHMIDT’s dictionary, on the
other hand, the phrase gźu mchog ma “die beiden Enden des Bogens” (496a) is mentioned. Even more
interesting explanation of gźu mchog is conveyed by DAS, namely, “agra kārmmuka (for kārmuka? - JB),
dhanuṣkoṭi, the bow-end, gen. ‘the two ends of a bow’” (1081b). Furthermore, one finds in
lexicographic sources gźu mchog equated with mchog laṅ, both explained as “l’alvéole pour fixer la
corde d’arc” (Desg:338b) as well as the verbal phrase gźu mchog ’dzugs pa “to rest one end of the bow
on some object (?)” (J:481a), “to set the string to a bow” (D:1081b).

With this in mind, and remarking additionally that in ITJ 731:r111 the form mchog gar (see the Text
section) occurs, I propose to reconstruct the first syllable of the compound in question as *mchog.
Hereto compare: sñan mchog “(h.) ear” (CDTD:3108; = sñan cog “1ear (h.); 2hearing (h.)”, Gs:434a); rna
mchog “1= rna ba; 2the pan of a fire-lock” (J:312b; CDTD:4689); am chog “ear; bosom” (J:605b; = a mchog
“ear”, Gs:1187c). As the following lexemes suggest, the original meaning of mchog could have been
“extremity”1: rtswa mchog “pointe, extrémité” (Desg:338b); mchog pa “= rtse mo, rtse mchog; extrémité,
sommet” (Desg:338b).

Now, a description and a picture of a so-called composite bow is provided in LAROCCA 2006a:196. It is
defined as “a bow made up from a combination of wood, horn, and sinew, as opposed to one made
from a single piece of wood or several sections of wood glued together” (p.196). As concerns the
application of horn in the discussed object, we are informed that “strips of horn are glued to the
belly (the side facing the archer when the bow held for shooting), where there is great compression

1
This meaning is actually glossed in Desg:338b. The CT meaning “the best, the most excellent in its kind” (J:166a) attests
most probably to a further semantic development of the lexeme; cf. hereto Ger. Spitze (N) “top, point” and its derivative
spitze (A) “super”.
 204

when the bow is drawn” and “[t]he nocks (the notches at the tips of the bow to hold the loops of the
bowstring) on this bow appear to be made of horn, but some were also said to be made of special
materials such as shell, ivory, gold, and sandalwood” (ibid.).

Combining the information we have collected from different sources so far, we could propose to re-
interpret the phrase from the OTC passage as *mchog dkar ’broṅ gi ru yod pa “white tip(s) [of a bow]
strengthened with (lit. having) yak’s horn”. Even though there exists the possibility that *mchog
dkar could have referred metonymically to a bow1, in the passage from the OTC, where it is stated
that mcho gar is strong (drag), I prefer to understand the compound literally.

Whether -dkar formed originally a part of the compound describing the appearance of bow tips
when made from horn or results from the folk etymology that replaced another less commonly used
term cannot be decided at the moment. However, the possible sound change from *mchog dkar to
mcho(g) gar could be easily explained in the following steps: *mchog dkar > *mchog kar (elision of
dental d- between two gutturals: d- > Ø / -gσ_k-) > mchog gar (voicing of k- between the voiced
guttural -g and a vowel: k- > g- / -gσ_a-) > mcho gar (haplography).

[T] btsan te ni myi mkhas pa “[Those] being mighty [but] not skilled
rgya drug (484) ni dguṅ mthaʼ rje // [are] the lords of the horizon, Chinese and Turks.
mgyogste ni myi mkhas pa / [Those] being swift [but] not skilled
śu ma ni rgyal ma gñis / [are] both, a śu ma and mare.
drag ste ni myi mkhas pa [Those] being strong [but] not skilled
mcho gar ni ʼbroṅ gi ru / [are] the white tips [of a bow strengthened] with
wild yak’s horn.
rno ste ni myi (485) mkhas pa [Those] being sharp [but] not skilled
mdo lcags ni steʼu ka ma / (PT 1287:483-5) [are] the iron arrowheads [called] ‘(those) having
an axe-blade[-shape]’”
mchog gar ni dra bkhug glu (read: glud) dmar [ni?] (r112) ldaṅ bzar te dad dgu g.yasu bab na nam mdzoṅ
g.yon du pyuṅ dad dgu g.yon du [bab?] [na?] (r113) nam mtshoṅ g.yon du byuṅ te ’broṅ g.yag skar ba ni de ru
bkhum mo // (ITJ 731:r111-3)
“As regards white tips [of a bow], [one] bent a dra2. As regards red ransom, [one] hanged up a ldaṅ. If
dad dgu came down to the right, nam mdzoṅ appeared to the left; if dad dgu came down to the left,
nam mtshong appeared to the left (erroneously for right?). [One] killed ’Broṅ g.yag skar ba3 there.”4

1
This interpretation has obviously been adopted by BTC, BSOD NAMS SKYID, and DBAṄ RGYAL, see above.
2
dra, if not erroneously for another word, could stand for a compound similar to WT dra lag dra lag can “having many
forked ends or branches, of the horns of a stag” (J:260). dra lag is attested in Nubra with the meaning “branch, bough”
(CDTD:3961). This or a similar compound could have been used in the respective passage to refer to the core of a bow
which in most cases consisted of a piece of wood (cf. LAROCCA 2006a:196). This interpretation would allow for the following
rendering of the first clause: “As regards the white tips[-bow], [one] bent its core.” Here, however, mchog gar would have to
refer metonymically to the whole bow and not only to its tips. As long as the exact meaning of dra has not been
ascertained, the literal rendering of mchog gar is preferred.
3
The plot makes it clear that ’broṅ g.yag skar ba should be read as a proper name; cf. also THOMAS 1957:26.
4
The passage is to a great extent unintelligible and its translation should be treated as merely tentative. Still, one gets the
impression that it concerns hunting yaks; ’Broṅ g.yag skar ba, even if a proper name, alludes to a wild yak (’broṅ g.yag). In
which case, mchog gar understood literally as “white tips [of a bow]” or metonymically as “a bow” would fit the context
very well. For a different translation see THOMAS 1957:26.
 205

47 mjal dum
[V] mjal dus (Ldan 2:8; scribal error or misreading)
YeŚes:179a: tsol ga hu thou dou’i; SR.1:697.6: ǰolγaqu tedüi; BTC:880b: bar ’dum; DSM:195b: ’dum ’grigs daṅ mna’ gan gyi
don la ’jug ste; BYD:166b: dṅos su thug phrad byas na ’dum ’grigs byuṅ ba.
Gs:391c: sm. mjal ’dum (mjal ’dum “face-to-face negotiating, mediating”, 391c); WTS.20:361b: Vereinbarung, Friedenschluß, -
vereinbarung.
FRANCKE.1909:90: assembly, composed of mjal “meet” and ’du ba “gather”; TLTD.3:133a: concordat; LI.1955:58: peace, peace-
making; STEINRA.1983:206n103: traité de paix; dum < sdum “concluded agreement; house, residence”; LI/COBLIN:86: peace;
RICHARDSON.1985:165: treaty; HELLER.1994:13: treaty (negotiations); IMAEDA.2012:117: negotiations.

[E] mjald ciṅ ’dum “to reconcile while having met”

[M] I(V) to reconcile; II(N) 1reconciliation; 2an (international) agreement
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV2+VV1]
[A] In the ST Treaty inscription (E 37) we find the following clause:
mtha bźi rgyal po kun daṅ yaṅ mjald ciṅ ’dum bar mdzad na //
“When [btsan po Khri lde sroṅ brtsan] brought about meeting and reconciliation1 with all the
kings of the horizon [...]”
From this we can infer that mjal dum was formed originally as a verbal compound with the
underlying structure mjald ciṅ ’dum, “to reconcile while having met”, > *mjal ’dum (compounding) >
mjal dum (elision of the word internal ’a chuṅ: ’a > Ø / -lσ_d-).2 Its primarily verbal character is still
preserved in two passages quoted from ITJ 751 (see the Text section). The first passage from the text
proves additionally that mjal dum was used as an intransitive verb.

Now, we should take a closer look at its semantic development from a verbal to a nominal
compound in OT sources. I concentrate here essentially on the occurrences of the compound in
royal inscriptions.3 There mjal dum occurs as a direct object of the following verbs:
mjal dum gsol “to offer a mjal dum”
mjal dum mdzad “to make/prepare a mjal dum”
mjal dum du mol “to confer about mjal dum”
Additionally, mjal dum forms part of some NPs: mjal dum chen po “a great mjal dum”; mjal dum gyi
gtsigs kyi mdo “a text of an edict of mjal dum”; mjal dum gyi mdo chen po “a great text of mjal dum”; mjal
dum gyi gtsigs “an edict of mjal dum”; mjal *dum* kyi mgo “the beginning of a mjal dum”.

The contextual analysis of the correspondent passages demonstrates that mjal dum was reached
after two countries (here China and Tibet) had conferred (mol) about issues concerning chab srid (ST

1
Lit. “prepared to reconcile while having met [...]”.
2
The variant reading mjal dus attested in Ldan 2:8 resulted most probably from a misreading of the final -m as -s; cf.
HELLER’s remark: “[...] since no photographs of the inscriptions have been published, in some cases the readings may be
conjectural, whilst in other cases there are lacunae.” (1994:12).
3
mjal dum occurs also as a noun in PT 16 and ITJ 751. I refrain here from citing passages from these texts due to the
constatation that the language of the document proves that the issues concerning state discussed therein were not
properly understood anymore. An inappropriate usage of some technical terms as well as a distorted syntax demonstrate
that the language of administrative or official documents as attested, for example, in inscriptions had already fallen into
oblivion.
 206

Treaty W 4-5, 25, E 2), but under the condition that one of them did not venture (sdo) the chab srid
(Khri 28). First when there was an agreement over chab srid (chab srid gcig, lit. “chab srid [being] of
one kind”), could a mjal dum be reached (ST Treaty W 36). A text of a mjal dum could be written down
on a stone pillar (rdo riṅ). Moreover, making a mjal dum is said to have had consequences for the
whole society contributing to its happiness (ST Treaty E 56).

To sum up our analysis, the reconstruction of the original constituents of the compound as well as
its nominal usage in the OT inscriptions prove that it should be understood as *“an international
agreement” (< *”reconciliation”) in a broader sense perhaps also as *“a peace treaty”.

[T] I rgyal khams chen po gsum mjal dum ba daṅ gtsigs chen po mdzad pa’i sa gźi (ITJ 751:37v3)
“site where (lit. of) three great kingdoms reconciled and issued an important (chen po) edict”
gnam ral ba ni lha’i byin kyis drubs / sa gas pa ni blon po’i rlabs kyis (41r3) btsems te / gnam sa ni yid sbyar /
dgra zin ni mjal dum nas (ITJ 751:41r2-3)
“The sky torn was stitched [anew] through the splenour of the gods. The earth split was sewed
[anew] through the glory of the councillors. The sky and the earth conformed in mind. Enemies and
allies reconciled.”
II.1
bka’ chen po la gtogs pa’i dge sloṅ bran ka yon tan daṅ lho don dam daṅ blon chen źaṅ ’bro phri (read:
khri) gzu’ dam (read: ram) śags [---] daṅ naṅ blon [---] khri sum bźeṅ mdo’ brtsan la rtsogs (read: stsogs) pa
/ (8) chab srid la bka’ rtsal (read: stsal) te / rgya daṅ mjal dus (read: dum) kyi mgo’ brtsams (Ldan 2:7-8;
trslr. after HELLER 1994:13)
“The monk Bran ka yon tan, who participated in great decisions (lit. orders), Lho don dam, grand
councillor Źaṅ ’bro khri gzu’ ram śags, and the councillor of the interior Khri sum bźeṅ mdo’ brtsan,
among others, being given orders concerning (lit. on) chab srid, started (lit. made a start of) a
reconciliation with China over the chab srid.”1
II.2
de tshun cad kyis chab srid kyi mṅa’ bdag mdzad ma thog la (28) nar du lan ’ga’ rgyas chab srid la ma bsdo
ste // rtag tu mjal (29) dum gsol lo (Khri 27-9)
“After that, as soon as [he] had become the sovereign of chab srid, each time (lit. continually) China
did not pose a treat to the chab srid, [he] always offered an agreement.”2
bod gyi rgyal po chen po (2) ’phrul gyi lha btsan po daṅ // (3) rgya’i rgyal po chen po rgya rje hwaṅ te (4)
dbon źaṅ gñis // chab srid (5) gcig du mol nas // mjal dum (6) chen po mdzad de (ST Treaty W 1-6)
“The great king of Tibet, supernatural deity, the btsan po, and the great king of China, the Chinese
ruler Hwaṅ te, both, nephew and uncle, after conferring about the common (lit. one) chab srid, made
a great agreement.”
mjal dum gyi gtsigs (11) kyi mdo rdo riṅs la bris pa’o (ST Treaty W 10-1)
“The text of the edict of the agreement written on [this] stone pillar.”
mol nas // mjal dum chen po ni (26) mdzad de // (ST Treaty W 25-6)
“Having conferred [about it, they] reached a great agreement.”

1
For other translations see HELLER 1994:13 and IMAEDA 2012:117. The latter author (ibid., p.116) falsely numbered the lines
after HELLER’s endnote numbers instead of her verses.
2
Text reconstruction after RICHARDSON 1985:88. The same inscription mentions mjal dum once more in l.43, according to
the reconstruction made by RICHARDSON, but this passage is too damaged to be properly evaluated and translated.
 207

da chab srid gcig ciṅ // mjal (37) dum chen po ’di ltar mdzad pas (38) dbon źaṅ dgyes pa’i bka’ phrind (39)
sñan pas kyaṅ ’drul dgos te // (40) phan tshun gyi pho ña ’doṅ ba yaṅ // lam (41) rñiṅ par byuṅ nas // sṅa
lugs bźin (42) // bod rgya gñis kyi bar // tsaṅ kun (43) yog du rta brjes la (ST Treaty W 36-43)
“Now, the chab srid being one, because a great agreement was reached in this way, it being necessary
to travel with good messages from (lit. of) pleased nephew and uncle, travelling messangers of both
sides appeared on old roads as well. Hence, according to earlier customs, let horses be changed at
Tsaṅ kun yog between Tibet and China!”
rgya rje źeṅ (40) śin b’un b’u hwaṅ te daṅ // mjal dum du mol te // bka’ khon rñiṅ pa ni (41) sbyaṅs śiṅ bsald
// (ST Treaty E 39-41)
“Having conferred with the Chinese ruler Źeṅ śin b’un b’u hwaṅ te about the agreement, [one]
forgot (lit. removed) and dispelled old resentments.”
pho ña gces pa las // bka’ phrin sñan pa daṅ // dkor nor // (45) bzaṅ pos ni // rgyun du ’drul na // mjal
dum gyi mdo chen po gtsigs (46) bca ba lta bu yaṅ ma grub (ST Treaty E 44-6)
“Even though the esteemed envoys were constantly traveling with valuable (lit. good, beautiful)
goods and pleasant messages, the great text of the agreement was not accomplished as a valid (lit.
completed) document.”
chab srid ni gcig ste // (56) bod rgya gñis rabs khrir bde skyid pa’i mjal dum chen po mdzad nas (ST Treaty E
55-6)
“chab srid being of one kind, [they] reached a great agreement [ensuring] that both, Chinese and
Tibetans, remain happy for (lit. in) 10.000 generations [to come].”
bod chen po’i blon po che phra mjal (2) dum gyi gtsigs ’dzin pa la gtogs (3) pa’i thabs daṅ myiṅ rus la // (ST
Treaty N 1-3)
“Concerning the ranks, names and clans of major and minor councillors of Great Tibet, who were
among those concluding the edict of the agreement: [...].”
rgya chen po’i blon po che phra mjal dum gyi (2) gtsigs ’dzin pa la gtogs pa’i thabs (3) daṅ myiṅ [rus la] // (ST
Treaty S 1-3)
“Concerning the ranks, names and clans of major and minor councillors of Great China, who were
among those concluding the edict of the agreement: [...].”

48 ʼjaṅ dum
DTH:150: une partie de ʼJaṅ; DOTSON.2013a:309: a branch of the ’Jaṅ people.1

[E] *’jaṅ gi sdum pa “house of ’Jaṅ”

[M] (N) [Royal] House of ’Jaṅ
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[PN+N]
[A] sdum pa in the meaning “house, residence” is attested, among others, in PT 1287:320-1 in the
following sentence:
bdagi sdum pa khri bomsu // dgyes skyems / (321) ston mo gsol du ji gnaṅ źes
“Would [you] allow [me] to offer delicacies and beverage, a feast, at Khri boms, a residence of
mine?”2

1
WTS.20:366b falsely divided the compound treating ’jaṅ as a separate word (see s.v. ’jaṅ).
2
Cf. ITJ 1375:v4 for an analogical wording.
 208

For the assumed semantic development from “place of residence” to “royal lineage, dynasty”
compare Eng. house in phrases like House of Windsor, royal house or ruling house.

I presume that the prefix *s- of the second syllable has been elided due to, on the one hand, its word
internal position between two voiced consonants (s- > Ø / -ṅσ_d-), and, on the other hand, the
association of the second syllable of the compound with the morpheme -dum that forms part of mjal
dum (see s.v.).1

[T] lho pyogs kyi smad na ʼjaṅ dum mywa dkar po źes (344) bya ba ʼi rgyal po [sde myi cuṅ ba]APP źig ʼdug pa
// rgyal po thugs sgam po ʼi rlabs daṅ thabs kyis bkaʼ stsal te / (345) mywa ʼi rgyal po kag la boṅ źes bya ba //
ʼbaṅs su pyag ʼtshal nas / thabs gcuṅ stsal te / myi maṅ gi (346) snon btab / yul che ʼi ni ʼdab bskyed do (PT
1287:343-6)
“The king from (lit. of) the House of ’Jaṅ called White Mywa, one [ruling over] (lit. of) a
small ?community? (sde myi), who stayed in the lowlands of southern regions, was given an order
through the magnificence and [skillful] means of the king of profound mind (i.e. Khri lde gtsug
brtsan):2 The king of Mywa called Kag la boṅ paid homage as a subject [and thereafter], having been
given the rank of a younger brother, made an addition of many people [and] expanded the
[immediate] vicinities of the great country (i.e. Tibet).”

49 rje blas
[V] rje bla (Or.8210/S.2228:B7; scribal error)
DUṄDKAR:910a: rgyal po’i las don. srid kyi las don.
J:180a: W[estern Tibet], service done in socage, compulsory service, in the fields, on roads etc. (s.v. rjib las); R.3:200b:
повинность, принудительная обязанность; obligation, compulsory attendance to one’s duties (s.v. rjib las); Gs:399c:
corvee labor (s.v. rjib las); WTS.21:404a: Amtspflicht.
TLTD.2:133: succession, or successor, in a post (s.v. rje bhas sic!); RICHARDSON.1952:9: “The Royal Work” – the post may have
been something in the nature of confidential secretary to the King. From other examples it appears that the word could be
used also as a title; RICHARDSON.1954:162: confidential royal service or perhaps leadership of the nobility, but still implying a
post in the Palace rather than in the Cabinet; LALOU.1955:205: un éminent personnage; THOMAS.1957:155n77: succession to
an office, next vacancy; p.166a: at first (next) vacancy; RICHARDSON.1972:35n76: seems to refer to the right of nobles to
succeed to high offices of state. Generally it is an honour to be competed for but here (Rkoṅ po inscription - JB) it appears
be a duty not customarily imposed on vassal princes; BECKWITH.1983:279n6: the officer known as rjeblas was in charge
perhaps of paying the army; STEINRA.1983:164: fonction administrative; p.208: une fonction publique; RICHARDSON.1985:5n2:
a privileged and responsible position in the administration; p.71n7: seems to imply a greater degree of subordination to
the btsan po than a feudatory prince was willing to admit; p.165: an official post or duty; UEBACH.1985:21: öffentliche
Funktion; p.31: öffentliches Amt; LI/COBLIN:154-7: LI:154: a title, perhaps of a high official; COBLIN:155: a common noun
which refers to service performed for the state or realm. In so far as it could be demanded by the government or the
authorities, it was a duty; p.156: service, duty; PHUNTSOK.1990:52: rje las: giving attendants to the king; p. 55: rje las is
interchangeable with the term źabs ’briṅ. This latter expression means either “attendants given to the king” or “service
rendered to the king by his attendant”; COBLIN.1991a:318b: service, duty; COBLIN.1991b:526b: service, duty?; COBLIN.1991c:65:
comprised two overlapping “nuclei” of meaning, i.e. “service” and “duty”; p.66: the meaning of rje blas seems to have been
service owed and rendered to one’s superior; rje “lord” + blas; p.67: there seems to be no easy or obvious explanation for
blas; blas could be a variant form of some other syllable, but we have no real evidence for this. Or it could be some word
which has been lost entirely; TAKEUCHI.1995:33: official duty; refers to corvée tax, such as transportation, labour works, and
copying sutras, imposed by Tibetan rulers; p.267: blas may be taken either as a variant form of glas “wage” or as as a

1
One may consider whether the lexeme ’jaṅ sa dam glossed in BTC:884b as “’jaṅ yul ni da lta yun nan źiṅ chen nub rgyud
kyi ta li daṅ li caṅ la sogs pa’i yul gru spyi daṅ. sa dam ni de’i bye brag li caṅ kho na’i miṅ yin” should not be treated as a
distorted variant of the reconstructed OT *’jaṅ sdum. The syllable sa could be explained as resulting from folk
etymologisation of the prefix s- and the vowel -a- in -dam as a consequence of a progressive vowel assimilation: *-u- > -a- /
-aσ-_; cf. hereto sa dam “’jaṅ sa dam gyi bsdus miṅ” (BTC:2898a). This hypothesis is additionally supported by GÑA’ GOṄ’s
comment on kag la boṅ (BDN:85n5) that occurs in the passage from PT 1287 cited below: “’jaṅ sa dum gyi rje po źig gi miṅ”,
an explanation repeated also in STK:210n6.
2
I interpret the gerund particle te in bka’ stsal te as having the introductory function (cf. HAHN 1996:151f.), i.e., what
follows is a specification of orders given to Kag la boṅ.
 209

contracted form of bla las “contract work”; SCHUESSLER.1998:4: lit. the lord’s work, work for the lord > service, duty to the
lord; the second element blas is an ancient variant of the WT word las “work”; DOTSON.2007b:55: official duty;
UEBACH/ZEISLER.2008:310: rje-bla (lord + service to be rendered); lit. “duty (or: “service”) to the lord”, “official duty”, “official
service”, “official work”; p.313: blas is an archaic form for las; it constitutes stem II or stem III (the s-less form) of an
original verb gla (? ~ *glod), *blas, *bla ~ gla, glos ~ *los “render a service in exchange” which seems to have survived under
the form gla, glas, -, glos “rent, pay wages” and under the form las, -, -, los “work”. The stem II blas would express the service
already rendered, stem III bla the services still to be rendered; DOTSON.2013a:91: official duties.

[E] *rje’i las “a work [done] for a lord”

[M] (N) (official) duty, service
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NBEN+N]
[R] rje blon / rje dbyal / rje sa / rjes ’baṅs
[A] Although the compound under consideration has attracted a lot of attention from many
scholars and its meaning “service, duty” has been widely accepted, I would like to propose still
another solution concerning its morphology. To wit, I interpret the word internal b- in -blas as a
linking element found also is some other, mainly determinative, compounds the first member of
which ends in a vowel and the second one begins with a consonant: Ø > b- / -Vσ_C- (for other
examples see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan). The only compound that would, on the
surface, seem to contradict my hypothesis is źiṅ blas glossed in Mvy:7102 as an equivalent of Skt.
kṛṣikarmāntaḥ.1 I tentatively propose to reconstruct its underlying structure as *źiṅ la rje blas “service
done on fields” (cf. rkya la rje blas cited below from ITJ 1247). źiṅ las attested in modern dialects as
“agriculture, farming, work in the field” (Tabo), “field work” (Southern Mustang), “agriculture,
work in the field” (Kyirong) and “agriculture” (Shigatse; cf. CDTD:7156) is in all probability an
independent later formation.2

For the interpretation of the reconstructed underlying structure *rje’i las, lit. “a work [done] for the
lord”, and the function of genitivus commodi (benafactive) compare, for instance:
chab srid kyi blon po chen poe las byas kyis (18) kyaṅ / ’phral yun gñis su spyir legs śiṅ dpen pa ’ba’ śig
(19) byed byed do (Źwa W 17-9)
“Due to [his] work done for the grand councillor of chab srid, [Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin], in general, is doing
only what is good and beneficial now and in the future.”3

1
Although DSM glosses źiṅ blas with “ser sruṅ mkhan gyi miṅ ste” (768b), an interpretation that should be related to the
definition of blas as given in BTC: “(rñiṅ) ser ba” (1916b).
Another occurrence of the syllable -blas concerns the compound bab blas attested in Tu 7I:A1 (see TAUBE 1980:74) the
documented classical variants of which include bab bla, bab la, and ba bla (ibid., p.75). It seems obvious that the compound
in question as well as its second element -blas cannot be related to the discussed -blas - a variant of las “work, deed”.
2
The latter compound is glossed in NEGI’s dictionary with “kṣetrakarma; kṣetravyāpāraḥ; kṛṣiḥ; kṛṣikarmāntaḥ”
(12:5174a). In this case, OT źiṅ blas would be identical with the later źiṅ las through their shared Sanskrit equivalent
kṛṣikarmāntaḥ.
3
RICHARDSON (1985:49) and LI/COBLIN (1987:277) render the phrase blon po chen poe las as “[performance of his] duties as
great minister” and “duties of a Great Minister”, respectively. These interpretations, however, do not agree with the usual
formulation of the fact that one acts as an official which in OT records is rendered by ‘PNABS OFFICIAL TITLEABS
byed/bgyid/mdzad’ “PN acts as an OFFICIAL TITLE”. Moreover, the description of Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin’s work as legs and dpen does not
correspond well with descriptions of services done by grand councillors which are customarily referred to as ’dzaṅs “wise”
and dpa’ “brave”. Furthermore, I was unable to trace any reference to Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin as a councillor in any OT document.
Instead, he is always called ban de (cf. Źwa E & W). For these reasons, I propose to interpret phrases like ’OFFICIAL TITLEGEN las’
as “work [done] for an OFFICIAL TITLE” in which the genitive particle is understood as genitivus commodi.
 210

The expression lag gi bla *“superintendent of the work” rendering in Mvy:8735 Skt. navakarmika,
“superintendent of the construction of an edifice” (MW:530c), and quoted by UEBACH and ZEISLER as
another evidence for the bl- onset in the assumed word family of *blas goes obviously back to a
different stem, i.e. bla “Ithe space over, above a thing; superior, better, preferable” (J:382b) and OT
“superior, authority” as attested, e.g., in bla nas or blar (cf. s.vv. bla skyes and bla ’og).

As the meaning of las is well attested in old as well as in classical sources I do not consider it
necessary for the purpose of the current research to look for its further cognates.

Contextual analysis. A detailed analysis of the occurrences of rje blas in OT records has already been
provided in COBLIN 1991c. For this reason, I refrain from translating all the passages involved once
more. Instead, the following phrases and expressions are listed in which the analysed compound
occurs:
1. Verbal phrases:
rje blas la ’gro “to go for service” (PT 454)
rje blas ñams su (myi) len “(not) to take service to heart” (PT 986; Źol E)
rje blas ’tshal “to wish a duty” (PT 1089; PT 1552; PT 1623v; vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:23; ITN
785)
rje blas ’khor “service comes to an end” (PT 1098)
rje blas bgyid “to do service” (PT 1217; ITJ 1247, trslr. after TLTD.2:404)
rje blasTERM sko “to appoint to a duty” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
rje blas ’bul “to offer service” (Fr.80, 730, vol.lxxiii, fol.37, trslr. after TLTD.2:47)
rje blas ’khur “to convey a duty” (Ch.82, vol.55, fol.27, trslr. after TLTD.2:59)
rje blas gyis bskal “to entrust with a duty” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
rje blas gnaṅ “to bestow a duty” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
rje blas sgyur “to change service” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:24)
rje blas gyis rtsol “to take pains by means of a duty” (?) (Or.15000/180, trslr. after TLTD.2:185)
rje blas gsol “to request a duty” (ITJ 738)
rje blas byed “to perform service” (Źol S)
2. Nominal phrases:
rje blas gyi gñer “levy official for (lit. of) a duty” (PT 1089)
dpen pa’i rje blas “service that is useful” (PT 1217)
rje blas dka’ ba “difficult service” (PT 1552; PT 1623)
rje blas kha rṅo ba “?” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
rje blas la brtson ’grus “zeal to a duty” (PT 1283)
rje blas gyi rṅo “energy for (lit. of) service” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after TLTD.2:24)
bdag chag phu rgyud gyi rje blas “a duty of our elder brother lineage” (vol.56, fol.72, trslr. after
TLTD.2:24)
 211

rgu boṅ gi rje blas “service of/for Rgu boṅ” (ITN 1006, trslr. after TLTD.2:302)
rje blas gyi kha tsham “?” (ITJ 848v)
rkya la rje blas “service [conveyed] on fields” (ITJ 1247, trslr. after TLTD.2:404)1

[T] bde blon gis khye stug bskoste // khye stug dguṅ lo lṅa drug tsam na gum na // da ltar kha rṅo bar //
(11) blon koṅ gsol ba’ // rje blas ’di blon koṅ spad gyis źo śa phul ba’i bka’ drin sgor gtshigsu gnaṅ ba / (12)
ma lags te // myes po led koṅ gi bu tsa rṅo thog pa las bsko ’o źes ’byuṅ ste // (vol.56, fol.72:10-2; trslr. after
TLTD.2:23)
“When, after the councillors of Bde [khams] had appointed Khye stug, Khye stug died after roughly
five or six years, now [we] request the councillor Koṅ as kha rṅo ba: ‘This service, that was granted in
an edict due to (?sgor) the źo śa’s favour offered to the councillor Koṅ by the children [of Khye stug],
not being good, [one] should be appointed from capable ones among the descendants of the
ancestor Led koṅ.’”
rje blas ’dir bdag cag led koṅ gi bu tsa rṅo thogs (read: thog pa2) las bsko bar // bka’ luṅ las (27) ’byuṅ
(vol.56, fol.72:26-7; trslr. after TLTD.2:23)
“[It] appears from the orders that we, the descendants of Led koṅ, are appointed to this service from
among capable ones.”
bdag ṅan pa rje blas gyi rṅo thog myi thog (vol.56, fol.72:27; trslr. after TLTD.2:24)
“Am [I], the humble one, capable for service or not?”
bka’ luṅ daṅ [’]dra (7) bar / rje blas dka[’] (8) dgu ñamsu blaṅs (9) te phyi naṅ gñis kyi (10) chab srid khab so
la (11) dpend pa daṅ che (12) chuṅ gñis la dra[ṅ] (13) źiṅ sñoms te / bod (14) mgo nag po’i srid (15) la phan
ba legs // (16) dgu byas so // (Źol E 6-16; reconstructed after RICHARDSON 1985:4)
“Having taken many difficult official duties to heart in accordance with orders, [Stag sgra klu khoṅ]
was helpful for khab sos [of] chab srid of both internal and external [affairs]. Being sincere and
impartial towards great and small ones, [he] provided benefits of all sorts of good deeds to the srid of
the black-headed Tibetans.”
ṅan lam klu khoṅ gis // (4) glo ba ñe ba’i rje blas byas (Źol S 3-4)
“Ṅan lam klu khoṅ performed [his] service of a loyal one.”
zla goṅ gi bu tsha rgyud (18) ’peld la rje blas gyi rṅo thog pa’i (19) rnams ji tsam du rṅo thog par bkas (20)
bkur źiṅ bstod par gnaṅ ṅo (Źol N 17-20)
“[One] grants to the descendants of Zla goṅ that [they] will be honoured by [btsan po’s] words and
praised as capable ones as far as [they are] competent for (lit. of) an official duty.”

50 rje blon
BTC:910a: rgyal po daṅ blon po; Negi.4:1420b: prakṛtiḥ.
DUṄDKAR:911a: ’phrul gyi rje blon te sprul pa’i rgyal blon zer ba daṅ don ’dra (s.v. rje blon ’phrul).
J:180b: king and minister; Desg:362a-b: roi et ses ministres, ministre d’État; B:190a: the king and his minister[s]; R.3:201a:
царь и министр; king and minister; Gs:400a: lord, chief, king and his ministers; WTS.21:404a: 1Bez[eichnung] für lokale
Herrscher und hohe Beamte (BECKWITH/WALTER 2010), Herrscher und Minister, König und Minister; 2ehrwürdiger Minister.
FRANCKE.1914:43: a high minister; TLTD.3:133b: eminent councillor; RICHARDSON.1972:35: king and ministers;
RICHARDSON.1985:31: ruler and minister; STEINRA.1985:111: roi-ministre; LI/COBLIN:399: ruler and ministers; COBLIN.1991c:94:
ruler and ministers; BECKWITH/WALTER.2010:541: formed from two constituents, rje ‘subordinate ruler, feudal lord’ and blon
‘high official, minister’, and accordingly should mean ‘lords and high officials’. This agrees with the Chinese equivalent of
rje blon in the Treaty inscription 君臣 junchen ‘lord(s) and official(s)’; DOTSON.2013a:286: lord and councillors.

1
Additionally, another compound is attested formed from rje blas, namely, rje blas gñer (PT 1098:5) < rje blas gyi gñer (cf. PT
1089:r35).
2
For details see s.v. rṅo thog.
 212

[E] *rje daṅ blon “lord(s) and councillor(s)”

[M] (N) lords and councillors
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; co-hyponymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] rje blas / rje dbyal / rje sa / rjes ’baṅs
[A] For the proposed reconstruction of the underlying structure of the compound rje blon compare
the following OT passages:
bzaṅ dag za bog dar / “Fine ones: za bog and silk;
(9) bkra dgu dag stag taṅ gzigs / variegated ones: tiger and leopard;
mjam la dag dro ba ni / gentle ones: dro ba;
(10) phags sbu dag dpyiṅ taṅ sbyiṅ / sublime ones: dpyiṅ and sbyiṅ;
gnag dgu dag khri (read: khre) taṅ (11) ’bras / black corns: millet and rice;
che dgu dag rje daṅ blon / great ones: lord and councillor;
rno dgu dag ’da daṅ mduṅ / sharp ones: arrow and spear;
(12) dmar dgu dag btsod daṅ khrags / red ones: antelope and blood;
bde dgu dag khri (13) spyan rta / happy ones: horse [of/and?] an intendant of the ten-
thousand-district;
gnag dag dom daṅ ’dras / (PT 1067:8-13) black ones: brown bear and yellow bear1.”
A very similar although, with regards to contents, slightly better preserved is the fragment from PT
1290:
bzaṅ dgu dag za bog dar // “Good ones: za bog and silk;
bkra dgu dag stag daṅ (v11) gzigs / variegated ones: tiger and leopard;
’jam [dgu] dag dbyi daṅ spyaṅ // gentle ones: lynx and wolf;
gda’ dgu dag khre daṅ ’bras /// gda’: millet and rice;
che dgu dag rje daṅ blon // great ones: lord and councillor;
rno dgu dag mda’ daṅ mduṅ / (PT 1290:v10-1) sharp ones: arrow and spear.”
The last two occurrences of the respective phrase come from the OTC:
yu bu ni rje daṅ blon // “As for us, lords and councillors:
yar mo ni chu thuṅs kyis // because the rivers [of] Yar mo were short,
mdo nas ni rtsaṅ du bsriṅ // [they] were extended from Mdo to Rtsaṅ.
yar mo ni źeṅ chuṅs kyis Because the fields [of] Yar mo were small,
lho nas ni byaṅ (438) du bskyed // [they] were enlarged from south to north.
ma brun ni mthaʼ bźi rgyal // ?Not having brun?, [we] are victorious over four
borders.
yu bu ni rje daṅ blon // As for us, lords and councillors:
rje ʼis ni ʼbaṅs ma gtaṅ / a lord shall not abandon [his] subjects.

1
In PT 126:127 and 130 we find dom mentioned together with dred (dom daṅ dred). On these grounds as well as taking into
account the fact that the passage cited from PT 1067 is highly distorted, I propose to reconstruct *dred for ’dras.
 213

rje ʼis ni ʼbaṅs btaṅ (439) na / If a lord abandoned [his] subjects,

gnam mthaʼi ni sruṅ du ruṅ // [he] would be right to breast the confines of the sky.
ʼbaṅs kyis ni rje ma gtaṅ / Subjects shall not abandon [their] lord.
ʼbaṅs kyis ni rje btaṅ na / If subjects abandoned [their] lord,
ṅas po ni rmad du ruṅ // (PT 1287:437-9) [they] would be right for ploughing Ṅas po.”1

From the last quoted passage we can infer that rje was a relative term denoting a social position that
was an inextricable part of the relation: rje ~ ’baṅs, i.e., (feudal) lord and his subjects. Interesting
enough, the latter fragment comes from a song sung by Khri sroṅ brtsan in which he uses the
inclusive plural pronoun yu bu “we” (cf. the inclusive 1st PL pronoun ’u in CDTD:7564) referring thus
to himself as a rje seen as just one among other rjes. As against this constatation, rje blon in the Rkoṅ
po inscription seems to refer exclusively to lords other than btsan po for we are informed that rje
blon were consulted by the btsan po, probably as a body of advisors (cf. also its Skt. equivalent
prakṛti). This observation concerns all the other clauses containing the expression rje blonABS mol, lit.
“to consult lords and councillors”, in which rje blon is without doubt the object of the verb mol.
Moreover, the inscription of Bsam yas makes an overt distinction between btsan po and rje blon (see
the Text section). One could speculate that the reference to Khri sroṅ brtsan as rje in the early
period of the Tibetan Empire constitutes a remnant from the times when Tibetan clans had not been
united yet or shortly afterwards when their leader was still perceived as primus inter pares.

In addition, we gather from the Źol inscription that rje blon could refer also to foreigners, here to
Chinese. Interestingly, this inscription mentions Chinese emperor (rgya rje) independently of rje
blon. Also the western inscription of the ST Treaty contains the compound rje blon but refers to the
Tibetan and Chinese sovereigns in the same sentence by calling them rgyal po chen po. The passage
states that rje blon made a vow what is expressed by using a non-honorific term (mna’ bor) and
proves that btsan po was not included in rje blon. According to DOTSON (2013a:342n20), rje blon in the
eastern inscription of Źwa’i lha khaṅ and in the second inscription of ’Bis khog as well as in PT
16+ITJ 751 and PT 1085 refers to the ruler (i.e. btsan po) and his councillors. As the passages quoted
below demonstrate, at least in case of the mentioned inscriptions, the compound under
consideration denoted lords and councillors. With regard to the Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal, the
distorted syntax of many passages and inappropriate usage of some technical expressions prove
that the administrative language used therein was already taken out of its context and made

1
For the verses gnam mthaʼi ni sruṅ du ruṅ and ṅas po ni rmad du ruṅ compare dguṅ mthaʼi ni sruṅ du ruṅ (PT 1287:269) and ṅas
po ni rmad du ruṅ (PT 1287:270), respectively. The latter attest to the differing structure of two clauses as regards the
occurrence of the genitive particle in mtha’i. Another sentence mentioning sruṅ and rmad is found in PT 1194:
da’i sruṅ du (25) lo gtam byas na myaṅ ro ni rmad du gda’ ’o // (ll.24-5)
”If [one] conversed about sruṅ of today, [he] is to plough Myaṅ ro.”
As this tentative translation demonstrates, the passage is highly obscure. Nevertheless, two elements confirm the
correctness of the verses from the OTC. Those are, namely, the genitive of da’i (cf. more proper mtha’i) and the phrase myaṅ
ro rmad, “to plough Myaṅ ro”, that can be juxtaposed with *ṅas po rmad “to plough Ṅas po”.
For the lack of a better solution, I interpret sruṅ to be a verb that requires its object to stand in genitive, compare in this
regard rigs and rṅo thog (see s.v.).
 214

thereby to a great extent unintelligible. For these reasons I cannot consider PT 16 & ITJ 751 an
authoritative basis for linguistic analysis of the administrative language of the Tibetan Empire and
instead concentrate in my analysis mainly on the Central Tibetan inscriptions (see the Text section).

Now, we can state that rje was a relative term denoting person connected to the notion of someone
having subjects (’baṅs); compare hereto the bond between a lord and his subjects as depicted in the
passage from the OTC quoted above as well as the following formations: rgya rje “lord of Chinese”, ’a
źa rje “lord of ’A źa”, rṅegs rje “lord from (lit. of) Rṅegs[-clan]”, bru źa rje “lord of Bru źa”, etc. Only in
this sense could Tibetan btsan po be called rje, i.e. in relation to his subjects - all the inhabitants of
the Tibetan Empire. For some more details on the relative character of the term see s.v. rje dbyal.

To sum up our survey, not even in the passages quoted from PT 1287 does rje refer exclusively to
btsan po - he is only one among many other persons denoted by this term. Also in none of the official
documents analysed so far did rje blon denote exclusively the btsan po and his councillors.
Nonetheless, it is highly probable and attested in fact by later lexicographic sources on CT, that the
connotation of rje blon was changing over time depending primarily on the political situation and
administrative system in which it was used. The first major semantic shift in Old Tibetan appeared
with the rise of btsan po to a position of a sovereign - an event followed independently by the
increasing Buddhist influence on language from the second half of the 8th century onwards. The
culmination of the semantic development of rje blon in this period was brought by the fall of the
Tibetan Empire around the middle of the 9th century.1

[T] źaṅ lon źa ʼbriṅ du bro ʼdor ʼdor ba / khu khri do re smyaṅ (276) zuṅ daṅ / gnubs sña do re gtsug blon
daṅ / rṅegs rgyal ʼbriṅ lan ton daṅ / tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto / (277) daṅ / ʼo ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan
daṅ / khu smon to re phaṅs tshab daṅ / rje blon bdun gyis de ltar dbu sñuṅ / (278) gnaṅ ṅo // (PT 1287:275-
8)
“Aristocrats, who were swearing an oath as entourage, Khu khri do re smyaṅ zuṅ, Gnubs sña do re
gtsug blon, Rṅegs rgyal ’briṅ lan ton, Tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto, ’O ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan,
Khu smon to re phaṅs tshab, and seven lords and councillors bestowed the vow in that way.“
smon lam la sogs pa btsan po khri lde sraṅ btsan gyi (3) sku riṅ la rje blon yon bdag daṅ sems can thams cad
kyi don gyi phyir dge (4) sloṅ lo chen ye śes dbyaṅs kyis bgyiste / (’Bis 2-4)
“During the life of the btsan po Khri lde sraṅ btsan, a prayer, among others, for the sake of lords and
councillors, patrons and all sentient beings was performed by the monk, great translator (lo chen <
*lo tsa ba chen p?) Ye śes dbyaṅs.”
btsan po yab sras daṅ (19) rje blon gun gyis dbu sñuṅ daṅ (20) bro / bor ro / (Bsam 18-20)
“The btsan po, father and son, together with all lords and councillors swore an oath.”
lha sras lde sroṅ gi sku riṅ la // rje // blon mol te (21) / bka’s // gnaṅ ṅo // (Rkoṅ 19-21)
“During the life of the Divine Son [Khri] lde sroṅ [brtsan], [the btsan po], having consulted lords and
councillors, granted with [his] order.”

1
See also s.v. rje dbyal for still further semantic changes that the word rje underwent during the period of the Old Tibetan
language.
 215

’di ltar bod rgya gñis kyi rje blon gyis kha (72) cig bśags mna’ bor te // gtsigs (73) kyi yi ge źib mor bris nas //
rgyal po chen (74) po gñis kyi ni phyag rgyas btab // (ST Treaty W 71-4)
“Accordingly, lords and councillors of both China and Tibet, having declared1 and made a vow,
wrote [its text] as a detailed letter of an edict [and] affixed thereafter the seals of both great kings
[to it].”
rgya rje he’u ’gi ’waṅ (47) te rje blon skrag ste / [lo gcig ciṅ rtag] du dpya (48) dar yug lṅa khri phul te / rgya
dpya ’jal du (49) bcug go // (Źol S 46-9)
“The lord of Chinese, He’u ’gi ’waṅ te, [as well as the Chinese] lords and councillors, being terrified,
offered during one year 50.000 bolts of silk that was a tribute. [One] compelled the Chinese to pay
the tribute.”
rje blon phyi rabs mṅa’ mdzad pa (42) rnams kyis kyaṅ / nam nam źa źar gtsigs rnam gñis kyi yi ge las
(43) ’byuṅ ba daṅ / rdo riṅs rnam gñis la bris pa las myi dbri myi (44) bcos myi bsgyur bar gyis śig // (Źwa E
41-4)
“Not even (kyaṅ) future generations [of] lords and councillors, that shall wield power, must ever let
to change, alter, or diminish [the contents of the decree] as compared with what appears from the
letter of two parts of the decree and what is written on both sides (lit. parts) of the stone pillar!”

51 rje dbyal
BYD:173a: rje daṅ btsun mo (s.v. rje dpyal).
BTK:99n2: staṅs dpyal te khyo śug gam yab yum gyi don. dbyal ni dpyal yin; STK:128n25: btsan po yab yum la zer ba. staṅs
dpyal lam staṅs źal źes pa daṅ don mtshuṅs so (s.v. btsan po rje dbyal).
HAARH.1969:405: [btsan po] who has withdrawn as a ruler; HILL.2006:95: the consort and the lord; VAN SCHAIK.2008: noble2;
ZEISLER.2011:107: lord or wife; DOTSON.2013a:269: lord or consort.

[E] *staṅs daṅ dbyal “the one accompanied by and the one that is led away”3
[M] (N) husband and wife
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; co-hyponymic; copulative; STRC[N+N]
[R] rje blas / rje blon / rje sa / rjes ’baṅs / staṅs dbyal
[A] rje dbyal is a hapax legomenon. In notes to its translation (see the Text section) I try to argue that
the actual form in which the passage has come down to us is highly distorted. This concerns the
syntax but even more the lexicon.

dbyal is scarcely attested in OT records. It forms the second member of the compound staṅs dbyal
(see s.v.) and appears, besides, in the following phrases:
khab daṅ dbyal du blaṅs (PT 1040:8-9; PT 1068:65; PT 1134:70) “took to khab and dbyal”;
k(h)ab daṅ dbyal bts(h)ald (PT 1134:40, 69) “searched for a khab and dbyal”;
khab daṅ dbyal ma mc(h)is (PT 1134:68-9) “did not have a khab nor dbyal”;
khab daṅ dbyal du bźedH (PT 1285:r119) “to accept to khab and dbyal”.1
1
The phrase kha cig bśags remains unclear. RICHARDSON (1985:126) and OTI (p.35) read źal gyis instead of kha cig. One can
raise two objections to this reading: 1The expression źal gyis has not been attested in any other OT document so far; 2If we
accept it, we would have to account for two ergatives and no direct object in absolutive for the verb bśags. From the
grammatical point of view, the reading kha cig seems more accurate and we find also similar phrases, cf. skad bśag (PT
126:38), mchid śags (PT 1084:21-3; PT 1096:r18, r28; PT 1297.2:13; ITJ 750:87), gsol śags (ITJ 738, repeatedly), dam śags (Ldan 7).
We can assume that, even if kha cig is not the correct reading, a word or phrase should be expected here in absolutive that
denotes some kind of oral statement.
2
On Early Tibet: http://earlytibet.com/2008/10/27/between-death-and-the-tomb; 04.07.2014.
3
For further details on staṅs and the reconstructed structure of the compound staṅs dbyal see s.v.
 216

In addition to these, we notice analogical phrases with dbyal, however, being replaced by gdar:
khab daṅ gdar du btaṅ (PT 1040:37) “let go to khab and gdar”;
khab daṅ gdar myi maṅ na (PT 1040:36) “if khab and gdar are not numerous”;
khab daṅ gdar du bźudH (PT 1040:81) “departed to khab and gdar”;
kab daṅ gdar du blaṅs (PT 1134:41) “took to khab and gdar”;
khab daṅ gdar du bźedH (PT 1285:r101, r102) “to accept to khab and gdar”.2
Side by side with these expressions we find also khab du bźud (PT 1040:6) “departed to khab”; khab du
bon (PT 1285:r103-4, 146) “gave to khab”3; khab du bźed (PT 1285:r122-3, 124, 146) “to accept to khab”;
khab du mchi “go to khab” (PT 1285:r129, 130); khab du blaṅs (ST Treaty E 25, 28) “took to khab”.4 From
these we can infer that dbyal was in a way synonymous with khab and gdar. Interestingly enough,
further clauses, structurally resembling those containing khab and cited above, can be added:
khab daṅ braṅ du byon (ITJ 731:v36, 87, 88-9) “went to khab and braṅ”;
khab daṅ braṅ du bros (ITJ 731:v56) “fled to khab and braṅ”;
khab chen chuṅ gñis śig mṅa’ (ITJ 732:15) “to have both, an elder and a younger [wife of] khab”;
khab gyi chen ma (ITJ 732:15) “elder wife of khab”;
khab gyi chun (read: chuṅ) ma (ITJ 732:16) “younger wife of khab”.
If my identifications are correct, it would appear that the original meaning of khab was *”cover,
shelter”5 which subsequently, perhaps due to its usage in clauses like *khab tu ’bros/’byon, lit. “to
flee/proceed to shelter”, developed into “house, abode” attested in lexicographic sources on CT. In
the next step, occurrence of khab in connection with verbs, like len, bźed, bźud, etc., and a direct
object denoting a woman (‘WOMANABS khabTERM’) acquired a metaphorical meaning “to take/receive
WOMAN as wife” replacing the original *“to take/receive WOMAN at home”. Thus, the primary

semantic role of GOAL, lit. “to house”, has been replaced by PURPOSE “as wife” (i.e.: “to [be] a wife”).6
In its original meaning khab appears in conjunction with braṅ. However, its occurrence with gdar
and dbyal and verbs like “to take” or “to accept” demonstrates the reconstructed semantic shift and
allows us to assume that the last two lexemes denoted not a kind of abode but rather referred to a
woman.

Further, we acquire some supplementary information on dbyal by juxtaposing the following clauses:

1
The phrase khab daṅ dbyal is shortly commented upon in STEIN.RA 1988:54.
2
We can also cite in this connection the following sentence: khab bya bdaru btag [...] (30) daṅ bśos śiṅ bźugs (ITJ 732:29-30)
“He seized her to take her for wife [...] and had her for consort” (trsl. THOMAS 1957:43). Although the structure of the first
part needs a more thorough examination, the context leaves no doubt as to the proper understanding of the clause.
3
I understand bon as the original V2 stem of the verb ’on “2to give, to bring” (J:503a).
4
In connection with these, compare CT khab tu bźes “to take for a wife, to marry” (J:38b); khab tu len “zur Gattin nehmen,
heiraten” (WTS.7:39a); khab tu ’byuṅ “Gattin werden” (WTS.7:39a); khab tu gśegs “verheiratet werden” (WTS.7:39a).
5
The word is assumed to belong to one word family with ’gebs “to cover; to spread over or on, to set up, to put on; to
protect” (J:94b); ’kheb “to cover, to spread over” (J:56b); gab “to hide, to conceal one’s self” (J:67a); sgab “1va. to cover, to
hide; 2va. to support, to assist, to aid” (Gs:274a); ’gab “to take care, to be cautious” (J:92b); ’khab “to fill penetrate; to
embrace, comprise” (J:45b); khebs “covering, coverlet” (J:42b), etc.
6
A similar semantic shift took obviously place in case of braṅ as well for compare mchis braṅ “1eleg[ant] dwelling, abode,
domicile; 2Lex. wife, partner” (J:165b) and dialectal bza’ braṅ “married couple, household” (CDTD:7537).
 217

pha daṅ yab gyi mtshan / smraʼ diṅ diṅ diṅs kyi rje / ma daṅ yum gyi mtshan dbyal gun gun ma btsun
(read: btsun mo1) (PT 1285:r16)
“the name of the father and yab: smra ’Diṅ diṅ, the lord of Diṅs; the name of the mother and yum:
dbyal Gun gun ma, [his] lady (btsun mo)”;

dmuʼi pha yab gyi mtshan naʼ / gtaṅs (read: staṅs) brag cha daṅ daṅ / ma yum gyi mtshan / dbyal drum
chaʼi ṅur ṅur (PT 1285:r59)
“if (na) the name of the father of Dmu, [it is] staṅs Brag cha daṅ daṅ; the name of the mother:
dbyal Drum cha’i ṅur ṅur”.2
If we look closer at the contexts in which these sentences occur, we observe even more parallels
concerning the applied terms, namely:
MALE FEMALE NORMAL HONORIFIC

pha ma pha yab

yab yum ma yum
smra dbyal bu mo sras lcham
rje btsun [mo]
pha yab ma yum
g-/staṅs dbyal
miṅ po sriṅ mo
dral po lcham
We notice that, on the one hand, dbyal is a female equivalent of smra and staṅs, with which it forms
also the compound staṅs dbyal (see s.v.), but, on the other hand, the equivalent of rje “lord”3 - the
first member of the compound under consideration - is in fact btsun mo “lady”.4 A Lexicon of
Zhangzhung and Bonpo Terms (TENZIN et al., 2008:173) glosses dbyal with “bud med; a woman, a female”.

By comparing the following OT phrases:

pha daṅ yab,
ma daṅ yum,
khab daṅ dbyal / gdar,
one could feel inclined to interpret dbyal and gdar as honorific counterparts of khab. This
observation can be confirmed by juxtaposing the phrase btsan po rje dbyal with other similar
formations from OT sources: btsan po yab (PT 1287:83, 252; ITJ 750:69, 71, 74, 146, 152, 156, 158, 282;
Skar 23; ST Treaty E 34; Źol S 8), btsan po mched (PT 1287:201), btsan po sras (PT 1287:320; ITJ 750:67,
150, 287; ITJ 1375:v3; Źol S 11, 16), btsan po dral (PT 1287:404, 406, 424, 425), btsan po myes (PT 1288:17,
1
Compare hereto ll.r118 and r145 of the same text.
2
Additionally, the lexeme in question occurs also in PT 1285:v44, in the final and much damaged fragment of ITJ 731:v101,
and as dbyal mo in PT 1285:r1, all of which passages remain highly obscure. Moreover, PT 1285:v129 has dbyig instead of
dbyal in its usual context: ma daṅ yum gi mtshan na / dbyig [ma thar thar lags] [...] bśos daṅ nams [kyi sras].
3
For more details on the exact meaning and connotations of rje see s.v. rje blon.
4
Hereto compare also skyi rje rmaṅ po daṅ sgyi bdagi btsun mo [...] (PT 1068:61) “Rmaṅ po, the lord of Skyi, and [...], the lady
of the Skyi-ruler”.
 218

19; Skar 4), btsan po sbon (PT 1288:18; ST Treaty E 42: dbon), btsan po yab sras (’Bis 9; Bsam 11, 18; Skar
26, 52), btsan po yab myes (’Phyoṅ 1), btsan po dbon sras (Skar 33), btsan po sras dbon (Źol N 12). The
honorific kinship terms used in apposition with btsan po lead us to the conclusion that dbyal likewise
must have been a honorific term. If the etymological meaning of smra/rma (?) was *“a man” - a
hypothesis that still needs a thorough examination1 - then one could assume that the meaning of
dbyal was *“(adult) woman”, which developed further to *married woman, wife” - an equivalent of
staṅs.2

The morphology of dbyal strongly suggests that it is a derivative (*d+byal or *d+b+yal). The only
candidates I could provisionally propose to be considered cognate to dbyal are WT yal “to dwindle,
fail; disappear, vanish” (J:508a)3; yol ba “Icurtain; II.1to be past; 2to evade, shun, to go not to a place”
(J:516b)4; g.yol “va. to avoid, to refrain from, to shirk, to shun” (Gs:1016a); ’byol “to give or make way,
to turn out of the way, to step aside” (J:399b); ’jol “I.2gen. ’byol ba to turn aside, to make way” (J:180a);
źol “unten, unterhalb” (Sch:494a), “1lower part, bottom, the area below a structure such as a fort”
(Gs:939a); gźol “1vi. to descend, fall; 2va. to descent, dismount” (Gs:949a)5; bśol “to put off, postpone,
defer, delay; to prolong; to stop, detain; to omit” (J:568b); śol “withering” (CDTD:8641); *śol “to be
finished” (CDTD.V:1258).6 Additionally, the dialects of Khalatse and Nurla seem to have preserved
the transitive equivalent of ’byol, dʒol cEA “to sweep off, to remove (chaff from the grain after
threshing)” which is reconstructed in CDTD.V:911 as *sbyol. The underlying meaning connecting all
these lexemes seems to have been *“to disappear, to get lost” for the INTR verbs and *”to make sth.
disappear” for the TR ones.

Now, an hypothesis is put forward according to which dbyal was originally V3 stem of the
reconstructed verb *’phyal/*’phyol (V2 *phyal / V3 *dbyal / V4 *phyol) *“to make sth. disappear; to
lead away” that would have been a TR counterpart of the attested ’byol.7 Although the verb itself is

1
Cf. BELLEZZA: “divine humans” (2008:350), “ancestral human figures” (p.381), “a proto-human or early human tribe”
(p.498) and DOTSON: “a synonym for mi, meaning ‘man’” (2008:53).
2
Cf. also Pol. żona < PS *žena “kobieta, małżonka” (BORYŚ 2005:756a).
3
Cf. especially its dialectal meaning in Balti, Kargil, Tshangra ncA “to be taken away” (CDTD.V:1152).
4
For the second verbal meaning JÄSCHKE quotes also g.yol, dbyol and ’byol as its variants (ibid.).
5
Compare hereto Southern Mustang “with tʃēn to lose one’s sight, to go blind (h)” (CDTD.V:1097) and the example cited by
GOLDSTEIN: ṅa tsho ñi ma ma gźol goṅ la ’gro dgos “We have to go before sunset” (949a).
6
CDTD.V adds to this list also g.yel ~ yel “1to be idle, lazy, slothful; idleness, laziness; 2thugs g.yel ba resp. to forget” (J:519a),
“1vi. to be inattentive, to wander mentally, to be forgetful, to not concentrate; 2vi. to be careless, slipshod over work”
(Gs:1014a; see CDTD.V: 1152) and *śoms Balti, Nurla “to wither” (CDTD.V:1233; see s.v. śol, CDTD.V:1258). Enlarging the
scope of the known derivative processes for WT one could also tentatively consider CT bsñel “resp. to forget” (J:202a); skyel
“1to conduct, accompany; 2to convey, bring, take; to carry off, to take away; 3to send; 4to risk, to stake; 5to use, to employ; to
spend” (J:30b; see also the dialectal meanings glossed in CDTD.V:55); skyol “to bring etc., to pay back, lit. to cause to arrive”
(CDTD.V:67); and ’khyol “to be carried, to be brought; to arrive at, come to, reach” (J:61a) to be included in this list.
7
For a similar alternation in CT compare, e.g., ’phyi “II.2also ’phyid pa to wipe, to blot out; to pull out; to tear out” (J:358b)
~ ’byi “pf. byi, also phyi and phyis, to be wiped off, blotted out, effaced; to fall of” (J:396b); ’phral “pf. phral, fut. dbral, imp.
phrol to separate, to part” (J:359b) ~ ’bral “pf. bral, imp. brol to be separated, parted from, deprived of” (J:400a); ’phri “pf. and
imp. phri(s), fut. dbri to lessen, diminish; to take away from” (J:360a) ~ ’bri “pf. and imp. bri “to lessen, decrease, diminish”
(J:400b). See also BIELMEIER’s notes on morphological alternation in verb derivation: “[...] in the alternation type the
intransitive verb nearly always shows a voiced initial. [...] with the alternation type the transitive verb shows aspirated
voiceless [...]” (1988b:19). Moreover, the reconstructed alternation ’ph- for the TR verb and ’b- for the INTR verb would prove
 219

not documented in any lexicographic sources I could access, its traces have been partly preserved in
the following glosses: phyal bar bor “yal bar bor ba” (DSM:498a); phyal le ba “ṅos mñam pa”
(DSM:498a), “śātam; mñam pa” (Mvy:1882); ’jam phyal “’jam źiṅ ṅos mñam pa” (BTC:888b); phyal
dpyad “(rñiṅ) mñam ñid” (BTC:1738b); ma phyal “mi ’dres” (DSM:623a); dpyal “1gñen gyi gtso bo’i don
la ’jug ste” (DSM:446a; example: dpyal ni dpuṅ gñen, < *dbyal?); pyol pyol “phyol phyol lam. bros pa’i
don te” (DSM:439b)1.

Due to the patient orientation of V3 stems, I would suggest the original meaning of dbyal to have
been *“that what was made to disappear” and specifically in the context of the analysed compound -
*“the one that was made to disappear, the one led away”, i.e. “abductee”. The term is supposed to
have alluded to a custom of a ceremonial leading away of a bride from her parent’s home.2

Conclusions. On the margin of my analysis of dbyal, two arguments were already put forward that
prove the inauthenticity of the compound analysed. First of all, the counterpart of dbyal was either
smra or staṅs - rje did not even belong to the kinship terminology and its female equivalent was btsun
mo. Furthermore, the analysis of kinship terms that were used in apposition with btsan po have
shown that only honorifics were allowed in this position and we have no evidence that rje has ever
been used as an honorific. To conclude this line of thought, I assume that rje has replaced the
original staṅs (see s.v. staṅs dbyal).3

that the pair *’phyol/’phyal ~ ’byol should be considered older than other transitive derivatives, for instance, *sbyol (ibid.,
pp.18-9).
1
This gloss is based on a quotation from PT 1287:51-2: yul yab (52) kyi rje myi bźugs na / pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs pyol pyol gyi cha ʼo “If
the lord over (lit. of) living space does not reside, [one] will be avoiding the vast pastures of the marches [of the country].”
2
A myth on abducting a bride as known in a Tibetan-speaking community of Dolpo is related in KIND 2002:283f.
In this connection one could mention the etymology of English wife < OE. wīf “the veiled one” and Latin nupta “a married
woman, bride, wife” < nūbere “to cover oneself for the bridegroom, to marry, wed” (KLEIN 1966:1744a; VANN 2008:417, s.v.
nūbō, although he does not consider this etymology as proven) - both would make a reference to customs related to a
bride.
Returning to the assumed synonym of dbyal, i.e. gdar (cf. khab daṅ gdar above), we observe that its morphology indicates
that it could also have been originally a V3 stem of the verb *’dar (V2 *bdar / V3 *gdar / V4 *(’)dar), different from ’dar “to
tremble, shudder, shiver, quake” (J:275a). Its alleged cognates would include: gad bdar “cleaning” (CDTD:1111); bdar bdar
Ndzorge “sleek, smooth” (CDTD:4095); phyi dar/bdar “dusting, wiping, cleaning” (Gs:691a); byi/phyi bdar ba “to clean, to
polish” (J:269a; cf. also JÄSCHKE’s note: “[bdar ba - JB] Ma. in two passages: to pray earnestly”, ibid.) and perhaps thar “1to
become free, to be saved; 2freedom, liberty, happiness, eternal bliss; 3free” (J:230a). Their common semantic denominator
seems to have been *”to remove, to take away, to deprive” which has further developed, on the one side, to “to cleanse”
and, on the other, to “to sharpen”, lit. “to polish by removing”. Hence, we could render gdar as *“that what has been
removed, taken away” acquiring in fact an almost exact synonym of the examined dbyal.
3
The already corrupted form rje dbyal (< *staṅs dbyal) seems to have given rise to or been co-occurring with further
transformations of the original lexeme for we find in ITJ 1060 (ll.2, 18, 49, 61-2) the phrase rje bden daṅ źal (for dbyal) (myi)
mjal that could be juxtaposed with, on the one hand, rje daṅ ’baṅs / mjal (PT 1060:48-9; for the relation of the term rje
to ’baṅs see s.v. rje blon), myi daṅ phyugs mjal (PT 1060:49), gser daṅ g.yu mjal (PT 1060:49), and, on the other hand, phu yid kyi
gdaṅ pyam gyi bśos kyi źal (read: dbyal) daṅ daṅ (read: staṅs) ni ma mjal / noṅs kyi spur daṅ mjald / nas // (ITJ 731:r72) “[He] did
not meet the wife and husband of the begotten elder brother Yid kyi gdaṅ pyam. [He] met with the corpse of the deceased
one.” The latter sentence, apart from being highly distorted, attests to the replacement of the original dbyal by źal, by the
way, a highly interesting case for the study of historical sound changes. Thus, the replacement of staṅs by rje might have
been caused by two main factors: 1. The broadening of meaning of rje to encompass also the sense of “2nobleman” (J:180b)
which ensued after the decline of old social relations that resulted from the fall of the Tibetan Empire; 2. The obsolescence
of staṅs confirmed by its multiple variants that are attested in OT document (see s.v. staṅs dbyal).
Another interesting observation regarding the passage from the OTC cited in the Text section is that the terminology
used there disagrees with the one we know, for instance, from the Old Tibetan Annals in other aspects as well (see also the
notes to the translation). To wit, the Annals make use of the verb noṅs only when referring to death of other relatives of a
btsan po, e.g. btsan po’s mother, grandmother, son or sister, whereas btsan po himself always dguṅ du gśegs, “goes to heaven”
 220

[T] ma na re gźan myi ʼdod / nam nam źa źar / btsan po rje (read: staṅs) dbyal źig noṅs na / thor to ʼphren
(46) mo ni bciṅsv2 / ṅo la mtshal gyis byugsv2 / lus la ni bźagsv2 / btsan po ʼi spur la ni ʼtshogv1 / myi la ʼphrog
(47) [rl]omv1 / zas la ni za ʼthuṅv1 / de ltar bya ʼam myi bya źes mchi nas / (PT 1287:45-7)
“The mother said: ‘I do not want anything else but that forever and ever when a btsan po, husband
and wife, dies, [one], having *cut off*1 ’phren mo tuft, smeared [his] face with blood2 [and] made
incisions on [his] body3, assembles around btsan po’s body1, boasts about deprival2, [and] feasts (lit.
eats and drinks) on victuals3. Will it be acted like that or not?’ Thus [she] spoke.”

(a detailed analysis of the vocabulary related to death and dying as attested in the OTA is provided in HILL 2008). We
further notice the internal inconsistency contained in the sentence from PT 1287. The referents of a coordinate compound
of two kinship terms standing in apposition to btsan po (see above) are always two persons, thus btsan po yab sras “btsan po,
father and son”, btsan po yab myes “btsan po, father and grandfather”, etc. Nevertheless, although we read in our fragment
that the rites should be performed in case of a btsan po’s and his wife’s death (btsan po rje dbyal), only the body of a btsan po
(btsan po ’i spur) is subsequently mentioned. In conclusion, we can remark that the passage in question was composed as a
quasi-historical narrative by a person writing from a later perspective who was, in all probability, re-working some earlier
sources not necessarily written ones since, as I try to argue below, it contained originally some metrical parts that were
not recognised as such by the scribe.
1
Although the verb ’chiṅ(s) (V2 bciṅs) is glossed with “to bind; to fetter” (J:169b), one would rather expect in this context a
verb referring to cutting off one’s hair - a mourning rite well documented in plenty of cultures across the world and
accompanied by smearing blood on one’s face and lacerating one’s body. Cf. also VAN SCHAIK
(http://earlytibet.com/2008/10/27/between-death-and-the-tomb/; 04.07.2014) and ZEISLER (2011:159) for some other
arguments supporting this interpretation.
Speculating about the original verb that could have been replaced by bciṅs and that in all probability denoted the act of
cutting off (hair) we could quote the following lexemes: coṅ coṅ “jagged, indented, serrated” (J:143a) and modern Jirel tɕōŋ,
tɕwà, tɕwā “to clear out the undergrowth or cut down trees (usu. to plant certain crops); to cut down trees
indiscriminately” (CDTD.V:1265). As already noticed in CDTD.V which marks the gloss with a question mark, the forms
attested for the latter verb clearly point to a verb different than gśoṅ under which it has been glossed. Could it be the
otherwise unattested verb *gcoṅ, bcoṅs (or: bcaṅs), bcoṅ (or: bcaṅ)?
2
I propose to render mtshal with “blood” on account of the fact that smearing one’s face with blood during funeral rituals
is a well documented rite worldwide. The context makes it also clear that it is the mourner’s face that should be besmeared
and not the one of a btsan po in which case we would expect a honorific term instead of ṅo. Besides, compare also
formations like sku mtshal, lit. “[btsan po’s] blood” (PT 1287:50), which leaves no doubt as for the interpretation of mtshal.
As already pointed out by ZEISLER (2011:160), the syntax of this sentence seems to violate the argument structure of the
verb ’byug, cf.:
[khyi bzaṅ po]o [lo ṅam gyi lagis]AD byugs pa daṅ ṅa ʼi rta rdzis khyi ʼi spu la dug bskus pas [lag pa]*S byug ste bsad de / (26) śa blan
no // (PT 1287:25-6)
“[He] stroked the beautiful dog with Lo ṅam’s hand. Due to the poison, that my herdsman had smeared on the dog’s hair,
[Lo ṅam’s] hand got besmeared. Having killed [him thus], [they] took revenge (lit. flesh).”
Concerning the ALLAT in ṅo la, I follow the interpretation proposed by ZEISLER, who ascribed to it a partitive function (ibid.).
This seems to be the case also with the just quoted passage where we read spu la dug bskus “smeared poison on hair”.
3
Tibetan authors (BDN:22n20, STK:129n27) followed by some western scholars understand this clause as “to adorn [one’s]
body” which, in my opinion, is a purely contextual interpretation (although one finds bźag pa glossed with brgyan pa also in
Dbus pa blo gsal’s Brda gsar rñiṅ gi rnam par dbye ba, apus MIMAKI 1992:489). This view seems much problematic since the text
requires that mourners first *cut off* their hair and then besmear their face. Applying ornaments on one’s body neither
fits into this picture nor corresponds to funeral rituals as known to us. Instead, one would expect lacerating one’s body or
a similar rite. Two hypotheses can be put forward concerning the interpretation of bźags:
1
bźags < *bźag (v2 < ’jogI “1to put, to place; 2to lay or put down”, J:179a-b); cf.: sems (resp. thugs) la ’jog pa “to take to heart”
(lit. “to put on [one’s] heart”) and lus la gru’i ’du śes bźag la “if we fancy the human body to be a ship” (J:179a; lit. “to put a
concept of a ship on [one’s] body”). The form bźags, which is otherwise unknown in lexicographic sources on CT, is
attested in a phrase strongly resembling the first of the quoted expressions: yid bźags byed pa “im Sinn halten” (CÜPPERS
2004:88). Besides, the following pair of clauses from PT 1047 could allow us to identify it with the CT bźag: g.yas g.yos su
bźags (l.14) ~ g.yas g.yos su bźag na (repeatedly); compare also the alternation from PT 1283: gan du gźags pa (l.355) and gan
du gźag (repeatedly). Since the additional -s is attested, as far as I am aware, only in those three cases, I would assume it
to be an error of hypercorrection resulting from an inacurate analysis of morpheme boundaries between the stem (bźag,
gźag) and the gerund particle ste when written together, cf. bźagste (PT 1068:19; ITJ 731:v40). This could have been
motivated, on the one hand, by the common appearance of -s suffix in V2 stems of verbs and, on the other hand, by -s of
the preceding two verbs, bciṅs and byugs. Thus, one could interpret lus la bźags (< *lus la bźag) literally as “put on/loaded
on/applied to [one’s] body”, i.e., “took it out on one’s body, wreaked on one’s body”, cf. Pol. wyładowywać się na.
2
bźags < *bźogs (v2 < ’jogII “to cut, to hew, to square; to carve, to chip”, J:179b): lus la bźags “cut/made [incisions] on [his]
body”. We have already mentioned that bciṅs has, in all likelihood, been substituted for another verb with the meaning
“to cut (off)”. Similarly, one would rather expect here the verb bźogs instead of bźags. Although the suffix -s of the
attested form bźags can be explained as a case of hypercorrection (see the first hypothesis), it is likewise possible that the
original *bźogs has been replaced by bźags since the verb ’jog / bźag / gźag / źog was more commonly used. In this case
bźags would be a mixed form of the original bźogs and the target bźag. The original meaning and the argument structure
 221

52 rje sa
YeŚes:185a: huṅ de le hu ’o roṅ; źe sa; BYMD:41r1: kündülen-ün orun; SR.1:718.7: źe sa; kündülen-ün orun; GC:297a: źe sa;
LCh:274c: sapratīśa (s.v. rje sa daṅ bcas par; Skt. sapratīśa “respectful”, MW:1148c); BTC:912a: źe sa; Negi.4:1421a: gauravam;
pratīśaḥ; DSM:204a: źe sa’i miṅ gi rnam graṅs te; BYD:173b: źe sa ste ṅag gi gus pa’i miṅ.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:91n460: źe sa.
Cs:248a: = źe sa respect, courtesy, civility; Sch:182: Respect, Höflichkeit, feine Sitte; J:180b: rje sa (or źe sa) byed pa to show
deference, to pay one’s respect; D:464b: = źe sa deference, respect; Desg:362b: źe sa, respect, honneur; Gs:400a: sm. źe sa;
WTS.21:406a: Respekt.
DTH:86: d’honneur; STEINRA.1985:93: de politesse; DOTSON.2013a:263: lordly station.

[E] *rje’i sa “lord’s place”

[M] 1(N) what is lordly/courtly; 2(A) lordly, courtly
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPOSS+N]
[R] rje blas / rje blon / rje dbyal / rjes ’baṅs / skya sa / sṅo sa / sa dog
[A] As far as I was able to establish, rje sa occurs only once in OT documents as an independent
lexeme. In the passage from PT 1286 cited in the Text section, rje sa determines gos, “garments”. For
the original meaning of the compound in question we can compare the OT sentence:
rgya rje sa nas pho ña ’drul ba mchis na // bdag gi pho ña brdzaṅ bar bgyi (PT 1082:40-1)
“If a traveling messanger came from the place of the Chinese lord4, my messanger will be sent.”

Thus, I suggest the following semantic development: *”lord’s place” > *”what is lordly, i.e.
characteristic to lord’s style of life” (when functioning as a determiner, rje sa’i, lit.“of lord’s place”) >

of ’jog *”to incise, make incision” seems to have resembled the CT rko “2to engrave” (J:16b) for the valency of which
compare, e.g., CT ’bur du rko ba “to emboss, to work out relievos” (J:394a, s.v. ’bur ba) and MT khos tshigs khebs la rkos
brgyab pa red “He engraved the ring” (GOLDSTEIN/NARKYID 1984:100a, s.v. engrave). I understand ALLAT here once again as
marking a direct object that is not fully afflicted by the action.
It seems reasonable to assume that the passage as handed down to us in its present form is a distorted version of the
original since the frequent usage of the topicalisation particle ni suggests its initially metrical character in the six verses
from thor to to za ’thuṅ. It is hardly, if at all, possible to reconstruct the original structure of the verses. We can only
presume that, if compared with other metrical passages from PT 1287, each verse had to consist of six syllables, the third
one being ni, thus rendering:
thor to *ni* ?’phren mo? ?bciṅs? /
ṅo la *ni* mtshal gyis byugs /
lus la ni *...* *bźogs* /
btsan po[’i] *ni* spur la ’tshog /
myi la *ni* *...* ’phrog rlom / (or rather: ˚*ni* ’phrog rlom *byed*; for details see s.v. ’phrog rlom)
zas la ni *...* za ’thuṅ / (or: ˚ni za ’thuṅ *byed*?)
(* - elements that have been reconstructed; ? - problematic elements)
We observe that the three first verbs of the assumed six-verses stanza are in a perfective form (bciṅs, byugs, bźags)
whereas the last three verbs use imperfective forms (’tshog, rlom, za ’thuṅ). Thus, bźags would mark a boundary between
actions that are conceived of as completed and those that are to be regarded as ongoing or durative: [...] bciṅs [...] byugs [...]
bźags [...] ’tshog [...] rlom [...] za ’thuṅ “[mourners], having *cut off* [...], besmeared [...] [and] cut [...], gather, boast, eat and
drink”. In my humble opinion, all the actions mentioned in these verses shall be carried out by mourners themselves, i.e.,
mourners are the agents/subjects of these verbs. The only honorific form we have here is spur referring to btsan po’s body
around which mourners should gather and feast.
1
For the valency of the OT verb ’tshog (XABS YALLAT “X gathers around Y”), compare:
myi chig la tshogs dgu tshogs na // zu tse lte bu su ga la yaṅ myed do (PT 1287:101)
“If nine assemblies gathered around one man, did at least one of them had a one like Zu tse?”
For another verb with similar semantics and argument structure compare ’khor as in:
bdag tshe ’phos pa’i rus bu tshal na ’dug pa la pha mas bskor te (Mdzaṅs blun; trslr. after HAHN 1996:191, ll.18-9)
“Parents, having gathered around bones of mine (lit. of the deceased me), that lie in the grove, [...]”.
2
Following ZEISLER (2011:163ff.), I read the last syllable of this verse as rlom; for details on ’phrog rlom see s.v.
3
I take ALLAT once more to have a partitive function.
4
The underlying structure of the compound rgya rje sa is assumed to have been *[rgya’i rje]’i sa.
 222

*“civility, lord’s convention, savoir-vivre, courtesy”.1 The last step in the proposed semantic
development was accompanied by the sound change rj- > ź-, that could have come to being by
analogy with źe “1inclination, affection, heart, mind; volition” (J:477b), yielding źe sa “reverence,
respect, civility, politeness” (J:477b) - a common appellation for the so-called honorific language (cf.
CDTD:7185).2

[T] [myi btsun son pa ʼi rnams]S / [rje sa ʼi gos gyon źiṅ / [[skyes pa ched po rnams] [btsun ba ʼi rnam (40) pa
yaṅ de nas]APP]PRED byuṅ ba]PRED yin no // (PT 1286:39-40)
“Living (son pa) noble people are those who, while wearing courtly garments3, appeared from among
great men, [from] the class of noble ones.”

53 rjes ’baṅs
[V] rjes ’paṅs (Or.15000/220v:3; devoicing)
WTS.21:411a: Anhänger und Untertan.
DTH:147: sujet; TLTD.2:102: the lord and people; RICHARDSON.1953:4: follower-subject; BECKWITH.1977:210: lord emperor (for
btsan po rjes ’baṅs - JB); TAUBE.1980:152b: Untertan, Diener; RICHARDSON.1985:165: follower, subject; LI/COBLIN:399: follower
and subject; HELLER.1994:13: subjects; PETECH.1994:289: nobles and subjects; RICHARDSON.1998d:194: the ruler and people (rjes
’baṅs for rje ’baṅs?); subjects; BECKWITH/WALTER.2010:540: followers and subjects; HILL.2010c:248: follower and subject;
DOTSON.2013a:281: vassal.4

[E] *rje sa’i ’baṅs “subject of lord’s place”

[M] (N) courtier (H)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[NPOSS+N]+N]
[R] rje blas / rje blon / rje dbyal / rje sa / skya sa / sṅo sa
[A] Context. Since the textual evidence for rjes ’baṅs that is at our disposal does not allow us to
make any definite conclusions about its semantics we should begin with the contextual analysis of
its occurrences. The compound appears in the following phrases:
1
after the word btsan po: btsan po rjes ’baṅs (PT 1287:220, 351, 434);
2
after a proper name: maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ rjes ’baṅs (PT 1287:307); bod rjes ’baṅs (ITJ 751:39r4, 40r1);
3
after źaṅ: źaṅ rjes ’baṅs (Tu 14:10-1; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:43);
4
determining lugs: rjes ’baṅs kyi lugs (Źwa W 21-2).
Comparing the phrases that are juxtaposed in the Źwa inscription, i.e. rjes ’baṅs kyi lugs and dge sloṅ gi
tshul, we can infer that rjes ’baṅs is a noun denoting human beings. This assumption is confirmed by
the evidence from the Ldan ma inscription 2, where rjes ’baṅs are said to be brought to deliverance.
Additional information can be gathered from Or.15000/220 and Tu 14; in both texts honorific terms
(thugs bde and thugs, respectively) are used with regard to rjes ’baṅs. Concerning the use of

1
For an analogical semantic development compare Eng. courtesy and courteous < court (KLEIN 1966:363a).
2
Currently the onset rj- has exactly the same pronunciation as ź- at least in four modern dialects: Leh, Kardze, Labrang,
and Nako ([ʒ] in Leh and [ʑ] in the remaining dialects, cf. CDTD). Hence, the shift from rje sa to źe sa might have been
triggered by a regular sound change.
As far as I was able to ascertain, the compound źe sa is not attested in OT sources.
3
Lit. “garments of the lord’s place” or “garment of what is lordly”.
4
SCHROETER glosses rjes ’baṅ as “following, that which follows immediately after” (335b). It is apparent, however, that the
compound rjes ’braṅ is meant here instead.
 223

honorifics, we should examine closer phrases that occur in apposition with the term btsan po in OT
documents. To wit, four groups can be discerned:
1
honorific kinship terms: e.g. btsan po sras, btsan po yab, btsan po yab myes,etc. (for the complete
list see s.v. rje dbyal);
2
proper names of btsan pos, e.g.: btsan po khri gtsug lde brtsan (PT 16:28v2), btsan po dri gum (PT
1287:19), btsan po khri sroṅ lde brtsan (’Phyoṅ 5), btsan po khri sroṅ lde brtsan (Rkoṅ 1);
3
combination of 1 and 2, e.g.: btsan po gcen sroṅ brtsan daṅ gcuṅ btsan sroṅ (PT 1288:8), btsan po
myes khri sroṅ rtsan (PT 1288:17), btsan pho sras khri ’dus sroṅ (ITJ 750:67), btsan po gcen ña khyi
(Rkoṅ 5), btsan po lha sras khri sroṅ lde brtsan (Rkoṅ 12);
4
religious title + proper name: btsan po byaṅ cub sems dpa’ khri sroṅ lde btsan (Brag A 1).
All the expressions consist of the title btsan po and an appositional phrase. The latter one, if it is not
a proper name, is either an honorific term or a religious title (byaṅ cub sems dpa’) that involves high
esteem for the respective person. Thus, the syntactic structure of the phrases here can be sketched
as follows: ‘btsan po + APPH (+ PROPER NAME)’.

There is, however, still another group of phrases with a different underlying structure additionally
confirmed in other OT records. In this group we can differentiate between expressions based on
conjunction or determination:
Conjunction:
1
btsan poCOM FUNCTION: btsan po rje blon (Skar 54-5) vs. btsan po yab sras daṅ rje blon gun (Bsam 18-20);
Determination:
1
btsan po gduṅ rabs rgyud (Źwa W 32) vs. btsan po ’i gduṅ rab (PT 1038:5);
2
btsan po sku yon (Lcaṅ S 14) vs. lha sras khri gtsug lde brtsan gyi sku yon (PT 999:1), btsan po khri
gtsug lde brtsan gyi sku yon (Lcaṅ S 21-2), btshan po’i sku yon (Ldan.2 12);
3
btsan po źa sṅa (PT 1287:266) vs. btsan po’i źa sṅa (PT 1287:386-7; Źol N 21);
4
btsan po spyan sṅa (PT 1287:428) vs. btsan poe spyan sṅa (ITJ 750:271-2, 286);
5
btsan po bka’ (ITJ 750:299, 305) vs. btsan po’i bka’ (Lcaṅ S 3-4, 24);
6
btsan po pho braṅ (ITJ 750:168) vs. btsan po’i pho braṅ (ITJ 750:133, 172, 180; Skar 45, 47).

On account of the fact that the compound rjes ’baṅs occurs not only in apposition to the term btsan
po but also following other lexemes, we can state that its referent is not the ruler himself. We
observe further that the lexemes forming the heads of the determinative phrases listed above are all
honorifics1. It has already been mentioned that rjes ’baṅs seems to have been an honorific term too
due to its co-occurrence with thugs bde and thugs. In conclusion to this part of the analysis two
statements can be made: 1rjes ’baṅs forms the head of a determinative phrase when following the
word btsan po, thus, *btsan po’i rjes ’baṅs; 2it is an honorific term.

1
For the usage of honorific register in conjunction with pho braṅ compare: dgun pho braṅ śaṅs gyi rab ka tsal du gśegs (ITJ
750:58) or dgun pho braṅ mar gyi tsal ka na bźugs (ITJ 750:125-6). In both sentences honorific verbs (gśegs, bźugs) are used.
 224

Morphology. Since *rjes in its known meanings does not seem to possess any honorific value, I
propose to analyse the first syllable of the compound under consideration as a result of clipping: *rje
sa > rjes- (for details see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan). The preservation of the coda -s in
the first syllable (instead of reducing rje sa to *rje-) could have been motivated by the need to
differentiate between the underlying structures of *rje’i ’baṅs “subjects of a lord” (cf. rje gcig gi ’baṅs
in PT 126:166) or “lord and subjects” (cf. rje daṅ ’baṅs in PT 1060:48) and *rje sa’i ’baṅs, lit. *“subjects
of lord’s place”.1 For the assumed underlying structure *rje sa’i ’baṅs compare rje sa’i gos (PT 1286:39)
“courtly garment” (see s.v. rje sa). The former phrase, in my opinion, underwent semantic
development through *”courtly subject” (an honorific of ’baṅs) to *“courtier”. Its honorific value
derives from the original rje sa for which see s.v.2 Ldan ma inscription mentions monks (dge sloṅ) and
a queen (jo mo) as forming rjes ’baṅs - both without doubt deserved a respectful treatment. It is
interesting in this context to look closer at the information contained in ITJ 751 where courtiers (rjes
’baṅs) are mentioned as hazarding the chab srid. From this we could infer that, first, they constituted
an influential group with pretentions to royal power, and, secondly, they were involved in court
intrigues.3

[T] ʼuṅ gi rjes laʼ // (220) btsan po rjes ʼbaṅs dgyes skyems ston mo gsol lo // (PT 1287:219-20)
“Thereafter, btsan po’s courtiers were offered delicacies and beverage, a feast.”
ʼuṅ gi ʼog du btsan po sroṅ brtsan daṅ / maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ rjes ʼbaṅs (308) kyi bar du // khyuṅ po spuṅ sad
kyis ʼphraʼ ma bcug ste / btsan po źa sṅar / źaṅ snaṅ glo ba myi ʼdriṅ du (309) ni ʼdriṅ źes gsol to // (PT
1287:307-9)

1
Although, as far as I am aware, no other examples of rjes- < *rje sa could be adduced here from Old or Classical Tibetan
sources, compare various canonical redactions of Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa - a text written during the OT phase of the
language - in ISHIKAWA 1990:3, ll.37, 38, where we read źes and źe sa side by side in one sentence, whereas Tabo version has
rje s[...] (the whole word is not preserved due to the text damage) for the first and rje sa for the second occurrence; see the
reproduction and transliteration of the Tabo text in PANGLUNG 1994, p.166, folio 1r:2, 3, and p.169.
2
With regard to the interpretation proposed by LI and COBLIN (1987:399) and maintained in BECKWITH and WALTER
(2010:540) as well as in HILL (2010c:248; see the Lexicographic section), two objections could be made: 1It does not explain
the honorific character of the compound; 2The meaning *”follower” as assumed for rjes is, to my knowlkedge, not attested
in OT records. The compound rjes ’braṅ “follower”, which one could argue to have underlain rjes ’baṅs (< *rjes ’braṅ
daṅ ’baṅs), is known only from later CT sources.
3
Although in both cases the syntax of the passages from ITJ 751 is highly distorted and the translations presented in the
Text section should be treated merely as tentative. The second fragment from ITJ 751 quoted in the Text section is
preceded directly by the following phrase:
thugs kyi (40r1) // ’phrin las su mdzad pa daṅ / blon chen po źaṅ khri sum rje daṅ / chen po źaṅ lha bzaṅ gis rgya drug gi g.yul chen
po bzlog pa las stsogs pha (ITJ 751:39v4-40r1)
“those ?accomplishing in deeds? of mind, grand councillor Źaṅ khri sum rje, and grand [councillor] Źaṅ lha bzaṅ, who
repulsed the great armies of the enemies, Chinese and Turks, among others”
This phrase stands in ABS and is followed by the phrase bod rjes ’baṅs kyis from which fact one could infer that the latter is
to be treated as an apposition to the phrase just quoted, i.e. grand councillors, among others, were also considered as
belonging to rjes ’baṅs. However, the highly distorted syntax of the whole text (PT 16 & ITJ 751) as well as the inappropriate
usage of some of the crucial administrative terms, do not allow for any far-reaching conclusions.
rjes ’baṅs must not be confused with CT rje ’baṅs “the king and his subjects” (D:464a), which is either a new and later
formation or a folk etymology of the OT rjes ’baṅs with simultaneous semantic change involved. rje ’baṅs is attested, for
instance, in Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston:
de nas bran ka dpal gyi yon tan gyis // sñi ba bsam por sprul nas rje ’baṅs bsdums (432-3, fols.140a-b; trslr. after DOTSON
2012:162)
“Thereafter, Bran ka dpal gyi yon tan manifested as Sñi ba bsam [and] then reconciled lords and subjects.”
Further occurrences of this compound can be found in Bka’ ’gyur and Bstan ’gyur (see RKTS).
 225

“Thereafter, Khyuṅ po spuṅ sad, having caused discord (lit. caused aspersions) between btsan po
Sroṅ brtsan and [his] courtier Maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ, asked in the presence [of] btsan po ’Is Źaṅ snaṅ
loyal or disloyal?’”
ʼuṅ nas btsan po (350) khri lde gtsug brtsan gyi źa sṅar // phaṅ daṅ gi khaṅ mo cher // kag la boṅ gi blon po /
dwan cuṅ kog / (351) pyag ʼtshal ba ʼi tshe // btsan po rjes ʼbaṅs kyis mgur blaṅs pa ʼi tshig la // (PT
1287:349-51)
“Thereafter, when in the presence of btsan po Khri lde gtsug brtsan, in ?a large house? of Phaṅ daṅ,
Dwan cuṅ kog, the councillor of Kag la boṅ, paid homage, btsan po’s courtier sang in these words:
[...].”
ʼuṅ gi rjes la // btsan po rjes ʼbaṅs dgyes skyems ston mo gsol te / (435) btsan po khri sroṅ brtsan gyis mgur
blaṅs pa // (PT 1287:434-5)
“Thereafter, having offered delicacies and beverage, a feast, [for] btsan po[’s] courtiers, btsan po Khri
sroṅ brtsan sang a song.”
bod rjes ’baṅs kyis chab srid la sdo ba’i slad du dbugs chags la gnad pa’i sems (39v1) kyis mphro btod ciṅ rma
phruṅ (read: phyuṅ ?) ṅo ’tsal / rdul tsam ma lus phar byaṅ bar smon lam gsol te / khar tsan khrom kyis yon
dbul ba la de ga g.yu tshal [gtsigs kyi gtsug lag khaṅ]APP du kwa cu khrom chen (39v2) po nas smon lam du gsol
ba (ITJ 751:39r4-39v2)
“Due to the fact that courtiers of Tibet hazarded the chab srid, whatever ?continuation? is caused
and wounds brought about with the mind that hurts animate beings, having prayed that [the mind]
is purified so that no more dust remains, [the following] request in [form of] a prayer from the great
khrom [of] Kwa cu is offered at De ga g.yu tshal, the temple of the edict, for donations that have been
given by the khrom [of] Khar tsam.”
bod rjes ’baṅs kyis chab srid la sdo ba’i slad (40r2) du dgra la gnad pa’i śugs kyis bgyis so ’tsal bag tsam ma lus
par byaṅ bar smon lam du gsol te // (ITJ 751:40r1-2)
“On account of the fact that courtiers of Tibet hazarded the chab srid, [one] prayed that whatever is
done by the power which hurts enemies, [it] is purified so that not even a bit remains.”
rjes ’paṅs thugs bde źiṅ (Or.15000/220:v3)
“Courtiers are happy.”
slad na khrom ba skyod (read: bskyod) par chad na yaṅ źaṅ rjes (11) ’baṅs gis śaṅ thugsla thogs śig (Tu 14:10-
1; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:43a)
“Later, when it is decided that [you] arrive [at] khrom, the courtiers [of] źaṅ shall keep śaṅ in [their]
minds.”
spre’u gi lo’i dbyar / (2) mtsan (read: btsan) po khri sde sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ la / (3) dg’e (sic!) sloṅ chos daṅ
chab srid kyi bka’ chen po la btags ste / (4) gser gyi bku rgyal man cad kyi thabs rtsal (read: stsal) / (5) jo mo
mchims lta (read: (b)za?) legs mo brtsan la rtsogs (read: stsogs) pa / (6) rjes ’baṅs maṅ mo źig thar par bkyel
(read: bskyel?) (Ldan.2 1-6; trslr. after HELLER 1994:13)
“In the summer of the monkey year, during the life of btsan po Khri sde sroṅ brtsan, many courtiers,
monks who, having engaged in great decisions concerning (lit. of) religion and the state, were given
ranks up to nobility of golden [letter] [and] the queen Legs mo brtsan, a lady from Mchims[-clan],
among others, were brought to deliverance.”
ban de ñid rjes ’baṅs kyi (22) lugs daṅ / dge sloṅ gi tshul ’dzin ciṅ / bka drin myi nod par gsol gyis (23) kyaṅ /
źo śa’i lan / bka drin sbyin pa’i chos yin bas // ṅa’i bkas / (Źwa W 21-3)
 226

“Even though ban de himself requested to adhere (lit. hold) to the manner of courtiers as well as to
the way of a monk and to not receive any favour, because the recompense for the źo śa is the custom
of bestowing a favour, by my order [this was decided]: [...].”1

54 ñam noṅs
BYD:178a: ṅo tsha med pa’i bya ba ṅan pa byed pa (s.v. ñam noṅsu gyurd); p.178b: khams dwaṅs par ’gro ba (s.v. ñams noṅs).
WTS.21:445b: Ableben, Sterben.
LALOU.1952:359: une réception (nods) de deuil (reads ñam nods - JB); TLTD.3:134a: out of health; TAKEUCHI.1998.2:115: ill;
UEBACH.2014:99: a man passed-away; a corpse; p.100: [the ceremony] of the passing away; p.106: ñams(sic!)-noṅs is not an
honorific term but a term of euphemistic usage, denoting the passing away of men.

[S] *ñams la noṅs “to be gone in heart”

[E] *ñams la noṅs pa “one gone in heart”
[M] (N) 1mourner; 2afflicted (one)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTAD-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[R] noṅs myig / noṅs yo
[A] The morphological similarity of the compound under consideration to the honorific thugs noṅs
that is attested in the ST Treaty and the Źwa inscriptions necessitates the analysis of the
corresponding passages:
phan tshun (32) thugs noṅs byuṅ ṅo chog na // dgyes snaṅ dag kyaṅ ma chad par bsris te // (ST Treaty E
31-2)
“In those [cases] (ṅo chog na) where mutual thugs noṅs arose, [they] retained unceasingly the
pretence of happiness.”

dbon źaṅ mold ba’i rjes kyaṅ tshad ma phyin par / (47) thugs noṅs kyis brtsal te // bar gyi gcugs rñiṅ pa
phran tshegs kyi / (48) dogs phrig gis // legs pa chen po’i sku don // phyi lcigs śe dag du gyur (49) nas //
(ST Treaty E 46-9)
“Even after the consultations between the nephew and the uncle, having been stirred up by thugs
noṅs so that no goals (tshad) were arrived at, due to fear and suspicion [arisen from] (lit. of) the
minor, old animosities between [them], the aim of great good became a mere eventuality.”

phyis yab daṅ (10) gcen thugs noṅs brtud par byuṅ ba’i rjes // ṅa chab srid (11) ma bźes pa’i skabsu kha
cig phan phun daṅ / gdon stson pa dag (12) yod pa yaṅ / ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzin kyis ñam drod zin nas / dpend
(13) pa’i bka gros gsold / (Źwa W 9-13)
“Later on, as it happened that [my] father and elder brother had reconciled (lit. joined [their]
thugs noṅs) [and] before I received chab srid (lit. at the time when I did not receive chab srid), ban
de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin took the initiative against (yaṅ) those who caused dissension and demons and
gave beneficial advices.”2

1
Another occurrence of rjes ’baṅs is recorded in Or.15000/483:1 but due to the text damage only the phrase mched daṅ
rjes ’baṅs phyogsu (trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:203, text 599) “to [my] brother and courtiers“ can be read. Whether rje ’paṅs
that can be seen on the recto side of Or.15000/220, l.5, should be read as *rjes ’paṅs remains unclear.
2
The authors of the previous translations passed over in silence the syntactic position of the phrase kha cig phan phun daṅ
/ gdon stson pa dag yod pa yaṅ rendering it as an independent clause “there was some confusion and a contention of evil
 227

In all three fragments, honorific speech is applied with reference to Chinese and Tibetan rulers (ST
Treaty) or to father and elder brother of a btsan po (Źwa). This observation confirms our assumption
that thugs noṅs belongs to the honorific register.

Now, if we compare the above passages with the ones containing the compound ñam noṅs, we notice
that none of the verbal phrases is repeated in any of them, cf.:
thugs noṅs byuṅ “thugs noṅs appears” ñam noṅs lags “to be ñam noṅs”
thugs noṅs brtud “to join thugs noṅs” ñam noṅs mdzad “to do ñam noṅs”
thugs noṅs kyis brtsal “to stir up by thugs noṅs” ñam noṅsu gyurd “to become ñam noṅs”
The only general linguistic remark concerning the two lexemes one could make is that both, thugs
noṅs and ñam noṅs, are nouns. It appears that thugs noṅs was an abstract noun1 whereas ñam noṅs
denoted a human being.

Unfortunately, the contextual analysis of the occurrences of ñam noṅs is hampered either by the
fragmentary character of the texts or by the co-occurrence of further unknown lexemes. In PT 1042
we read that a human being (źaṅ lon) was sent to be a ñam noṅs2. In Or.15000/37 another human
being (*pha* rgan) became ñam noṅs, whereas in the Khotanese plate ñam noṅs is determined by a
phrase that refers to a human being but as a direct object of the verb mdzad “to act” ñam noṅs could
theoretically also denote a human being.3 As UEBACH rightly observes, the sentence from
Or.15000/37 is paralleled by the following passage:
ma rgan mo gum na’ ru s[bu] (read: rus bu) yaṅ ’khyam[...] (Or.15000/248:4; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1998.2:103, text 314)
“When the old mother died, also [her] remains disintegrated [...]”4

spirits” (RICHARDSON 1985:47) or “there were also some certain individuals who stirred up dissention and demons”
(LI/COBLIN:276). The nominalisation of the verb yod and the particle yaṅ make it clear that it is an NP within a greater
construction. This construction is the clause [kha cig phan phun daṅ / gdon stson pa dag yod pa yaṅ]*O / [ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzin kyis]A
[ñam drod]O zin nas with two obligatory arguments of the verb zin: agent ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzin and direct object ñam drod. The
action expressed by ñam drod zin is directed against kha cig phan phun daṅ / gdon stson pa dag yod pa yaṅ which acquires the
semantic role of PATIENT whereas the first object ñam drod should be understood as THEME. I argue that the particle yaṅ ~
kyaṅ marked in OT an additional object in derived constructions of extended transitive. A further example can be quoted:
[myaṅ gi gtsigs kyaṅ]*O [zur (58) phyuṅ]O brnan bskyed de gnaṅ ṅo // (Źwa W 57-8)
“An edict for (lit. of) Myaṅ, having been added an appendix, is granted.”
In some cases, this construction has subsequently led to incorporation of objects of TR and subjects of INTR verbs - a
phenomenon well known from CT literature. On incorporation as a linguistic process see MITHUN 1984 & 2000.
1
From the inscriptions we gather that the existence of thugs noṅs was a hindrance to mutual relations between two
countries or between relatives.
2
UEBACH oversees in her translation the verb lags, cf.: “If a źaṅ-lon [councillor] had been sent to mDo-smad to [the
ceremony of] somebody (or: some men) who had passed away...” (ibid., p.99). Unother problem is her rendering of the
inessive particle na as directional “to”. lags as an existential verb “to be (somewhere)” needs a predicate in inessive, thus
my rendering of mdo smad na ñam noṅs lags as “to be a ñam noṅs in Mdo smad”.
3
As already demonstrated elsewhere (see s.v. rje blas), the construction ’OFFICIAL TITLEGEN FUNCTION byed/bgyid/mdzad’ should
be interpreted as “sb. acts as FUNCTION for OFFICIAL TITLE”; OFFICIAL TITLE and FUNCTION have here human being referents. Cf.:
ʼgreṅ dud gñis kyi rje daṅ bdag mdzad pa ʼi gtsug lag chen po (PT 1287:367)
“great principles of a one who functioned as a lord and master of both, men and animals”
4
The translation of ’khyam[...] as “to disperse, disintegrate” is only tentative. It seems that *rus bu ’khyam was an idiomatic
expression. The verb ’khyam is attested dialectally as intransitive (cf. CDTD.V:125), mainly controllable, although non-
controllable in Kargil for which dialect it is glossed with “to loiter, to get wasted (of food, by not eating it), to have
abundantly” (ibid.). Since remains or bones cannot wander around (this meaning is always combined with a HUMAN BEING
subject), I understand ’khyam in the above passages as an ncA verb with rus bu being its subject. rus bu ma khyams is glossed
 228

The following juxtaposition demonstrates the structural parallelism of the single clauses:
[ma rgan mo]S gum na’
[bdagi ’pha rgan]S ñam noṅsu gyurd na
Both are also followed by a similar construction:
*rus* bu yaṅ ’khyam
rus bu ma khyams
Two significant differences should, however, be noticed. First of all, the negation of khyams in the
second example which follows the expression ñam noṅsu gyurd. Secondly, should ñam noṅsu gyurd be
a synonym of gum why is it used in an unmarked sentence? We observe, namely that ñam noṅs was a
subject and an object of honorific verbs, lags and mdzad respectively, in two other passages. Lastly,
one should not pass over in silence the fact that the texts of both documents are highly fragmentary
and we do not even know to whom the remains mentioned in the second passage belonged.

Due to the scarce information we receive from the texts themselves, we are left with the
morphological analysis and some educated guesses. noṅs is not listed in Mahāvyutpatti. It is found in
later Tibetan-Sanskrit lexicographic sources glossed with “1atyaya; 2guṇagoṣa” (LCh:451b-c). The
rendering noṅs for the original atyaya stems from the translation of Śāntideva’s Bodhicaryāvatāra
(I.29 & 66; accessed via Bibliotheca Polyglotta1), a text translated into Tibetan for the first time in
the 9th century. atyaya is explained as “sin” (Edg:10b), “passing, lapse, passage; passing away,
perishing, death; danger, risk, evil, suffering; transgression, guilt, vice; getting at, attacking;
overcoming, mastering (mentally)” (MW:17a), “1Vorübergang, das Verstreichen; 2das zu-Grunde-
Gehen, das auf-den-Lauf-Gehen, das in-Gefahr-Gerathen; 3Leiden, Beschwerden; 4Versehen,
Vergehen; 5das Ueberschreiten; 6Angriff; 7das Ergründen” (Bö.1:110b).

I assume that the honorific register of noṅs (only in one particular meaning!), observed already in OT
texts and preserved in modern dialects (CDTD.V:719), came from its application instead of a taboo
word TO DIE when referring to a person of a higher social position. Compare in this respect the well
known expression dguṅ du gśegs for btsan po’s passing away.

In the light of the equation noṅs = atyaya and the fact that the latter term is derived from Skt. verb
ati-√i2 which itself comes from √i “to go, walk” (MW:163c), worth mentioning is here the Lepcha
verb nóṅ “1to go, to go away, to go forth, to proceed” (MG:200a; cf. also PLAISIER 2006:227). Hence, I
propose to reconstruct the original verb as *noṅ “to go, to pass”. Its V2 stem noṅs acquired special
resultative meaning “to pass away, to die” < “to be gone” and became an honorific only with

in BYD with “rus pa ma ’thor ba’i don” (533a). UEBACH, who renders *rus bu ’khyam with “bone relics being scattered”,
concludes, in my opinion prematurely, that the phrase proves cremation practices among Tibetans (ibid., p.106). In fact, it
could be merely a metaphor expressing transitoriness. Thus, rus bu ’khyam, lit. “remains disperse”, could just mean “to pass
away”.
1
http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=fulltext&view=fulltext&vid=24; 18.03.2015.
2
Skt. “to pass, elapse, pass over, overflow; to pass on; to get over; to pass through; to defer; to enter; to overcome,
overtake, outdo; to pass by, neglect; to overstep, violate; to be redundant; to die” (MW:16b).
 229

reference to the Tibetan royal family.1 Thus, it neatly corresponded with the usage of gśegs
“resp[ectful] to go, to go away” (J:565b) in dguṅ du gśegs.

Keeping in mind the fact that PT 1042 contains a description of a funeral ritual, I propose the
following reconstruction of ñam noṅs: *ñams la noṅs pa “(one) gone in heart”2, i.e. “a mourner”, for
which compare Bathang sems nad “mourning” (CDTD:8817) and Chiktan noṅs pa “dead person (h)”
(CDTD:4597). I tentatively consider ñam noṅs in Or.15000/37 as attesting to a further semantic
development along the line: “griever” > “grieved (one)” > “afflicted; (terminally) ill”. The latter shift
can be supported by the unmarked character of the compound in Or.15000/37 as already mentioned
earlier.

[T] 1 źaṅ lon źig mdo smad na ñam noṅs lags / (141) par btaṅ naʼ // phaṅs cha ri gaṅ du gśegs kar gsol / (PT
1042:140-1)
“When [they] had sent an aristocrat to be a mourner in Mdo smad, [they] offered items of archery
that should go to the mortuary.”
ched po blon rgyal bzaṅ gyi ñam noṅs mdzad pa’i bag tsas (= CT bag tshos?) gnyis gyi gla (Khotanese Plate
206:r1; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:115, text 358)
“the wage of two bag tsas for (lit. of) the one that acted as a mourner for (lit. of) the grand Blon rgyal
bzaṅ.”3
2
bdagi ’pha (read: pha) rgan ñam noṅsu gyurd na rus bu ma khyams pa tsham sñan [sñuṅ] [---]
(Or.15000/37:r7)
“When my old father became afflicted, around the time before [his?] remains disintegrated (i.e.,
before he passed away) [...].”4

55 ñiṅ rim
BYD:181a: rgyal po’am thog la’aṅ.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:86n318: ñug rum yin nam sñam.
DTH:195: le roi, le sommet; UEBACH.2012:61n41: Nying-rim (reads as an PN - JB); DOTSON.2013a:313: of inner circle.

[S] *ñiṅ gi rim pa “a place in a row of the internal order”

[E] *ñiṅ gi rim pa “having a place in a row of the internal order”
[M] (A) of internal order
SEM
[C] proper exocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NEXPL+N]
[R] stod rims
[A] We can determine the meaning of ñiṅ- in ñiṅ rim by comparing the compound with some well
known CT formations: ñiṅ ’khrul “’khrul ba’i naṅ gi ’khrul ba” (BTC:951b); ñiṅ sprul “or gsum sprul, an

1
For other meanings of noṅs that derive from the same original *“to go, to pass” see s.vv. noṅs myig and noṅs yo.
2
The ambiguity concerning the coda of ñam(s), i.e. whether it should be written with or without -s (see, e.g., J:185b), seems
to be present already in OT documents for we find ñams chuṅ (PT 1051:20), ñams cuṅ (ITJ 738:3v14) beside ñam chuṅ (PT
1287:251) and ñam che (ITJ 740:209). In case of ñam noṅs, the elision of the word internal -s could have additionally been
triggered by its position between two nasal sounds: -s > Ø / -m_σn-.
3
The genitive in blon rgyal bzaṅ gyi is understood here as genitivus commodi and the whole phrase should be read “the one
that acted as a mourner in the name of the grand Blon rgyal bzaṅ”. This reading points to an institutionalised function of a
mourner that could be hired (cf. here the term gla “wage”) to attend a mourning ceremony.
For a different understanding of the passage cf. HOERNLE 1916:402-3, WTS.21:445, s.v. ñam noṅs, and UEBACH 2014:100.
4
For a different translation see UEBACH 2014:99.
 230

em[anation] of the third degree”(J:336b), “sprul pa’i yaṅ sprul” (BTC:951b); ñiṅ bran “bran g.yog gi
bran g.yog gam. bran g.yog tha ma” (BTC:951b); ñiṅ tsha “bu yi bu” (GC:309a); ñiṅ g.yog “servant of
servant’s servant” (J:519b), “g.yog po’i g.yog po” (BTC:952a); ñiṅ lag “a category not familiar to us;
gen[erally] mentioned together with yan lag; it might be translated by: members of a second order,
parts of the yan lag. In C[entral Tibet]: inner parts of the body, [as] opp[osed to] to outer” (J:187b),
“1minor or secondary members of the body, such as the forehead, nose, chin, fingers, ear, eyes, etc.;
2
a division, section, part, subdivision” (D:481b), “yan lag gi yan lag” (GC:309a), “pratyaṅga” (Mvy:299,
4037, 5199; ñiṅ log (sic!) 3929); ñiṅ slob “a pupil’s pupil” (D:482a), “slob ma’i slob ma” (BTC:952a). A
common semantic trait of ñiṅ- in all these compounds is that it denotes items of secondary order
that belong to the respective category, e.g. limbs, pupils, servants, etc.1 Thus, we can assume that ñiṅ
rim referred to rim pa, “1series, succession; 2the place in a row or file, constituent part or member of
a series; 3order, method” (J:530a), of secondary or minor importance.

ñiṅ in OT sources. I was able to acertain a few more occurrences of ñiṅ in OT documents, all of which
come from the same text and appear in one sentence2:
myiṅ po dral po byaṅ ka snam bźi nas / śa ñiṅ la ñiṅ bgal dgo ñiṅ la (72) ñiṅ bgalde byon na / lcham skyi
nam ñag cig gyis (PT 1068:71-2)
“When sister’s brother, having bgal the ñiṅ for a stag-ñiṅ, having bgal the ñiṅ for an antelope-ñiṅ,
arrived from Byaṅ ka snam bźi, sister Skyi nam ñag [said:]”
Although the single phrases remain obscure hampering our understanding of the passage as a
whole, we learn that the brother, who earlier in the story went for hunting stags and antelopes (śa
bśor dgo ’drim du bźud, l.67), having loaded (bgal for bkal?) ñiṅ for stag- and antelope-ñiṅ, comes back.

Now, ñiṅ is attested in some further CT compounds where it seems to denote the most internal parts
of an object, so to say, its essence, cf.: ñiṅ khu “1the juice, essence of any substance; the pith or sñiṅ
(heart, soul); 2spirit (of wine)” (D:481b), “maṇḍa” (Mvy:5683; s.v. sarpir-maṇḍa = mar gyi (s)ñiṅ khu);
ñiṅ sgo phugs “the private or inner (hidden) door of a castle or palace” (D:481b); ñiṅ mtshams “’brel
ba’i mtshams sam tshigs” (BTC:951b)3; ñiṅ śa “raṅ śa’am źe du’i śa’aṅ zer” (GC:309a), “one’s own

1
It is possible that in some of the just quoted compounds ñiṅ- should actually be traced back to *ñiṅ lag.
As opposed to these, one finds also respective terms denoting objects of higher or primary order, e.g.: yaṅ sprul
“emanation of the second degree, i.e. one emanation going forth from another” (J:336b); yaṅ g.yog “servant’s servant”
(J:519b); yan lag “1member, limb; 2branch of a river, branch of a tree; 3branch, section, separate part, a particular head,
point, thought, in a treatise” (J:507a).
2
ñiṅ is glossed as “Ilacet, ceps; IIdiviser, séparer” (Desg:376a), “1raṅ; 2lhag par ram yaṅ dgos” (BTC:951b); “1ñe du’i miṅ daṅ.
2
raṅ daṅ. 3yaṅ źes pa’i don la ’jug ste” (DSM:212a), “yaṅ ṅam raṅ” (BYD:180b). For ñiṅ źiṅ in PT 1194:32 see s.v. ñin źiṅ.
3
Cf. also ñiṅ mtshams sbyor ba “to be reborn, to be transmigrated in regular routine; the re-appearing of the soul after
death in one of the four forms of birth, i.e., the linking of the limits of existence” (D:481b). The compound is attested
already in OT sources in ’Phags pa sa lu’i ljaṅ pa źes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo (Skt. Śālistamba-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra), texts
691:4 and 694:1 transliterated in TAKEUCHI 1998.2:240.
 231

flesh” (D:482a).1 Of special interest is here the compound ñiṅ mtshams that reminds one of bar
mtshams of evidently analogical structure.

An obvious cognate of the analysed ñiṅ is sñiṅ “the heart” (J:197b), i.e., the most internal, essential
part of a thing. ñiṅ was apparently an antonym of yan *”outer part” - a cognate of CT yan pa “free,
vacant, unoccupied, having no owner, of places and things that are common property, like the air,
rocks and stones etc.” (J:506b). For the relation yan *”outer part” vs. ñiṅ *”inner part” compare the
CT triplet phyi ~ bar ~ naṅ and the above mentioned pair ñiṅ mtshams ~ bar mtshams. From this
comparison we learn about the Tibetan space ordering in the days of yore. To wit, parts of space
which one reaches as first when approaching from outside were arranged as being of primary order
(yan-), whereas those being inside the arrangement, where conceived of as being of secondary order
(ñiṅ-) but at the same time somehow more essential for its constitution.

On account of the fact that ñiṅ rim takes an attributive position in the passage from the OTC
qualifying spyan chen po, I propose to interpret it as an exocentric compound with the literal
meaning *“having the place in a row of the internal order”.2

[T] brag rtser nol thabs bkye ba ʼi tshe // ʼjaṅ maṅ po bkum nas // spyan chen (395) po ñiṅ rim daṅ / sna la
gthogs pa daṅ / dmaṅs yan chad sum brgyaʼ rtsa bcu gñis bzuṅ nas / (396) ʼjaṅ rje gol gyis kyaṅ pyag ʼtshal te
/ ʼbaṅs rnal mar bkug nas / dpyaʼ phab ste sṅa mkho bźin du (397) bkod do // (PT 1287:394-7)
“When a battle was committed at Brag rtse, [one] killed many ’Jaṅ[-people]. After [one] had seized
three hundred and twelve [prisoners of war] (grand intendants of internal order, those participating
in leadership, down to commoners), [one] gathered also as actual subjects the lord and servants of
’Jaṅ, who had paid homage. Having imposed taxes, [one] made arrangements according to what was
proper in earlier times.”

56 ñin źiṅ
[V] ñiṅ źiṅ (PT 1194:32; regressive assimilation)
BYD:181b: ñin ltar.
WTS.22:471b: am Tag, bei Tage, tagsüber (s.v. ñin).
DTH:136: le jour; THOMAS.1957:137, 139: be it day; DOTSON.2013a:276: by day.

[E] *ñin gyi źiṅ “duration of the day”

[M] (Adv) during the day, by day
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] mtshan źiṅ
[A] We find a group of phrases in OT documents, the formation of which seems to be unknown in
CT1, cf.: dgun ciṅ (ITJ 731:v2, 26), ñin źiṅ (PT 1052:r248; PT 1068:20; PT 1136:36; PT 1287:160, 162; ITJ

1
The exact semantic relationship between these and the following compounds remains to be cleared: ñiṅ grul “rigs ṅan
źig” (GC:309a), “1rigs ṅan daṅ. 2bcud ’chor ba’i miṅ ste” (DSM:212a); ñiṅ tor “ṅes par ram śin tu’am rab tu” (GC:309a), “1śin
tu daṅ. 2ṅes par daṅ. 3mtha’ gcig tu źes pa’i don te” (DSM:212b).
2
Both elements forming the compound are well attested in other similar formations in Old as well as in Classical Tibetan
literature. For this reason I do not consider it likely to be a proper name as proposed by UEBACH 2012:61n41, see the
Lexicographic section. Moreover, mentioning only one concrete person of not a very high position by name in the very
context of PT 1287 would seem at least superfluous.
 232

732; ITJ 738:3v122, 155; ITJ 739:17v7)2, phyir źiṅ (PT 1290:r1; ITJ 730:6; ITJ 733:12, 14; ITJ 734:1r17, 22,
26, 31, 38; ITJ 735:13; ITJ 738:1v15, 2v14, 3v87; Khri 4; ST Treaty E 11), dbyar ciṅ (ITJ 731:v23, 26),
mtshan źiṅ (PT 1052:r242, 248; PT 1068:20; PT 1194:33; PT 1287:161, 162; ITJ 732:24; ITJ 738:3v123, 155;
ITJ 739:17v8), slar źiṅ (ST Treaty E 12).4 Apart from their second element, they share one more
common feature: their first members are terms denoting units of time. They are either nouns
(“winter”, “summer”, “day”, “night”) or adverbs (“later”).

The alternation in the second member (ciṅ ~ źiṅ) proves that this morpheme is identical with the CT
so-called coordinative particle źiṅ/ciṅ/śiṅ on which we find an interesting note in JÄSCHKE: “it
corresponds to the English participle in ing, is used in sentences beginning with when, after, as, and
is affixed to verbal roots and adjectives [...]; fr[e]q[uent] also where coordinate ideas are in English
connected by and or but [...]; [i]t is also used like the ablative of the gerund in Latin” (140b-1a;
emphasis in original). I assume that the particle derived from the noun źiṅ “1field, ground, soil,
arable land” (J:475a; < *”an extending/broad one”) as a consequence of the following
grammaticalisation:
“field”
*“extending one”
*”duration” *“during”5 “while” (CONV)6
For the assumed semantic development of źiṅ and its subsequent grammaticalisation compare the
following passage in which the morpheme is used in two distinct functions, first as a postposition
and then as a converb:
(12) btsan po sras dbon sku tse rabs (13) re źiṅ yaṅ / zla goṅ gi bu tsha rgyud (14) ’peld las gcig / źam ’briṅ
/ (15) na naṅ kor yan cad du gźug (16) ciṅ tshal zar rtag du mchis par (17) gnaṅ ṅo // (Źol N 12-7)
“It is granted that during each generation of btsan po, son or grandson, one from among the
descendants of Zla goṅ, while being installed in the entourage up to naṅ kor, has always a meal to
eat.”

1
The only similar phrase I was able to trace in CT lexicographic sources was ñin re źiṅ gi “adj. daily” (Cs:50b), “täglich”
(Sch:189a).
2
The variant ñiṅ źiṅ attested in PT 1194:32 resulted from the regressive coda assimilation: -n > -ṅ / -i_σ-iṅ, that was
facilitated by the occurrence of the same vowel -i- in both syllables.
3
THOMAS has reconstructed this as dbyal ci[ṅ] noticing that a part of dbyal has been crossed out (1957:16, and n.13). A
comparison of this sentence with the one from v25-26 allows us to correct THOMAS’ reconstruction as dbyar ciṅ.
4
Cf. also THOMAS 1957:76.
5
The shift from *”duration” to “during” occurred via postpositional formation like *‘NPGEN źiṅINESS/TERM’, lit. “in the duration
of NP” > ‘NP źiṅ’ (compounding) “during NP”.
6
The word family of źiṅ includes in all probability also: źeṅ “1breadth, width; 2plain, surface, side” (J:478a); mjiṅ in: rtswa
mjiṅ “meadow” (J:173b); and ’jiṅ “the middle” (J:176b).
The sound change in the second syllable in the compounds of the type ‘TIME UNIT+źiṅ’ and the occurrence of the
allomorph -ciṅ as in dgun ciṅ (< *dgund ciṅ?) and dbyar ciṅ (< *dbyard ciṅ) support the hypothesis that the process of
grammaticalisation has already set in encompassing in the first phase even nominal formations.
For a similar semantic development compare thaṅ “1a plain, steppe” (J:228a; < *”extent”) and “7a moment, a little while”
(J:228b; for a detailed semantic analysis of thaṅ see s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ). The latter meaning is attested in the following phrases:
chig thaṅ “one moment” (J:228b; in Das: tshig thaṅ, 568a); bźi thaṅ “four moments” (J:228b).
 233

[T] myaṅ (160) dbaʼs mnon daṅ gsum // bro len chiṅ mkhar pyiṅ bar mchis nas // ñin źiṅ ni phag tshal gyi
śiṅ (161) khuṅ na skugso // mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ bar mchi ste // dbu sñuṅ bro mnaʼ gcod pa ʼi tshe // yar myi
ʼbaṅs (162) kyis dpyad paʼ //
myi bzaṅs ni rta bzaṅs śig //
ñin źiṅ ni phag tshal na /
mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ (163) bar mchiʼ /
dgraʼ ʼam ni zin ci ʼu
źes dpyad do // (PT 1287:159-63)
“The three, Myaṅ, Dba’s and Mnon, under oath (lit. while taking the oath) went to the fortress Pyiṅ
ba. By day, [they] were hiding in a tree hollow of a forest hideout. By night, at the time of going to
Pyiṅ ba and swearing an oath, a subject of a man from Yar, who was examining [the three men],
enquired:
‘Good men, good horses,
by day in a forest hideout,
by night going to Pyiṅ ba,
are [you] enemies or allies?’”1

57 ñe yo ba
DTH:161: délit; KAPSTEIN.2000:55: misdeed; DOTSON.2007b:6: the wicked and deceitful; DOTSON.2013a:297: wickedness and
deceit.

[S] *ñes pa daṅ yo ba “a mishap”

[E] *[ñes pa daṅ yo ba]+ba “one (actively) engaged in a mishap”
[M] (N) culprit
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] ñes dgu / noṅs yo
[A] From PT 1287:453 we learn that ñe yo ba were expected to be punished. In the relevant passage
punishments meted out to ñe yo ba are apparently contrasted with rewards bestowed on good ones
who remain loyal. Hence, ñe yo ba, being a derivative formation, should be literally understood as
referring to “those who are engaged in ñe yo”. In PT 1283:64 we read: ñes pa yon po byed byed de
“Committing constantly bad faults...”. ñes pa yon po, lit. “bad faults”, resembles semantically and
morphologically the compound *ñe yo that underlies the analysed ñe yo ba.

Still another OT formation can be quoted here in order to help us reconstruct the underlying
structure of ñe yo ba. To wit, noṅs yo (for details see s.v.), which is attested in at least two more
variants: noṅ źo and noṅs źo. We notice the alternation in the second syllable -yo ~ -źo that allows us
to juxtapose our ñe yo ba with the CT ñe źo2 which, as a matter of fact, is attested in OT texts as well,
cf.:

1
For additional comments regarding some of the phrases appearing in this passage see s.v. dgra zin.
Other OT occurrences of ñin źiṅ are listed in the Analytical section [A] above. The compound seems to be attested three
times in the canonical literature; cf. RKTS.
2
ñe źo is glossed with: “’al dal, hir, seb, se cig, gem chi nar” (YeŚes:192b), “skyon?” (SR.1:753.6), “bar chad dam skyon”
(GC:313a), “skyon cha’am bar chad” (BTC:963b), “vipat” (Negi.4:1573a), “skyon nam bar chad” (BYD:182b), “skyon cha daṅ.
bar chad. bkra mi śis pa” (DUṄDKAR:936b, s.v. ño (sic!) źo), “Fehler, Sünde, Vergehen” (Sch:190b), “damage, mishap,
accident” (J:190a), “1= phyogs ri partiality; 2mishap” (D:487a), “= skyon, = dka’ tshigs, malheur, accident” (Desg:381a), “mishap,
accident” (B:199a), “aпристрастие; partiality; бповреждение; вред; damage; внесчастный случай; accident” (R.3:255a-b),
 234

’dron po la btab na ñe źo myed ste ’oṅ (ITJ 738:1v81, trslr. after OTDO; ITJ 738:3v66, trslr. after THOMAS
1957:123)
“If [you] cast for a guest, there being no ñe źo, [he] will arrive.”

ñe źo dag myede thugs bde [źe]s thos [t]e // glo ba dga’ (3) slan cad gyaṅ ñe źo dag myed par smon to //
(Or.15000/184:r2-3)
“Having heard that there was no ñe źo [and that you] are happy, I am glad. I shall pray also later
that there is no ñe źo [to you].”1

stoṅ sde la ñe źo slad ma ni myed (Or.15000/184:r5)

“Later, there shall be no ñe źo in the thousand-district.”
In these passages, ñe źo occurs as a subject of the verb myed. From the passages quoted s.v. noṅs yo we
learn that the latter compound was used exclusively with the verb mchis.2 Thus, we can infer that
noṅs yo was the honorific equivalent of *ñe yo ~ ñe źo. The already mentioned OT phrase ñes pa yon po
and noṅs- used as an honorific classifier evidence to the fact that the first syllable of the analysed
formation should be reconstructed as *ñes-.

S.v. noṅs yo a clause is cited containing the phrase noṅs skyon mchis (ITJ 740:258-9), that, on the one
hand, parallels noṅs yo mchis and ñe źo myed, and, on the other hand, proves that the second element
of the compounds noṅs yo and *ñe yo should be understood as a noun as opposed to yon po in ñes pa
yon po.3 Thus, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of *ñe yo as*ñes pa daṅ yo ba, lit.
*“evil and crookedness”, compounded to ñes yo, *“mishap”, which is in fact documented in PT 1256,
cf.:
pho ña ’di rnams ñes yo myed par yu then (3) [d?]u [---] bar khas blaṅs pa’i myiṅ smr[a] [---] la // (PT
1256:2-3)
“a name register [of those who] guaranteed that these envoys [---] to Yu then (i.e. Khotan)
without there being any mishap”4

“1accident, mishap, disaster; 2lack, shortage” (Gs:419c), “sickness” (TLTD.3:134b, s.v. ñe śo), “sickness” (THOMAS 1957:133),
“Krankheit” (TAUBE 1980:153a).
1
Cf. noṅ źo ma (4) mchis źes thos / glo ba dga’ / (PT 1082:3-4) cited and translated s.v. noṅs yo.
2
The phrase ñe źo med par is explained in JÄSCHKE’s dictionary as “without an accident, safely” (190a). The latter meaning
seems to have been intended in all passages quoted above. DUṄDKAR glosses ñe źo med pa with “bde ba daṅ. legs pa daṅ.
skyon med pa daṅ. bkra śis pa sogs la ’jug go” (934b). Apart from skyon med pa, the remaining equivalents are positive.
3
The morpheme skyon occurs also in all Tibetan explanations of the word ñe źo, see the lexicographic glosses cited above.
4
The first letters of the third line are unfortunately partly destroyed due to the paper bend, thus hindering the reading of
the most crucial part of the clause. As regards the last part of the transliteration, we find three phrases in OT documents
involving myiṅ smra, “names, name lists, name registers” (TAKEUCHI 1995:223): myiṅ smrar bris pha (PT 1101:r3; trslr. after
TAKEUCHI 1995:221; Or.15000/326:r2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:139, text 427), myi (read: myiṅ) smra dkar chag (PT 1119:14;
trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:248), and myiṅ smra la (Khot. Pl. 206:r2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:115, text 358). The last
reconstructed syllable in our passage, la, can be barely seen; although there seems to be enough place between this letter
and smra for one open syllable, due to the lack of ra btags it does not seem to have been bris. Thus, on the evidence from the
just quoted sources I reconstruct the last part of the phrase tentatively as *myiṅ smra la. The second syllable in the third
line, which is missing from the transliteration, cannot be identified for the moment being. From the context one would
expect an intransitive verb of motion: the clause has a subject in ABS (pho ña ’di rnams) and a complement in TERM (yu then
du) that additionally is a place name. The only reading of the uncertain syllable I could propose is bsdar which is included
in SCHMIDT’s dictionary who glossed it in the phrase mdun du bsdar ba with “hoffen, vertrauen, eine Gunst erwarten” (297b).
In JÄSCHKE, however, we find mdun du bdar ba explained as “pūraskṛ (sic! read: puraskṛ - JB), to place in front; to lead; to
 235

Returning to ñe yo ba, I must admit that the elision of the word final -s in *ñes cannot, for the
moment being, be satisfactorily explained. It could be the case of folk etymology or hypercorrection
as a result of the following processes: *ñes yo > *ñes śo (partial progressive assimilation: y- > ś- / -sσ_)
> *ñe śo (elision of -s before fricative ś-: -s > Ø / _σś-)1 > ñe źo (voicing between two vowels: ś- > ź- / -
Vσ_V-) > ñe yo (folk etymology by comparison with yo ba “oblique, sloping, slanting, awry, crooked;
obliquity, slope, slant”, J:514b, or yon po as in ñes pa yon po?).2

I understand ñe yo ba literally as “those attached to a mishap”, i.e. as denoting persons that were
actively engaged in bringing about a mishap, thus the proposed rendering “culprit”.

[T] bod kyi gtsug lag bkaʼ grims ched po daṅ / blon po ʼi rim pa daṅ / che chuṅ (453) gñis kyi dbaṅ thaṅ daṅ
/ legs pa zin pa ʼi bya dgaʼ daṅ / ñe yo ba ʼi chad pa daṅ / źiṅ ʼbrog gi thul ka daṅ dor ka daṅ / sluṅs kyi go bar
bsñams (454) pa daṅ / bre pul daṅ / sraṅ la stsogs pa // bod kyi chos kyi gźuṅ bzaṅ po kun // btsan po khri
sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ las byuṅ ṅo / (PT 1287:452-4)
“The Tibetan principles - the great law, successions of councillors, prerogatives of both, great and
small ones, rewards for good ones, that adhere [to us], punishments for culprits, standardisation of
thul ka and dor ka of fields and pastures, and of distances between (lit. of) sluṅs, (weight units) bre,
phul and sraṅ among others, all the good foundations of the Tibetan customs appeared from the
reign (lit. life) of the btsan po Khri sroṅ brtsan.”

58 ñes dgu
DTH:133: criminel; les fautes; ZEISLER.2004:405: much (lit. nine) evil; evil; DOTSON.2013a:274: criminal; criminally.

[S] *ñes pa dgu “nine evils”

[E] *ñes pa dgu “of nine evils”
[M] (A) extremenly evil, malicious
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+NUM]
[R] ñe yo ba
[A] The occurrence of ñes dgu in PT 1287 attests to it as being either an adjective qualifying rjo bo
(in: rjo bo ñes dgu byed pa) or, when marked with TERM, an adverb (ñes dgur byed). The adverbial
character of ñes dgur can be easily proven by comparing the respective passage with two other
clauses from PT 1287:

appoint; show; inspect; prefer; honour” (J:269a-b, s.v. bdar ba). Thus, one could reconstruct the phrase as: *pho ña ’di rnams
ñes yo myed par yu then du bsdar bar khas blaṅs pa’i myiṅ smra “a name register [of those who] guaranteed that these envoys
led (or: were led) to Yu then without there being any mishap”.
Another occurrence of ñes yo is attested in the canonical text ’Dul ba mdo’i rnam par bśad pa by Prajñākara:
’phral du gcan gzan daṅ rkun chom la sogs pa’i ñes yo daṅ mi sprad (D 4121, ’dul ba, ru 94r4)
“[One] does not meet with ñes yo of beasts of prey or robbery.”
As this example demonstrates, in classical language ñes yo could refer to a quite broad spectrum of unfortunate incidents,
those caused intentionally by human beings as well as those brought about by animals.
1
Although THOMAS reads ñe śo’ in Or.15000/147:r4 (TLTD.2:383), TAKEUCHI (1998.2:69, text 209), and I agree with him, reads
the second syllable as śo’u; the first syllable is not visible anymore due to the paper damage.
2
Alternatively, -s could have been elided from the original *ñes yo ba yielding *ñe yo ba by analogy with the well known
expression glo ba ñe “to be loyal”. To wit, the passage from the OTC juxtaposes good citizens with those who deserve
punishment. If yo- connoted an inappropriate, queer way of behaviour, then the new formation *ñe yo ba might have been
re-interpreted as *”one of crooked loyality” < *glo ba ñe ba yo ba instead of *ñes yo.
As far as I am aware ñe yo ba in PT 1287 is the only occurrence of the form *ñe yo in OT sources. THOMAS identifies ñe so in
ñe so pa from ITN 1861:1 with ñe źo (TLTD.3:98 and 134b, s.v. ñe śo), however, it is more likely to be connected to so pa, lit.
“spotter”, although no definite statement can be made due to the damage of the woodslip.
 236

ji la yaṅ log pa gśin pyogs śe dag byed (ll.119-20);

ji la yaṅ log pa gśin pyogs ñes dgur byed (l.128);
ji la yaṅ log pa gśin pyogs mdzad (l.130).
This juxtaposition demonstrates the position of ñes dgur. In the first example the same position is
taken up by the adverb śe dag, whereas in the last clause it is left empty.1

We find an analogically formed compound in CT, namely ṅan dgu “every possible evil” (J:126a), “all
the evil, bad things (there are), every possible evil, extremely evil” (Gs:295c), which is additionally
attested in Bathang in the phrase ŋẽ̱gū lȳːtshȭː “fierce, ferocious” (CDTD:2075: < ?).

On account of the fact that the second member of the compound under consideration is a numeral
dgu “1nine; 2many” (J:84a), its first member must be interpreted as a noun and thus representing ñes
pa, “I.1evil, calamity, damage; I.2moral fault, offence, sin, crime; I.3punishment” (J:190b-1a). Since our
reconstruction yields an NP *ñes pa dgu “many evils” underlying ñes dgu2, the compound is assumed
to have been originally a possessive one “(sth.) of many evils” functioning first as an exocentric
compound but developing towards an independent lexical item already in OT - an assumption
confirmed by its adverbial usage in the second passage.3

[T] ʼuṅ ltar [ziṅ po rje stag skya bo // chos log chiṅ srid gyur pas // rjo bo ñes dguʼ byed paʼ]O // myig gis //
(125) mthoṅ yaṅ // ñes pa ʼi blo gdab du ma ʼos pa ʼi chad pa nan ches / tshig drag gis // ji ga sus kyaṅ blo
gdab / (126) ma phod do // (PT 1287:124-6)
“In this way, although it could be seen with the [naked] eye that Ziṅ po rje stag skya bo, due to
customs that reversed and srid that changed, was acting as a malicious lord, [as regards] the
punishments ?for (lit. of) those who were not suitable to gdab the blo of the evil one?4, because
[their] severity (nan) was great, no one (sus kyaṅ) dared to blo gdab (criticize?) anything (ji ga) with
harsh words.”
jo bo ziṅ po rje ṅan źan te // (128) ji la yaṅ log pa gśin pyogs ñes dgur byed pas // yul gyi srid kyaṅ dmaʼs so
// (PT 1287:127-8)
“Due to the lord Ziṅ po rje who, being mean and inferior, was maliciously making, for whatever
reasons, the wrong ones5 the good ones (lit. party of the good ones), even the srid of the country
diminished.”

1
For a similar analysis of the position and character of ñes dgur see DOTSON 2013a:327n3.
2
Cf. ṅan dgu < ṅan “1evil, mischief, misfortune” (J:126a) + dgu.
3
The same process was still productive in CT, compare phrases like chu bo gtiṅ zab po, lit. “a river of deep bottom”, in
which the nominal phrase gtiṅ zab po “deep bottom” is an attribute of chu bo. The NP gtiṅ zab po developed subsequently to
a compound gtiṅ zab with a purely adjectival meaning “deep, profound, intense” (Gs:451c).
Further compounds of the structure ‘N+NUM’ that form possessive compounds in OT are listed s.v. (rgyal) thag brgyad.
4
For the reconstructed topicalisation of chad pa in ma ʼos pa ʼi chad pa nan ches compare ma ʼos pa ʼi chad pa ni nan che ʼo (PT
1287:123).
ñes pa ʼi blo gdab du is glossed with “bei dem Versuch den Übeltäter zu beraten” in WTS.22:503a, s.v. ñes.
5
log pa, lit. “the one acting in an inverted way”.
 237

59 ltag brñan
DSM:256b: mdzaṅs spyod dam nus mthu.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:80n157: blo rtsa brtan po (reads: ltag brtan - JB); BDN:36n4: ltag brtan. rtag brtan te blo sems ʼgyur ba med
pa’i don.
DTH:130: double vue; n.1: lit. reflet de la nuque; p.195: (dos-image) double vue (s.v. ltag brñen); DOTSON.2013a:271: sagacious;
p.273: sagacity.

[E] *ltag pa brñan po “a borrowed neck”

[M] (N) support; helpfulness
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[A] Only a relatively small group of compounds is formed with the second member -brñan. From
classical as well as modern Tibetan languages we can list: skad brñan “echo” (Gs:49a); sku brñan
“statue, image (h.)” (Gs:56c); skra brñan “wig, toupee” (Gs:82a); gos brñan “a mendicant who puts on a
ragged garment; a ragged dress” (D:232b); grib brñan “grib pa’am grib nag gi gzugs brñan” (BTC:399a-
b); glog brñan Kyirong “movie, television”, Dzongkha “film, video, motion picture”, Hor, Themchen
“film” (CDTD:1436); mgo brñan “eine Maske, Larve, ein Schreckbild” (Sch:201b), “a mask, a fearful
apparition” (J:201a); sgra brñan “reflected sound, echo” (J:201a); sgron brñan “slide projector”
(Gs:288b); ’dra brñan “image, statue” (Gs:581c); snaṅ brñan “a reflected image, an image, a reflected
light” (Cs:11b); phyag brñan “a servant, (a serjeant)” (Cs:111b); gzugs brñan “a reflected image; also
image, picture in general; even a little statue” (J:201a); brla brñan “(rñiṅ) kha snon” (BTC:2741b),
“gsar du bsnan pa” (DSM:901a). The common morphological feature of the compounds listed is that
their first member is a noun. Besides, some of them denote body parts (skra, mgo, phyag, brla) or refer
to appearance (’dra, snaṅ, gzugs). The compounds themselves are also nouns.

In accordance with these observations I propose to identify ltag- with the CT ltag pa “1the back part
of the neck, nape” (J:216a). -brñan is obviously a derivative of brña “1to borrow; 2to seize by force, to
usurp” (J:201a) formed by means of the nominal suffix -n, thus brñan po “borrowed; reflected”
(J:201a). Furthermore, DSM glosses brñan with “’khor g.yog” (231b); compare hereto CT tshab
“representative; equivalent, substitute” (J:446b). Accordingly, the etymological meaning of the
compound is proposed to have been *“a borrowed/substitutional neck”.1

From the passages quoted below it appears that ltag brñan is a noun denoting a positive quality that
is of great esteem when represented by a councillor. In this context, *“a borrowed neck” could
metaphorically refer to someone offering his help and support or to the support itself for which
compare modern rgyab skyor Tabo “support, aid” and Kyirong “with pi̖ː (= WT byed - JB) to support”
(CDTD:1829; lit. “supporting the back”), and a similar CT compound rgyab rten “something to lean
against, a safe retreat, prop, support” (J:107b); cf. also modern ltag pa “2behind; 3protector, patron,

1
For analogical formations compare CT: pha g.yar “step-father” (J:517b); bu g.yar “adopted child” (J:517b); ma g.yar “step-
mother” (J:517b); as well as compounds formed with -tshab.
 238

backer, supporter” (Gs:465v).1 ltag brnyan co-occurs in the OTC with two terms connoting abstract
notions, ’phrul and ’dzaṅs rgya, supporting, thus, its interpretation as “support; helpfulness”.

[T] de ʼi ʼog (73) du śud pu rgyal to re ṅa myis byas te // ʼdi yan chad kyi blon po ʼphrul daṅ ldan te / ltag
brñan daṅ ʼdom / (74) ste // ʼdzaṅs (read: ’dzaṅs kyad)2 kyaṅ tshad myed do // (PT 1287:72-4)
“Thereafter, Śud pu rgyal to re ṅa myi served [as a councillor]; all the councillors including the
latter one (lit. the councillors up to this one), were endowed with ’phrul [and] committed3 to
support. [Their] wisdom had no measure.”
de ʼi ʼog du // mgar khri sgra ʼdzi rmun gyis byaste // ʼdzaṅs rgya daṅ ltag brñan ni // ʼdron po myi / (80)
gsum ʼgrogs te ʼgro na // ʼdron po thog ma ʼi sñiṅ la ʼdi sems // bar ma ʼi sñiṅ la ʼdi // (81) sems / tha ma ʼi
sñiṅ la ʼdi sems śes // grogs po la gtam byas pa daṅ // bden nam brdzun / (82) ʼdron po gsum kha bkalte rmas
na // khri sgra ʼdzi rmun mchi ba bźin mad de // ʼdzaṅs kyad // (83) ni de tsam mo // (PT 1287:79-83)
“Thereafter, Mgar khri sgra ’dzi rmun served [as a councillor]; as concerns [his] vast wisdom and
helpfulness, when going accompanied [by] three men, foreigners, [he] said to [his] friend what the
first foreigner was thinking about this [and that] in [his] mind, the middle about this [and that],
[and] the latter about this [and that]. When, having translated (? lit. loaded mouth), [one] asked the
three foreigners whether it was true or false, [it] was true like Khri sgra ’dzi rmun was saying.
Regarding [his] wisdom, it was just like that.”

60 stag ’phraṅ
[V] stag ’phreṅ (PT 126:126; folk etymology)
stag phraṅ (PT 126:130; folk etymology)
BDN:403:n7: stag sbreṅ g.yag sbreṅ ṅam stag sgrig g.yag sgrig.
DTH:168: poils d’un tigre; DOTSON.2013a:303: tiger regiment.

[E] *stag lpags kyi ’breṅ “a strap [made] from the hide of a tiger ”
[M] (N) 1tiger-strap; 2tiger-path, path on which tiger walks
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[NSOUR+N]MAT+N]
[A] We read in the OTC, in the sentence following the one in which the compound under
consideration occurs, that hats and boots shall be sewn. At first glance, the sentence seems to be
taken out of context for it mentions hats and boots that should be sewn but states neither for whom,
from what material nor for what purpose. In my opinion, Woṅ ker źaṅ śe claims here that he could
have hats and boots sewn from tiger- and leopard-straps which were used by Tibetans to honour the
best warriors.4 The core message seems to be that Chinese have so many objects, which are highly
esteemed in Tibetan army, that they could even start using them for making clothes. Accordingly, I
propose to reconstruct both stag ’phraṅ and g.yag ’phraṅ as *stag ’breṅ and *g.yag ’breṅ, respectively.

1
For the semantic alternation between the abstract noun “help” and the nomen agentis “helper, supporter” compare źabs
phyi which in most modern dialects denotes “a helper, servant, assistant” but is glossed with “help” for Leh and Nubra
(CDTD:7119).
2
For details on this reconstruction see s.v. ’dzaṅs kyad.
3
For this meaning of ’dom compare the data from modern dialects: Nurla ncA “to be committed, to be busy”, Tabo ncAD
“to be busy” (CDTD.V:647). ltag brñan daṅ ’dom would literally mean *“to come together with help”, i.e. “to help”.
4
Yaks and tigers are commonly associated in Tibetan literature and folk stories with strength and bravery, respectively;
cf. KARMAY 1998:421.
 239

Since straps can only be made from hide and not from the animal itself, I assume that stag- stands
for another compound that denoted tiger’s hide, cf., for instance, CT stag lpags “tiger-skin” (J:329a).1

Two further variants of the compound (stag ’phreṅ, stag phraṅ) are attested in PT 126 although with
seemingly different meaning, namely, “tiger-path”.2 The semantic shift based on a synecdoche could
have primarily aim at referring by the term to a person that has been honoured with a strap of
tiger’s hide (*“one possessing a tiger’s hide” > “warrior”3) and then through a metonymy also to the
way in which such a person acts (*”the way of a one who possesses a tiger’s hide”). As can be
inferred from PT 126, the underlying structure of the already folk etymologised stag ’phraṅ (< *stag
’breṅ) was re-interpreted as *stag gi (’)phraṅ and the compound started to be understood literally as
“a path of a tiger”, i.e., “a path on which tiger walks”. This process of reinterpretation forced also
the composers of PT 126 to replace g.yag ’phraṅ (see PT 1287) with gzig ’phraṅ, i.e., an animal, g.yag,
admired for its bravery and strength - two qualities for which it was awed by Tibetan warriors4 -
with gzig, a species of animal that, as another cat of prey, matched better stag.

Interestingly, if we juxtapose three different variants of the compound with their meanings and the
attested meanings of their second members, we acquire the following set:
stag ’phraṅ “tiger-strap” “footpath” (J: 359a)5;
stag ’phreṅ “tiger-path” “a string, a thread or cord” (J:360b)6;
stag phraṅ “tiger-path” “footpath”.
It appears that only in the latter case the form corresponds to the attested meanings of both, the
compound itself and its second element. The hypothesis is put forward that the original lexeme
*stag ’breṅ “tiger-strap”, devoid of its historical context after the fall of the Tibetan Empire,
underwent independently various semantic and morphological changes:

1
The morpheme ’phreṅ seems to be attested in OT sources only as a part of proper names, e.g., men pa ’phreṅ ba (PT
1287:53), lit. *”a string of ornaments” (men “an ornament, piece of finery”, J:418b); gser phreṅ “Skt. Kāñcana-cakra”
(TLTD.3:190b: = gser gyi phreṅ ba can), and in Buddhists texts in the meaning “garland, wreath” (for instance in PT 1261:133
= man 鬘, after LI 1961:317; Or.15000/434:r15; Or.15000/381:r9; Or.15000/456:v2).
(’)phreṅ (ba), as noted already by JÄSCHKE and confirmed by the latter examples from OT, denoted “a string, a thread or
cord, on which things are filed, strung, or ranged” (J:360b), although one finds the form ’phraṅ- also in CT ’phraṅ ’phrul
“Herabhängendes” (Sch:360a) that could originally have denoted straps bestowed in recognition of one’s merits in the
battle. As opposed to this, (’)breṅ (pa/ba) is glossed with “strap, rope” (J:402a) and the CT compound ko ’breṅ, “leather
strap” (J:402a), leaves no doubt that this lexeme should be reconstructed for -phraṅ in stag ’phraṅ. For OT occurrences of
(’)breṅ see below.
2
PT 126, with its distorted syntax and inconsistent orthography, is another example, beside PT 16/ITJ 751, of a
composition written in an environment in which the exact knowledge and even the memory of the days of yore have
already started to fade away. This process was characterised by the inaccurate usage of some technical terms connected to
the political and administrative system of the Tibetan Empire.
3
Compare hereto Eng. informal boots for soldiers in the idiomatic expression boots on the ground
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/boot; 20.03.2015)
4
Cf. hereto dgra ru rgal (read: rgol) g.yag du druṅ (read: draṅ) (9) phod dam (PT 1287:8-9) “Would [you] dare to fight as [my]
foe? Would [you] dare to wage [war] as yak?”.
5
This CT meaning of ’phraṅ is documented also in OT ʼphraṅ po ʼi brag g.yaʼ bo (PT 1287:23) “a rust[-coloured] rock along (lit.
of) the footpath”.
6
’phreṅ- in this meaning is not attested in OT sources but cf.: dbu’ ’breṅ zaṅ yag (PT 1287:14) “excellent head-rope” (see s.v.
zaṅ yag) or źags (’)breṅ (PT 1068:106; PT 1136:22) “leash-strap” for which CT (’)breṅ “strap, rope” (J:402a) could be cited.
 240

*stag ’breṅ “tiger-strap” > stag (’)phraṅ “id.” (folk etymology by analogy with ’phraṅ (po), preceded
most probably by the vowel assimilation: *stag ’breṅ > *stag ’braṅ);
*stag ’breṅ “tiger-strap” > stag ’phreṅ “tiger-path” (folk etymology by analogy with Buddhist ’phreṅ
(ba) and the already documented stag (’)phraṅ;
*stag ’breṅ “tiger-strap” > stag phraṅ “tiger-path” (folk etymology by analogy with (’)phraṅ,
triggered additionally by the existing stag ’phraṅ, and a literal reading of the compound).

I assume that ’phraṅ “a footpath” (J:359a), ’phreṅ “a string, a thread or cord” (J:360b), as well as ’breṅ
“strap, rope” (J:402a) are all cognate to CT ’braṅ ba “IIto follow, to walk at another’s heels; to pursue”
(J:399b) for which JÄSCHKE gives also a variant form ’breṅ ba (ibid.).1

[T] 1 mtsho sṅon po pyogs kyi dmag pon // (497) mgar khri ʼbriṅ btsan brod ʼtshal ba la // woṅ ker źaṅ śes
spriṅ baʼ // khre rkyal gaṅ daṅ / yuṅs ʼbru rkyal gaṅ bskur te // (498) bod kyi dmag // stag ʼphraṅ g.yag
ʼphraṅ du bgraṅs pa ʼi graṅs kyaṅ ṅa la yod do // glad pa la tshad blaṅs ste / (499) źwar drubs / rkaṅ pa la
tshad blaṅste lham du drubs // (PT 1287:496-9)
“Woṅ ker źaṅ śe sent a message to Mgar khri ’briṅ btsan brod, the asking army commander of the
Blue Lake region: ‘Having sent a full sack of millet and a full sack of grains of mustard-seeds,
concerning the army of Tibet, I have also numbers of [things] counted as tiger- and yak-straps.
Having taken the measure of (lit. for) the head, [I shall] sew [the straps] together as hats! Having
taken the measure of (lit. for) the foot, [I shall] sew [the straps] together as shoes!’”
2
ṅed kyi yul ’di dag na / sa ’tshams kyi stag ’phreṅ khri skugs dag na / gles pa stag daṅ (127) gzig / dom daṅ
dred las bstsogs pa maṅ por mchis na / (PT 126:126-7)
“If in these lands of ours, in hidings2 [of] ten thousand tiger-paths of the frontier, gles pa such as,
tiger and leopard, brown bear and yellow bear, became abundant [...]”
bdag cag ṅan pa la sgyu daṅ zol ma mch[is] / (130) dmu rje ’i stag phraṅ gzig phraṅ na / gles pa stag gzig daṅ
yaṅ mjal / dom daṅ dred daṅ yaṅ mjal / (131) la la ni btsas phul / myi la ni yon phul nas / bdag cag ṅan pa la
śul bstan nas / dmu rje ’i spya ṅar mchis (132) pa lags //// (PT 126:129-32)
“We, the humble ones, do not use (lit. possess) artifice or deceit. On the tiger-path, on the leopard-
path, [we] encountered gles pa [such as] tigers and leopards, brown and yellow bears. Having given
some of them fare, having given offerings to the people, we, the humble ones, were shown the way
[and] have arrived before the lord of Dmu.”

61 staṅs dbyal
[V] rje dbyal (PT 1287:45; folk etymology; see s.v.)
staṅ dbyald (Or.15000/186:v13)
staṅs bsbyal (Or.8212/1853:r1)
staṅs sbyal (Or.15000/130:v1)
staṅs byal (PT 1047:7; Or.15000/25:r1; Or.15000/265:r2; Tib 114:r1)
staṅ sb[y]al (Or.15000/36:r6; Or.15000/139:r1)
staṅs pya (PT 1047:5)

1
For a similar semantic development within one word family compare: rgyu ba “to go, walk, move, wander, range”
(J:111a); rgyu ma “1entrails, intestines, bowels; 2sausage” (J:111a); rgyud “string, cord” (J:111a); rgyud pa “1to fasten or file on
a string, to string; 2to pass through or over, to traverse” (J:112a-b); rgyun “a continual flowing, the flow, current or stream”
(J:112b); rgyus pa “the fine threads or fibres of which animal muscle, plants, etc. are composed” (J:113a); brgyud “family,
lineage; relations, ancestors, descendants, offspring” (J:124a).
2
For a discussion of skugs see s.v. dgra zin.
 241

YeŚes:225a: ’ar ga pe leg; SR.1:878.2: arγ-a bilig1; BTC:1100a: yab yum mam bza’ tshaṅ pho mo gñis ’dzoms kyi źe sa ste. steṅ
źal źes kyaṅ ’bri rgyun ’dug (s.v. staṅs dpyal); DSM:246b: khyo śug gam bza’ tshaṅ pho mo’i źe sa’i tshig ste (s.v. btaṅ dpyal);
p.264b: yab yum mam khyo śug gi źe sa (s.v. staṅs źal); BYD:202a: staṅs dpyal (s.v. gtaṅs dpyal); p.206b: bza’ mi’am khyo śug
gñis kyi don (s.v. btaṅ dpyal); p.214a: staṅ dpyal. yab yum lta bu źe sa’i tshig (s.v. staṅ dpyald); staṅ dpyald daṅ ’dra’o (s.v.
staṅs dgyal); staṅ dpyald daṅ ’dra’o (s.v. staṅs dpyald); staṅ dpyald daṅ dra’o (s.v. staṅs byal); p.214b: staṅ dpyald daṅ ’dra’o
(s.v. staṅs bsal).
BSODDBAṄ.1992:77n83: bza’ tshaṅ pho mo gñis ’dzoms kyi źe tshig; DUṄDKAR:1017a: staṅs dpyal. yab yum mam bza’ tshaṅ
pho mo gñis ’dzoms kyi źe tshig (s.v. staṅs byal).
Gs:470b: a married couple (s.v. staṅs dpyal).
DTH:42: noble; TLTD.2:397: distinguished; TLTD.3:138b: a title of respect; SNELLGROVE.1967:71: parents; p.298: husband and
wife; TAUBE.1980:154a: Gemahl und Gemahlin; RICHARDSON.1985:35: consort; LI/COBLIN:405: lord and lady, an honorific epithet
for a married couple; DEJONG.1989:47: husband and wife; DOTSON.2009:106: husband and wife; HILL.2011:17: imperial couple.

[E] *staṅs daṅ dbyal “the one accompanied by and the one led away”
[M] (N) husband and wife (H)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; co-hyponymic; copulative; STRC[N+N]
[R] rje dbyal
[A] As has already been demonstrated s.v. rje dbyal, dbyal- is a deverbal noun with the etymological
meaning *“that what was made to disappear”. Similarly, I argue that staṅs- is derived from *staṅ “to
accompany; to be accompanied”, an obvious cognate of CT stoṅs pa “pf. bstaṅs, fut. bstaṅ (?), to
accompany” (J:223a).2 Accordingly, the etymological meaning of *staṅs is proposed to have been
*“[one] accompanied (by)”; when used in a context of wedding ceremonies presumably meant to
denote a man that accompanied the bride.3 For the OT meaning and argument structure of the
verbal stem staṅs compare:
’bod (5) ’bod dga’ daṅ staṅste (PT 1039:4-5)
“Having accompanied ’bod ’bod dga’...”

daʼ re śig re śig naʼ / g.yu ro luṅ sum naʼ / thaṅ ba g.yu thaṅ źig / (r30) thaṅ thaṅ brla maʼi goṅ la / ltaṅs
(read: staṅs) kyaṅ ltaṅs (read: staṅs) / smra gol skyi maʼi than gyi rje btsal rje yaṅ rñed / (PT 1285:r29-
30)

1
This Mongolian rendering does not, in fact, translate staṅs dbyal but rather its definiens yab yum glossed in all quoted
Tibetan lexicographical sources.
2
staṅs- is attested in OT documents in the orthographic variants ltaṅs, gtaṅs and sdaṅs, see examples cited below. The
alternation of initial st- and lt- is attested also in modern dialects; compare, e.g., the dialectal data on stuṅ (CDTD.V:528),
stod (CDTD.V:534), or ston (CDTD.V:535). Still another variant of the lexeme, staṅ, is found glossed as a Tibetan term with
“khyo ga; a husband, a consort, a spouse” in TENZIN 2008:95.
Besides, the word family includes: daṅ “with” (J:248a); daṅ po “1the first; 2the first thing, part” (J:249a); daṅ kyog “the
initial sign of respect” (RICHARDSON 1952:75-6), “the opening crook” (SCHERRER/BONANI 2009:311; cf. CT mgo yig), “dbu khyud
de rje btsun sa paṇ gyis. daṅ kyog ni glaṅ po che’i sna lta bu’i a yin la. de yaṅ yi ge’i daṅ por ’jug pas de ltar btaṭ par gsuṅs.
la las sṅags kyi dbur om yig ’god srol yod pa bźin bod yig gi dbur yaṅ om yig bkod pa rim gyis yi ge’i tshul źig pa daṅ kyog
yin par bśad do” (BTC:1240a); gdaṅs “1music, harmony, melody; 2resp. for dpral ba forehead” (J:265b); ’daṅ ba “gelangen (zu
od. an etwas od. Jemand)” (Sch:270a); ’daṅs in: brgya ’daṅs “an hundert, bis hundert” (Sch:123b); sdoṅ(s) ba “to unite, to join,
to enter into a confederacy, to associate one’s self with” (J:296b); sdoṅs zla “prob. = zla grogs” (J:296b).
For the grammaticalisation of verbs with the meaning “to follow” and “to accompany” to comitative compare
HEINE/KUTEVA 2002:140 who quote Chinese tong: Archaic Chinese “to be the same” > “to share with” > “to accompany”,
which subsequently, during the Tang period, was grammaticalised to a comitative preposition. According to SCHUESSLER
(2007:499), this lexeme could be related to Tibetan sdoṅ ba.
3
RICHARDSON glosses staṅs as “accompanied by ?” (1985:166).
 242

“Now, the very one day, in Luṅ sum [of] G.yu ro, Thaṅ ba g.yu thaṅ, a wooer for Thaṅ thaṅ brla
ma accompanied [her]. A lord of the vicinity of Smra gol skyi ma was fetched. A lord was found.”1
Besides, staṅs is attested as a noun in the following passages:
tha ṅa (r18) brla ma źig / goṅ la sdaṅs (read: staṅs) btsal / staṅs mchis / (PT 1285:r17-8)
“One fetched a wooer for Tha ṅa brla ma2. A wooer appeared.”

rkoṅ yul bre snar maṅ du mchis (r19) rkoṅ de dkar po źig tha ṅa brla maʼi goṅ (read: goṅ la) staṅs btsal
staṅs ma lags (PT 1285:r18-9)
“[They] went to Bre snar, the land of Rkoṅ. [They] fetched Rkoṅ de dkar po, a wooer for Tha ṅa
brla ma. The wooer was not good.”

myaṅ daṅ thags sum na (r20) myaṅ chun rgyal po źig / tha ṅa brla maʼi / goṅ la ltaṅs (read: staṅs) ston
staṅs ma lags / (PT 1285:r19-20)
“In Myaṅ daṅ thags sum, Myaṅ chun rgyal po, a wooer for Tha ṅa brla ma, appeared. The wooer
was not good.”3

dmuʼi pha yab gyi mtshan naʼ / gtaṅs brag cha daṅ daṅ / ma yum gyi mtshan / dbyal drum chaʼi ṅur ṅur
(PT 1285:r59)
“If (na) the name of the father of Dmu, [it is] husband Brag cha daṅ daṅ; the name of the mother:
wife Drum cha’i ṅur ṅur.”
The story of Tha ṅa brla ma as narrated in PT 1285 demonstrates that the original context in which
staṅs was used and probably also developed was the one of engagement and wedding. staṅs refers
here obviously to men that court Tha ṅa brla ma and were rejected but also to the one that has been
chosen to become her husband. At the same time, the text juxtaposes staṅs (here: gtaṅs) with dbyal
when referring to a couple that already has got children (l.r59). The following semantic
development seems to have taken place with regard to staṅs as a noun: *“a one accompanied by” >
“a wooer” > *“a groom” > “a husband”.4

The usage of staṅs dbyal in apposition with btsan po proves that the compound belonged to the
honorific register in OT. For a survey of kinship terms that were allowed to stand in apposition with
btsan po see s.v. rje dbyal.

1
I understand the second ltaṅs in ltaṅs kyaṅ ltaṅs as identical with the verbal stem staṅs by analogy with the following
clause: rje yaṅ rñed.
2
The phrase tha ṅa brla ma’i goṅ la is attested repeatedly in PT 1285:r20-30.
3
Sentences of identical structure are repeated in ll.r20-30.
4
staṅs, glossed in lexicographic sources on CT with “manner, style, posture” (J:220a), is attested in Sapi dialect with the
meaning “physical skill” (CDTD:3376). Whether this represents further semantic development of OT staṅs must be
ascertained by additional data from modern dialects although compare staṅ po “stag śar ram skyes pa” (DSM:264a) and the
Mongolian equivalent glossed by SUMATIRATNA (1:878.2): arγ-a bilig “[knowledge of] skillful means and wisdom, two qualities
possessed by the Buddha; matter and mind; male and female elements (Ch. yin-yang 阴阳)” (Less:51b), the first element of
which, arγ-a, is explained as “means, method; way out, possibility; ruse, trick, artifice, scheming; the male or positive
element in nature as contrasted with the female or negative element; positive pole” (Less:51a-b).
 243

Finally, one should mention the morphological peculiarity of both terms forming the compound
staṅs dbyal. Although I have proposed to reconstruct both constituents as deverbal nouns, when
occurring as independent lexemes they are never accompanied by any nominal particle, thus, no
such forms are attested as *staṅs pa/po or *dbyal mo. It is probable and in fact confirmed by the
multiplicity of their orthographic variants attested in OT sources1, that already by the time the texts
have been written down the lexemes in question had belonged to archaic vocabulary not used any
more in everyday life.

[T] rgyal pho yab sras staṅs pya (read: dbyal) la skyems gsol źiṅ thugs dgyes (PT 1047:5)
“While [he] was offering beverage to the king, father and son, husband and wife, [they] rejoiced.”
rgyal pho staṅs byal daṅ blon pho daṅ źam riṅ pha yan chad / (8) na bza’ bzaṅ pho bnabs śiṅ dgyel skyems
gsol baʼi źal // (PT 1047:7-8)
“effigies (źal) of [persons] including (yan chad) the king, wife and husband, councillors and źam riṅ pa,
that [one] dressed [in] beautiful garments and to which [one] offered delicacies and beverage”
źaṅ btsan to re lhas byi na (read: byin) las stsogs pas / gñe bo bgyi (177) ste / btsan mo kim śaṅ khoṅ co ra
saʼi śa tsal du gśegs / dgun btsan po staṅs dbyal brag mar na bźugs (ITJ 750:176-7)
“Źaṅ btsan to re lhas byin, among others, acted as a groomsman. btsan mo Kim śaṅ khoṅ co went to
Śa tsal of Ra sa. In the winter, the btsan po, husband and wife, stayed in Brag mar.”
staṅs dbyal2 yab sras thugs rtag (8) du bde bar smond chiṅ mchis // (Or.15000/180:v7-8)
“I am praying that the husband and wife, father and son, are constantly happy.”
slan cad kyaṅ yab sras staṅs byal thugs rtag du bde ba’i źal ñe bar mthoṅ bar smon ciṅ mchis
(Or.15000/265:r2)
“Hereafter, I am praying to see face to face (lit. closely) the countenance of father and son, husband
and wife, who are constantly happy.”
jo mo rgyal mo brtsan yum (2) sras kyis phyogs bcu’i (3) dkon mchog gsum la (4) mchod pa’i slad du coṅ (5) ’di
bgyis te de’i bso(6)d nams kyi stobs kyis (7) lha btsan po khri sroṅ lde (8) brtsan yab sras staṅs dbya(9)l gsuṅ
dbyaṅs drug (10) cu sgra dbyaṅs daṅ ldan te (11) bla na myed pa’i byaṅ chub (12) du grub par smond to
(Bsam Bell)
“The lady Rgyal mo brtsan, mother and [her] children, having this bell prepared in order to worship
the Three Jewels of ten directions, prayed that by the power of its (i.e. of the bell’s) merit, the deity,
btsan po Khri sroṅ lde brtsan, father and children, husband and wife, being accompanied3 by the
harmonious sound [of] the sixty gsuṅ dbyaṅs4, attain the unsurpassed enlightment.”5

1
Further transformations of staṅs dbyal as well as of its constitutents when occurring as independent lexemes in OT
sources, including replacement of staṅs by rje- and dbyal by źal, are discussed s.v. rje dbyal.
2
Although the ligature -by- resembles here to a great extent -gy-, a comparison with -by- in tshur byon (l.7) of the same
text confirms the correctness of the reading dbyal.
3
Lit. “being near to”, cf. J:289b.
4
Interestingly, the inscription consists of 59 syllables according to the editions of RICHARDSON (1985:34) and LI/COBLIN
(1987:334). One may wonder whether a thorough examination of its interpunction would not prove that there were
originally 60 syllables divided by tshegs. This assumption is confirmed indirectly by the fact that the sound of the bell is
said to accompany the btsan po and his family on their way towards the enlightment.
5
Further occurrences of the compound include: tsha bo btsan ra daṅ che źe lha ldem staṅs byal (Or.15000/25:r1); yab sras staṅ
sb[y]al (Or.15000/36:r6); staṅs sbyal daṅ yas ñu tshu[---] (Or.15000/130:v1); [---] bo kl[u] bzaṅ daṅ ce źe gtsug lde staṅ sby[al]
(Or.15000/139:r1); lha dpal / staṅ dbyald (Or.15000/186:v13); staṅ[s byal] daṅ yab sras (Or.15000/580:v4; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1998.2:195, text 580); tsha bo btshan ra // daṅ tsa mo lha ldem staṅs bsbyal (Or.8212/1853:r1) “nephew Btshar ra and niece Lha
ldem, husband and wife” (from this we can infer that ts(h)a mo was a term denoting also a wife of ego’s nephew); jo cho stoṅ
zaṅ staṅs dbyal (Or.15000/242:r1) “lord Stoṅ zaṅ, husband and wife”; jo cho rgyal zigs staṅs byal (Tib 114:r1; trslr. after TAUBE
1980:51) “lord Rgyal zigs, husband and wife”.
 244

62 ste’u ka ma
SR.1:882.4: bhalla; degedü oγuli; DSM:267a: sta re chuṅ ba.
DTH:166: hachette et lame; n.3: Composé de ste’u = hachette, et ka ma li = sorte de sabre; DOTSON.2013a:301: the axeblade.

[S] *ste’u’i kha “an edge of an axe”

[E] *[ste’u’i kha]+ma “having an axe-edge(-ones)”
[M] (N) (those) having an axe-blade[-shape]
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] DSM glosses mda’ ste’u kha ma with “mda’i rtse mo ste’u ’dra ba’i mda’i bye brag cig” (357a)
quoting the following sentence from Rā ma ṅa’i rtogs brjod as an example: gźu’i rgyal po dam bca’ gsum
ldan gyi mda’ bo che ste’u kha ma daṅ sprad de. The passage, however, speaks of mda’ bo che ste’u kha ma
and not mda’ ste’u kha ma as glossed by DSM. Apart from that, we find ste’u kha ma glossed in
Mahāvyutpatti with “bhalla” (6100; Skt. bhalla “a kind of arrow or missile with a point of a partic[ular]
shape; a partic[ular] part of an arrow; n. an arrow-head of a partic[ular] shape”, MW:748b)1 and in
DSM with “sta re chuṅ ba” (267a, s.v. ste’u ka ma with the quotation from PT 1287). Compare also DAS’
comment on mde’u: “the arrow-head is made of various designs some with three points, others like a
miniature pick-axe” (675a-b). The same author cites some of the names given apparently to
arrowheads according to their shape (D:675b): mde’u be’u’i so ‘dra ba “arrow-head like calf’s teeth” (cf.
Mvy:6098: mde ’u be ’u so ’dra ba “vatsadantaka”); mde’u byi’u sñiṅ ma “arrow-head like a bird’s heart”
(cf. Mvy:6101: mde ’u byu ’u sñiṅ ma ’dra “mudgalikā (mūrkhalikā)”); mde’u zur bźi pa “an arrow with
four-bladed head” (cf. Mvy:6099: mde ’u zur bźi pa “tilakocavaka”).

On this evidence, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of ste’u kha ma as *ste’u’i (ste’u =
2
DIM < sta) kha ma, “(those) having an axe-blade[-shape]” or “axe-blade-shaped (ones)”. The particle -
ma is assumed to form generic names, thus *ste’u kha “having the edge of a small axe” + -ma ‘matrix
morpheme’3 > “[a class of iron arrowheads which is called] ‘(those) having an axe-blade[-shape]’”. It
is assumed that, despite compounding, the diminutive morpheme -’u was retained to prevent the
reading of *ste as a gerund particle.

For more details on the phrase mdo lcags ste’u ka ma see s.v. mdo lcags.

[T] btsan te ni myi mkhas pa “[Those] being mighty [but] not skilled
rgya drug (484) ni dguṅ mthaʼ rje // [are] the lords of the horizon, Chinese and Turks.

The compound as well as its consituents remained to be used in later literature as well for we read, e.g., pha staṅs gyi khri
daṅ rje / ma dbyal gyi khri nam skar in one of the texts from Dga’ thaṅ ’bum pa che (Rnel dri ’dul ba’i thabs sogs, fol. 21, l.4;
DGA’THAṄ:151) or in later Bon po texts (SNELLGROVE 1967): ltaṅ dbyal (p.70, l.2), pho mo staṅ dbyal (p.72, l.14), and pho rnams
staṅ daṅ mo rnams dbyal (p.80, l.17). Four further occurrences of staṅs dbyal are documented in the canonical literature in
Dpal gsaṅ ba’i sñiṅ po de kho na ñid rnam par ṅes pa (H 796, rgyud, wa 194r6 & 198r2) and Gsaṅ ba’i sñiṅ po de kho na ñid ṅes pa’i
bla ma chen po (H 801, rgyud, źa 54v5 & 63v7; cited after BCRD).
1
Its obvious derivative is ste ’u kha ña rṅa ~ ste ’u ka ña rṅa ma glossed as “kṣurapra” (Mvy:6083; Skt. kṣurapra “sharp-edged
like a razor; a sharp-edged arrow; a sharp-edged knife; a sharp-edged arrow-head”, MW:331c).
2
For the translation of kha as “blade” compare “5sharpness, edge, of a knife etc.” (J:35a, s.v. khaIV). The original *kha
underwent deaspiration to -ka due to the second-syllable position in the compound.
3
For details on this function of -ma see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.
 245

mgyogste ni myi mkhas pa / [Those] being swift [but] not skilled

śu ma ni rgyal ma gñis / [are] both, a śu ma and mare.
drag ste ni myi mkhas pa [Those] being strong [but] not skilled
mcho gar ni ʼbroṅ gi ru / [are] the white tips [of a bow strengthened] with
wild yak’s horn.
rno ste ni myi (485) mkhas pa [Those] being sharp [but] not skilled
mdo lcags ni steʼu ka ma / (PT 1287:483-5) [are] the iron arrowheads [called] ‘(those) having
an axe-blade[-shape]’.”

63 stod rims
[V] rims (PT 1042:52; scribal error)
Negi.5:1877a: mukhyaḥ (s.v. stod rim).
DUṄDKAR:1023b: stod rim ni mi ya rabs can.
DTH:144: Stod rims (proper name - JB); TLTD.3:139a: upper row; EMMERICK.1967:128b: In translating ‘respectfully’, I have in
mind the complimentary use of stod in the beginning of compounds and rim gro, sku rim ‘honour’; [...] It may, however,
mean the ‘upper ranks’.; RICHARDSON.1998a:186: of high rank; DOTSON.2013a:284: elites; p.340n7: I have glossed stod rims with
stod rim, which I take to be a synonym for mtho rim, “upper level”.

[S] *stod kyi rim pa “a place in a row of the upper part”

[E] *[stod kyi rim pa]+-s “those (-s) of the place in a row of the upper part”
[M] (N) elite members
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTdeterminative; FORM[N+N]
[R] ñiṅ rim
[A] In order to elucidate the argument structure of the verbal phrase bkyon ’bebs that occurs in one
clause with stod rims in the OTC I shall cite a few clauses from ITJ 750:
dgun blon chen pho khri ʼbriṅ gyis / tsoṅ ka che chuṅ du draṅste / (128) rgyaʼi dmag pon chen po thug pu
śi bzuṅ / deʼi dgun mgar la bkyon phab ste btsan po phar du gśegs par [lo] chig / (ITJ 750:127-8)
“In the winter, grand councilor [Mgar] khri ’briṅ [btsan brod], having marched towards Greater
and Lesser Tsoṅ ka, seized Thug pu śi, the great general of the Chinese. That winter, [one]
brought an accusation down upon Mgar. The btsan po went to Phar. Thus one year.”

khu maṅ po rje lha zuṅ daṅ1 / blon chen por bkaʼ stsald / deʼi rjes la gliṅ riṅs tsal du khu maṅ po rje lha zuṅ
(155) la bkyon phab / dbaʼs khri gzigs źaṅ ñen blon chen phor bkaʼ stsalde / se rib log par lo gchig / (ITJ
750:154-5)
“[The btsan po] proclaimed Khu maṅ po rje lha zuṅ as a grand councillor. Thereafter, at Gliṅ riṅs
tsal, [one] brought an accusation down upon Khu maṅ po rje lha zuṅ. [The btsan po] proclaimed
Dba’s khri gzigs źaṅ ñen as a grand councillor. Se rib revolted. Thus one year.”

ʼdun ma / na mar du ʼbon da rgyal btsan zuṅ daṅ / blon chen pho khri gzigs gyis bsduste / lho ʼdus sregs
(158) la bkyon phab / (ITJ 750:157-8)

1
daṅ shall be omitted. It is possible that the source document on which our copy is based, instead of one, mentioned two
persons.
 246

“The council, having been gathered at Na mar by ’bon da rgyal Btsan zuṅ and grand councillor
[Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], brough an accusation down upon Lho ’dus sregs.”

ʼdun ma zrid (249) gyi ldu nag du ʼdus / dgun pho braṅ brag mar na bźugste / dbaʼs stag sgra khoṅ lod la
bkyon phab nas / ʼbro chuṅ bzaṅ (250) ʼor maṅ blon chen por bkaʼ stsald / (ITJ 750:248-50)
“The council gathered at Ldu nag of Zrid. In the winter, the court, having resided in Brag mar,
brought an accusation down upon Dba’s stag sgra khoṅ lod. Hence, [the btsan po] proclaimed ’Bro
chuṅ bzaṅ ’or maṅ as a grand councillor.”

An analogical phrase but with the INTR ’bab is either attested:

dgun stod ʼdun ma glagi (72) ryu byer ʼdus / dgun smad mdan du ʼduste / ra saṅ rje spuṅ rye ryuṅ daṅ /
khu khri sña dgru zuṅ la bkyon bab (73) ste / btsan pho ñen kar na bźugs śiṅ / yab btol bar lo gchig / (ITJ
750:71-3)
“In the early winter, the council gathered at Ryu bye of Glag. In the late winter, having gathered
at Mdan, accusations came down upon Ra saṅ rje spuṅ rye ruṅ and Khu khri sña dgru zuṅ.”

dbyar ʼdun gźoṅ phyag du ʼbon da rgyal btsan (180) zuṅ daṅ / blon chen pho khri gzigs gyis bsduste / chog
ro khoṅ ge la bkyon bab / (ITJ 750:179-80)
“The winter council was gathered at Gźoṅ phyag by ’bon da rgyal Btsan zuṅ and grand councillor
[Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen]; an accusation came down upon Chog ro khoṅ ge.”
Since none of the transitive clauses contains an agent argument, the following sentences with the
verb ’bebs should be added:
thams chad bod kyis phab ste bźes pas // blar yaṅ dkor maṅ po brñes // (PT 1287:342)
“Because all [the cities], having been captured by the Tibetans, were seized, [one] obtained many
riches also for (lit. to) the authorities.”

źaṅ mchims (377) rgyal zigs la stsogs pas rgya ʼi mkhar kiṅ śi phab ste / rgya rje gwaṅ bu hwaṅ te bskos so
// (PT 1287:376-7)
“Źaṅ mchims rgyal zigs [śu theṅ], among others, having captured the Chinese stronghold Kiṅ śi,
appointed the Chinese lord Gwaṅ bu hwaṅ te.”

mdo smad gyi ʼdun ma seb du ʼduste / blon skyes bzaṅ ldoṅ tsab gyis / khyi śa can phab par lo chig (ITJ
750:270)
“The council of Mdo smad gathered at Seb. Councillor Skyes bzaṅ ldoṅ tsab captured Khyi śa can.
Thus one year.”
From these we can infer that the agent of ’bebs is marked with ERG. Thus, the complete argument
structure of the verbal phrase bkyon ’bebs would be:
XERG YALLAT bkyonABS ’bebs “X brings an accusation down upon Y.”
With this in mind and comparing the clause from PT 1287 with other occurrences of stod rims (see
the Text section), we can ascertain its proper syntactic interpretation:
 247

[myaṅ daṅ cog ro stod rims la]ALLAT bkyonABS dbab par bgyis
“[One] caused that an accusation was brought down upon stod rims Myaṅ and Cog ro.”
This clearly demonstrates that stod rims should be understood as an apposition to myaṅ daṅ cog ro.

The morpheme rims is only scarcely attested in OT documents; the OTDO database lists only three
further occurrences: dgu rims (PT 1290:r1), sṅar rims (PT 1297.2:7), rims kyis (PT 1042:52).1 Apart from
the latter for which see below, rims in dgu rims and sṅar rims seems to be a variant form of rim.2 Thus,
the suggestion made by THOMAS (TLTD.3:182b) and followed by DOTSON (2013a:340n7) to read rim
instead of rims also in our compound is not unfounded. Even more so for we read in ITN 816: stod
rims daṅ gral (for full citation see below); CT gral “1row, series, class” (J:76b) is a close semantic
equivalent of rim pa “1series, succession; 2the place in a row or file, constituent part or member of a
series; 3order, method” (J:530a). Compare also modern dialectal gral rim “social class” (CDTD:1272) or
in Tabo even “good social position, rank (of a family in the village, not related to caste)” (ibid.).

The morpheme stod as attested in OT compounds is limited to two semantic fields denoting spacial
or temporal relations with the respective meanings “upper” (in: stod phyogs, stod smad, ya stod and
numerous toponyms) and “early” (in: dgun stod, dbyar stod, riṅ stod). These can hardly be related to
the context of PT 1287 in which our compound occurs.3

To sum up, we learn from ITN 279 and ITN 816 that stod rims were countable, for twenty and twenty
four of them are mentioned. In PT 1042:52 we read: źal ta pa rims kyis phyag bgyis nas. On account of
the fact that źal ta pa rims kyis forms one nominal phrase (cf. ITN 279), I argue that rims kyis is to be
reconstructed as *stod rims kyis; rims-, as has been demonstrated above, occurred in OT documents
only in compounds (with the exception of the homonym rims “epidemy”) whereas rim- as an
independent lexeme was always accompanied by the nominal particle -pa, thus rim pa (for examples
see OTDO).4

In our passages, stod rims seems to function as an apposition attached to either proper names (clans
Myaṅ and Cog ro) or terms denoting officials, e.g., źal ta pa. Just like sna, sna tshogs, rnam pa, etc., stod
rims does not need a genitive of the preceding phrase and its quantity can be specified by adding a
concrete number; thus, it appears to have been used as a classifier. Despite the problems with the

1
Or.15000/227:v2 contains syllables so rims, but due to the fragmentary character of the document no interpretation
concerning the relation between these two syllables can be put forward. The same observation can be made regarding
Or.15000/496 where in ll.5 and 6 we read twice rims phye probably for *rims phyed “half an array (?)”. Although THOMAS
glosses the first rims phye together with the preceding bka’ as one phrase, bka’ rims phye “circular-order-flour”
(TLTD.3:113a), this does not seem very plausible. Besides, one finds also rims (Tib 135:v9; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:100, text 41)
and rims nad (Or.15000/435:v1, trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:184) known from later lexicographic works on CT as “contagious
disease, epidemy, plague” (J:530a).
2
dgu rim has already been analysed in this work (see s.v.), whereas PT 1297 contains also a variant phrase sṅar brim (l.24).
go rims instead of CT go rim is cited by EMMERICK (1967:62, l.5); see also RKTS and TLB for its numerous other occurrences in
Buddhist literature.
3
As against DOTSON’s interpretation, stod was in OT not a synonym of mtho for the latter lexeme encompassed a much
broader spectrum of meanings including metaphoric ones, like “exalted”.
4
rims kyis instead of *stod rims kyis came into being most probably by analogy with rim gyis “or rim par by degrees”
(D:1184a) which is found in canonical literature also written as rims kyis (see RKTS).
 248

semantics of stod- and the obvious possibility that it represents another compound, I reconstruct
stod rims as *stod kyi rim pa, lit. “(the place in) a row of the upper part”; -s is understood as a suffix
forming collective terms: *[stod rim]+-s, “elite members”.1

[T] deʼi ʼog / (50) du nam kaʼ // deʼi ʼog du naṅ gi zo rig / deʼi ʼog du smra źal / deʼi ʼog du g.yas g.yos kyi
mnabs / (51) sgye / deʼi ʼog du źal daṅ sku rten // deʼi ʼog du thugs gur / deʼi ʼog du riṅ gur / deʼi ʼog du /
(52) dbon lob // ser gśegs nas źal ta pa rims (read: stod rims) kyis phyag bgyis nas // ñam pag ma ʼchugs /
(53) par gsol // (PT 1042:49-53)
“Thereafter nam ka, zo rig of the interior, smra źal, bags of edible produce on (lit. of) the left and right
(side), źal and sku rten, thugs gur, riṅ gur, dbon lob, went successively (repeated de’i ’og du) to the grave.
Hence, the elite members of pages saluted [them and] gave ñam pag so that [it] was not mistaken.”
riṅ lugs gyi g.yar sṅar // [...] / dge ’dun stod rims ban de toṅ byi daṅ / rje’u phab yon daṅ / (16) li phan in la
stsogste rmas na yaṅ // (PT 1079:13-6; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184-5)
“In the presence of the representative, [... and] the elite members of the clergy: monk Toṅ byi, Rje’u
phab yon and Li phan in, among others, enquired [...].”
de tsam na myaṅ daṅ cog ro stod rims la bkyon dbab par bgyis ste // khra (read: khrag) khrug (255) [g]i rjes
la bab pas // gsol dguṅ yaṅ gnaṅ ste // btsan po źa sṅa nas // bkaʼ stsald paʼ // (PT 1287:254-5)
“Just then, having caused that an accusation was brought down upon the elite members of Myaṅ
and Cog ro, due to what happened after unrests, [the btsan po], having granted also a gsol dguṅ,
ordered:”
źal ta pa stod rims ñi śu rtsa bźi // thaṅ bñamste (ITN 279:v1)
“Twenty four elite members of pages were of equal status.”
[s]t[o]d r[i]ms daṅ g[r]al ñi śu / thaṅ mñam st[e] (ITN 816:r1)
“Twenty elite members and classes [of ...] were of equal status.”2

64 thaṅ kar
CT thaṅ dkar
D Kargil, Tshangra “vulture”; Chiktan “white variety of vulture”; Western Drokpas “white vulture (a bird feeding on
carrion)”, Bayan “cinereous vulture” (CDTD:3473, s.v. thaṅ dkar); Ladakhi “a type of vulture” (LEU:115, s.v. thaṅ dkar).
YeŚes:236a: pur gud, tsha ga’aṅ tha sa, tshag tsha ga’i (s.v. thaṅ dkar); BTC:1140a: bya rgod (s.v. thaṅ dkar).
Sch:228b: der weissgeschwänzte Adler (s.v. thaṅ dkar); D:568b: 1white-tailed eagle; 2a greyhound (s.v. thaṅ dkar); R.4:19b:
I
орёл с белым хвостом; white-tailed eagle (s.v. thaṅ dkar); IIборзая собака; greyhound (s.v. thaṅ dkar); Gs:485c: 1Tibetan
white vulture; 2white pine (a species of pine tree).
DTH:167: plaine; THOMAS.1957:31: Thaṅ kar (proper name - JB); BELLEZZA.2005:342: lammergeier; BELLEZZA.2008:420:
lammergeyer (s.v. thaṅ dkar); DOTSON.2013a:302: white plains.

[E] *thaṅ dkar po “white spread ones”

1
For classifiers of similar etymology cf. Eng. array as in a vast array of literature or Pol. szereg in szereg ulic. Compare also the
English idiomatic expression to be in the front line.
2
stod rims is found also in canonical texts, cf.: bram ze la sogs pa mi stod rims su skyes pa (Viśvāmitra, Dpal gsaṅ ba ’dus pa’i
rgyud kyi man ṅag gi rgya mtsho thigs pa, D 1844, rgyud, ji 126r5; trslr. after BCRD) “brahmans and the like, those born among
(lit. as) the elite members of men”; śel chu dbus ni rgya gar daṅ / rgya’i blon po daṅ / ’baṅs stod rims ’dres par bkod nas (Li’i yul luṅ
bstan pa, D 4202, spriṅ yig, ṅe 176r3; trslr. after EMMERICK 1967:20, ll.14-6) “Concerning the land (lit. the middle part)
between the rivers, [they] planned [it] so that the councillors of India and China as well as the elite members of the
subjects intermingled.” For the phrase mi stod rims that occurs in the first passage compare mi stod rim in Bsod nams kyi stobs
kyi rtogs pa brjod pa (H 355, mdo sde, a 13r2) and ĀRYAŚŪRA’s Skyes pa’i rabs kyi rgyud (= Skt. Jātakamāla, D 4150, skyes rab, hu
10r7). The passage from the latter work is cited in NEGI (5.1877a) where its Sanskrit equivalent is given as pauramukhya
(“chief man of the city”, MW:651a). Skt. mukhya is rendered with “dṅos, gdoṅ, blon, gtso (bo), bzaṅs, sogs pa” according to
LOKESH CHANDRA (2007:500a). Besides, as the juxtaposition in HANISCH 2005.2:64 demonstrates, its further equivalents in
Tibetan were stod rim(s) and mchog.
 249

[M] I(A) white winged; II(N) white-winged one

SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; FORM[N+A]
[R] thaṅ prom
[A] Originally an epitheton ornans of a species of birds that have white wings, but through a
metonymic shift started to denote the bird itself: *“white wings” > “(one) having white wings”;
*thaṅ dkar > thaṅ kar: d- > Ø / -ṅσ_k- (elision of a dental plosive between two guttural consonants).1

For a detailed analysis of thaṅ see s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ. Compare also the parallel formation of thaṅ prom
(s.v.).

[T] I rgod thaṅ kar thaṅ nag thaṅ ser gsum (41) [ne ru]2 bkum ste (PT 1194:40-1)
“[One] killed the three: a white-winged, a black-winged, [and] a yellow-winged vulture.”
’o na re śig re śig na bya thaṅ kar thaṅ naṅ gñyis śig ya se3 byung / bya thaṅ kar gi4 (v70) mjug la ’jus te (ITJ
731:v69-70; trslr. after THOMAS 1957:18)
“Now, the very one day, the two appeared ?from above? (ya se): a white-winged and a black-winged
bird5. [One] grasped the tail of the white-winged bird.”
myi ṅan bu ni bya (v78) thaṅ kar gi mjug ma la ’jus te bros te mchis (ITJ 731:v77-8; trslr. after THOMAS
1957:19)
“The humble man, having grasped the tail of the white-winged bird, went fleeing.”
II
thaṅ kar yug gyis bsgron ba lha mda’6 yod dam myed (PT 126:141)
“Do [you] have a white-winged one decorated with a piece of stuff or not?”
kye ʼdam gyi ni thaṅ kar du / “Oh! As a white-winged one of ’Dam
lha gśegs ni (492) źal ma ʼtshol // the deity came. [I] did not recognise [its] face.
lha gśegs ni źal ʼtshol na / Had [I] recognised the face [of] the deity that
came,7
dud de ni pyag kyaṅ ʼtshal // having bent [myself], [I] would have paid homage.
pyag mdaʼ ni sleb kyis ʼdzin // (PT 1287:491-2) [I] would seize the arrow with the flat hand.”8

1
BACOT and DOTSON translate thaṅ kar in the OTC as “plaine” and “white plains” respectively. In order for this
interpretation to be accepted, one would need to explain why plains should be called white. All the other occurrences of
thaṅ kar, however, attest to the meaning proposed in the present work.
THOMAS interprets thaṅ kar and thaṅ naṅ (sic!) as proper names, although he notices their similarity to thaṅ prom (see s.v.)
and thaṅ g.yag, respectively (1957:38). Besides, he understands thaṅ as denoting “tail” and relates it to CT ’thaṅ po/mthaṅ
“lower parts of the body” (ibid.)
2
The bracketed element remains untranslated for its exact form and thus the function in the sentence still need to be
determined. It could be read also as ne’u, mesu, resu or reru, with the last reading being most convincing.
3
Here, I follow the OTDO transliteration. THOMAS reads ya me (1957:18).
4
Here, I follow the OTDO transliteration. THOMAS reads gi[s?] (1957:18).
5
I read thaṅ nag instead of thaṅ naṅ. For the emendation compare the passage from PT 1194 cited above. The syllable final
-g assimilated to the final-ṅ of the preceding syllable, thaṅ.
6
I have deleted lha mda’ on comparison with sentences that follow the passage in question. The next sentence begins with
the phrase lha mda’ ’i rkyen, thus it is seems plausible that its first two syllables have been inserted here by mistake.
7
The last two verses could be translated also as “[I] did not offer [him] food. Had [I] offered [him] food [...]”.
8
Notwithstanding the proposed translation, the exact meaning of the stanza remains unclear. I understand sleb as cognate
to CT gleb pa “to make flat, plain” (J:81b) and leb “flat” (J:551b). In OT documents we find three similar VPs, sleb kyis ’dzin
(PT 1287:492), leb kyis blaṅs (PT 1289:v3.5), and sleb g(y)is loṅ (ITJ 738:3v74, 3v129). A working hypothesis is put forward that
sleb could have originally been an epithet ornans of a hand, lit. “the flat one” or “the one that makes flat” if we interpret sleb
as a derivative from the TR *sleb “to make flat”.
 250

65 thaṅ khram
[V] taṅ khram (ITJ 750:222; deaspiration / scribal error?)
thaṅ (PT 997:7, 9; PT 1079:5; scribal error)
taṅ (Or.8212.187:9; scribal error)
BTC:1140b: (rñiṅ) lag ’dzin khyim yig; DSM:286a: ’baṅs daṅ dmag gi lag ’dzin yi ge byaṅ bu; BYD:225b: lag ’dzin khyim yig.
BDN:100n17: btsan po’i dbaṅ thaṅ la gtogs mir mṅa’ ba’i byaṅ bu.
DTH:46: le registre; LALOU.1955:201: cadastre; RÓNA-TAS.1956:166: the khram of the fields, the khram of the meadows;
URAY.1962b:359: tally (register) of authority; n.16: The compound thaṅ khram is used in all of the three passages in
connexion with names of dignitaries, and in two of them obviously in connexion with organizational and personal changes
in offices; UEBACH.2008:58: tally of authority; made on the occasion of changes in the territorial division of Tibet which
affected also the offices and officials; DOTSON.2009:52: tally of jurisdiction; p.112n263: a tally of authority in the sense of
record of officials’ jurisdictions and their rights and duties; HILL.2011:33: tally of ranks.

[E] *thaṅ gi khram “a tally of a particular degree to which something is”

[M] (N) a tally of jurisdiction
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NEXPL+N]
[R] khram skya / mṅa’ thaṅ / dbaṅ thaṅ
[A] In order to ascertain the exact meaning of thaṅ ~ taṅ1 in the OTA we should examine its
occurrences therein:
mṅan mched brgyad las bźir bcos paʼi zlugs gyi riṅ lugs (241) bkyeʼ / dpyid blon chen po maṅ źam gyis /
zlor bsduste / mṅan gyi thaṅ sbyard / khab soʼi khrald pa bskos / (ITJ 750:240-1)
“The envoy was sent with (lit. of) the information [concerning] the reduction of the [number of]
grand mṅans from eight to four. In the spring, grand councillor [Rṅegs] maṅ źam [stag tsab],
having summoned [the council] at Zlo, fixed the thaṅ of mṅans [and] appointed the tax-collectors
for (lit. of) khab so.”

źaṅ rgyal zigs chen pho g.yuʼi yi (read: yi ge) (60) stsalde / mgar ʼdzi / rmun gyi thaṅ du chog śesu bstod
// (Or.8212.187:59-60)
“Having bestowed the turquoise letter [on] the great Źaṅ [mchims rgyal] rgyal zigs [śu theṅ],
[one] praised [him] for being fulfilled (lit. knowing the sufficiency) in thaṅ of mgar ’dzi rmun.”2
Thus, we learn that a thaṅ of mṅan officials was fixed after their number had been changed. In both
passages thaṅ is determined by terms that could be identified as official titles or functions, namely,
mṅan and mgar ’dzi rmun. Now, if we compare these phrases with the meanings of thaṅ as extracted
s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ, we observe that the only sememe that would fit in these contexts is “extent” in its

1
For a detailed semantic analysis of thaṅ in general see s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ.
2
The same sentence in repeated in ll.65-6 of Or.8212.187 in a slightly more corrupted form: źaṅ rgyas zigs chen po ’i ye ge
stsal de mgar ’ji rmun thaṅ du chog śesu bsdod.
mgar ’dzi rmun appears in Or.8212.187 twice in the entries for the year 764/5. It is obvious that it cannot refer to Mgar
khri sgra ’dzi rmun for the latter was a councillor in the early 7th century, during the reign of Khri slon btsan (cf. PT
1287:79-82). From our passage it appears as if mgar ’dzi rmun were an official title. See also a short note on this issue in
DOTSON 2009:133-4n366 who states “From the edict of Khri Sroṅ-lde-brtsan preserved by Dpa’ bo Gtsug-lag, it appears that
Mgar-’dzi-rmun is the highest rank among ministers of the interior.” One could tentatively reconstruct the first two
syllables of the word as *’gar rdzi “a herd of cattle”; for ’gar- compare ’gar Balti, Chiktan “crossbreed of yak bull and female
dzo”, Tshangra “male crossbreed of yak bull and female dzo” (CDTD:1645), and CT ’gar ba “1masc. ’gar-po, fem. ’gar mo, a
mixed breed of cattle, of a mdzo and a common cow, or a bull and a mdzo-mo” (J:93a). The exact meaning and function of
the third syllable, -rmun, remain unknown.
 251

special sense of “a particular degree to which something is”. In the language of the Tibetan imperial
administration it would refer, in author’s opinion, to the jurisdiction, i.e. the sphere over which the
legal authority of an official extends.1 To sum up, a thaṅ khram was a tally containing the account of
the jurisdiction of an official that was issued accompanying important changes in the
administration.

I propose to read *thaṅ khram instead of the attested t(h)aṅ in PT 997:7, 9, PT 1079:5, and
Or.8212.187:9. It is conspicuous that t(h)aṅ occurs in these cases as a direct object of the verb ’debs in
thaṅ ’debs, thaṅ btab, thaṅ gdab, and taṅ btab, respectively. These can be confronted with, on the one
hand, the phrases khram ’debs (for examples see s.v. khram skya) as well as khram thaṅ (chen po) ’debs
(see the Text section below) and, on the other hand, with the absence of the phrase *thaṅ ’debs in the
available OT sources (except for the very passages cited below that are claimed to be corrupt).2 The
reason for omitting the second syllable of the compound in these four cases is not clear. With regard
to PT 997, it could be the co-occurrence of the morpheme thaṅ for *thaṅ khram in another
compound, to wit, lha ris thaṅ rtsis (< *lha ris kyi [thaṅ khram gyi rtsis]) in l.6. This could have
“inspired” the scribe to interpret the original phrase *’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ gi thaṅ khram in l.7 as
*’baṅs daṅ [dkor stsaṅ gi thaṅ khram] (instead of the proper *[’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ] gi thaṅ khram) and
subsequently to truncate its latter part to dkor stsaṅ thaṅ. In addition, one should not understate the
fact that administrative and legal documents like PT 997 and PT 1079, respectively, are noted for the
succinctness of their language. Examples of compounds that consist of more than two syllables,
although otherwise seldom in OT, can be encountered more often in these genres, cf. lha ris thaṅ rtsis
or kwa cu lha ris (PT 997:9). It can be presumed that the formulaic style forced the omission of
genitive particles in the first line. Thus, a phrase like *’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ gi thaṅ khram might have in
fact been written originally as *’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ thaṅ khram and, misunderstood, shortened to the
attested *’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ thaṅ. Or.8212.187, on the other hand, in known for its numerous scribal
errors and unstable orthography which could be responsible also for the replacement of the original
*thaṅ khram with taṅ.

As already mentioned above, the compound thaṅ khram is additionally reconstructed in the
underlying structure of lha ris thaṅ rtsis < *lha ris kyi [thaṅ khram gyi rtsis].

[T] lha ris thaṅ rtsis mdzad pa’i riṅ lugs spyi la mchis pa // ban de ’bre gźon nu blo gros daṅ / ru dpon roṅs
po lha ’dus (7) kyi g.yar sṅar // ’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) ’debs pa’i riṅ lugs / naṅ khor
gśen rma sbyin daṅ ru ’theb ta ne (8) cuṅ daṅ stoṅ pon ro ’bye stag slebs daṅ / lo stag legs daṅ gñan rgyal bzaṅ
lastsogs pa’i (9) grar // kwa cu lha ris kyi khab so / sṅon gźi ’dzin ban de man ’ju śi ris thaṅ (read: thaṅ
khram) btab (PT 997:6-9; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1992:107-8)
“In the presence of ban de ’Bre gźon nu blo gros and the head of the Horn, Roṅs po lha ’dus, the
representatives who were making accounts of the tallies of jurisdiction of the monastic estate (lha ris

1
Compare also similar conclusions reached by DOTSON in 2009:52-3n73.
2
Neither did the survey of lexicographical sources on CT yield any such phrases.
 252

thaṅ rtsis) and who were in the fore, the khab so of the monastic estate [of] Kwa cu, the earlier
resident ban de Man ’ju śi ri, issued a tally of jurisdiction to the ?college? of representatives who
were issuing tallies of jurisdiction [of] subjects and property in grain, the naṅ khor Gśen rma sbyin,
ru ’theb Ta ne cuṅ, the head of the Thousand-District, Ro ’bye stag slebs, Lo stag legs, Gñan rgyal
bzaṅ, among others.”
źaṅ legs sum brtsan daṅ / blon rgyal bzaṅ daṅ / źaṅ legs bzaṅ gis // kwa cu khrom kyi ’dun sa / tsheg pe’ur
bsdud (5) pa’i lan gyi dgun / bde gams gyi lha ris khab so bzlug ciṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) gdab par chad
nas // (PT 1079:4-5; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184)
“In the winter, at the time when Źaṅ legs sum brtsan, councillor Rgyal bzaṅ, and Źaṅ legs bzaṅ
gathered [the council] at Tsheg pe’u, the assembly hall of the khrom of Kwa cu, the monastic estates
of Bde gams were decided so that, while khab so were informed, tallies of jurisdiction were issued.”
ʼdun ma mkhar phrag du / blon khri sum rjes bsdus nas / mṅan (222) daṅ / sluṅs stod smad gyi thaṅ khram
chen po btab / (ITJ 750:221-2)
“Councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer] gathered the council at Mkhar phrag. Thereafter, [he]
issued a great tally of jurisdiction for (lit. of) mṅans and upper and lower sluṅs.”
dgun ʼdun byar liṅs tsal du blon chen po cuṅ bzaṅ gyis bsduste / mṅan (251) chen po brgyad las / bźir bcos
paʼi taṅ khram btab / (ITJ 750:250-1)
“Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having gathered the winter council at Byar liṅs tsal,
issued a tally of jurisdiction, in which [one] reduced [the number of] grand mṅans from eight to
four.”
zlor śud pu khoṅ zuṅ daṅ / laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan gñis / ʼbyuṅ ʼjugi rtsis bgyiste thaṅ khram (291) btab / (ITJ
750:290-1)
“Having made an account of replacing both, Śud pu khoṅ zuṅ and Laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan, at Zlo, [one]
issued a tally of jurisdiction.”
mdun ma skyi bya rliṅ tsaldu (8) blon ce cuṅ bzaṅ daṅ / ʼbal ldoṅ tsab daṅ laṅ myes zigs gsum gyis bsduste /
ru bźi ʼbrog sogi mkhos bgyis / dgu (9) khol gyi khral phab pha bsduste / blon skyes bzaṅ stag snaṅ la taṅ
(read: thaṅ khram) btab par lo gchig / (Or.8212.187:7-9)
“The three, grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], ’Bal [skyes bzaṅ] ldoṅ tsab, and Laṅ myes
zigs, having gathered the council at Bya rliṅ tsal [of] Skyi, made arrangements for (lit. of) summer
pastures and hay lands [of] the Four Horns. Having gathered imposed taxes [paid by] (lit. of)
bondsmen, [they] issued a tally of jurisdiction for (lit. of) councillor [Dba’s] skyes bzaṅ stag snaṅ.
Thus one year.”

66 thaṅ prom
[V] thaṅ ’phrom (ITJ 739:12v5; scribal error?)
DSM:286a: thaṅ dkar.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:83n225: bya rgod thaṅ dkar. bya rgod lus po’i spu mdog dkar ba; BDN:367n4: rgod de ʼdab chags rgod thaṅ
dkar lta bur ʼjug pa ʼdra; BTK:70n4: thaṅ phrom ste rgod thaṅ dkar daṅ thaṅ smug la’o; BNY:139n32: bya rgod thaṅ dkar.
bya rgod lus po’i spu mdog dkar ba; STK:152n24: bya rgod dkar la zer.
DTH:140: Thaṅ prom (proper name - JB); THOMAS.1957:81: Thaṅ prom (proper name - JB); p.98: Tail-white; STEINRA.1972:255:
with belly white; URAY.1972a:21: of white belly; ZEISLER.2011:117: white-breasted or white-tailed; DOTSON.2013a:336n30:
apparently the same as thaṅ dkar, a term for the lammergeier, or bearded vulture, which has white feathers on its breast
and its head.1

1
More commonly CT thaṅ phrom is glossed as a kind of medicinal herb, cf.: “a medicinal herb” (J:228b), “datura”
(Desg:445b), “см. thaṅ khrom” (R.4:21a); “white henbane” (Gs:486b; s.v. thaṅ phrom dkar po); “black henbane” (Gs:486b; s.v.
thaṅ phrom nag po), “sṅo sman gyi rigs śig” (BTC:1142a; s.vv. thaṅ phrom dkar po, thaṅ phrom khra bo, thaṅ phrom nag po), “=
thaṅ khrom” (LCh:338c; thaṅ khrom “dhustūra (sic!)”, LCh:338b), “čaγan datur-a” (SR.1:906.7, s.v. thaṅ phrom dkar po; datur-a
 253

[E] *thaṅ phrom “white spread ones”

[M] (N) white-winged one
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] thaṅ kar / ldoṅ prom
[A] Apart from the compound thaṅ prom, prom ~ phrom is found also as the second member of the
compounds ldoṅ prom (see s.v.) and sñi prom. On the other hand, it occurs as an independent lexeme,
for instance, in the following passage:
thaṅ ba sñun kyaṅ bśos / dmu thaṅ [sñun kyaṅ] bśos / gnaʼ bas daʼ yaṅ bzaṅ phrom bas lod kyaṅ dkar //
(PT 1285:r76)
“Thaṅ ba dmu thaṅ, although having been ill, became bśos. [He] is now [even] more beautiful
than before. Also [his] lod is [even] more white than phrom.”
and in a variant form phrum in:
thaṅ ba g.yu thaṅ sñun kyaṅ bśos / gnaʼ bas daʼ bzaṅ / phrum bas lod dkar // (PT 1285:r55)
“Thaṅ ba g.yu thaṅ, although having been ill, became bśos. [He] is now [even] more beautiful than
before. Also [his] lod is [even] more white than phrum.”

ʼol rje zin braṅ sñun kyaṅ bśos / gnaʼ bas daʼ yaṅ bzaṅ phrum bas lod gyaṅ dkar // (PT 1285:r115)
“Zin braṅ, the lord of ’Ol, although having been ill, became bśos. [He] is now [even] more beautiful
than before. Also [his] lod is [even] more white than phrum.”
From these we can infer that phrum ~ phrom1 was a substance of white or nearly white colour. Now,
we find phrum glossed as “źo daṅ dar ba” (DSM:511a) and “źo sla bo’am da ra lta bu” (GC:542a).2 Thus,
in the passages just quoted, one’s lod3 is said to be even more white than curd. phrum ~ phrom seems
to be cognate to Gyarong (WT rgyal roṅ) prɑm in kə prɑm which, according to NAGANO (2008:101),
could be cognate to PLB *plu (MATISOFF 2003:74) and PTB *plu “white” (STC:205).4 The derived

is a loanword from Skt. dhattūra). The historical relationship between this lexeme and the one analysed below remains to
be clarified.
1
The vowel -u- seems to be better attested in cognate languages, see below. The variant form phrom as an independent
morpheme can be explained as resulting from back formation: *thaṅ phrom / ldoṅ prom (see s.v.) > phrom. The form *thaṅ
phrom (< *thaṅ phrum) could have come into being due to the partial vowel assimilation: -u- > -o- / -aCσCC_-, cf. also ldoṅ
prom.
2
Cf. also EMMERICK’s rendering “beestings” (1985:309) and the following explanations given by KARMAY: “the word phrom
has the connotation of ‘white’: skya phrom phrom = ko sogs mdog, ‘colour of hide, etc.’, understood as ‘white’. Moreover, the
word phrum designates: dar ba’am źo, ‘curds’ or ‘yogurt’ [...]. There are other examples of phrom with meaning white in our
text: Thug mo phrom phrom, name of a white ewe; ’Bri mo phrom phrom, name of a white ’bri, the female yak.” (1998:264-
5:n78).
3
LALOU translated lod as “pustules” (1958:183). From the context one would rather expect here words like “countenance,
face” or “complexion, skin”. In support of this hypothesis one can quote the reconstructed PTB root *s-lwa SKIN
(http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/595; 22.03.2015) and its possible derivatives: Lepcha lut “to
uncover, to strip off, as skin, bark, thatch, to turn over as leaf of book” (MG:356a) and Chepang hlyu- “vt. peel off (skin), lift
off root thatch, take down nets”, hlyut- “vi. strip off (skin)”, hlyun “old or cast skin; scurf”, hlyun- “vt. peel off (clothes, skin
of snake, etc.), undress” (CAUGHLEY 2000:303b; although, according to STEDT, the Chepang hlyu- shall be connected to PTani
*rjo SKIN, cf. http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/599; 22.03.2015). However, the exact meaning of
lod remains unknown for the time being.
4
THOMAS (1957:38) quotes additionally Qiangic (his: Hsi-fan) prom “white” although without specifying the source for this
information. Cf. also Źaṅ źuṅ phrum “white” (MARTIN 2010:148a, who emphasises that it is not the usual word for “white” in
Źaṅ źuṅ).
 254

meaning “curd” can be compared with the meaning of dkar mo which could denote dairy products in
OT.1

Basing our conclusions on these observations, we can state that thaṅ prom was a synonym of thaṅ kar
(see s.v.) and denoted a variety of vulture, namely a one with white wings. As opposed to thaṅ kar, no
attributive usage of thaṅ prom has been attested so far.

One could speculate about the origins of the compounds putting forward a dialectal hypothesis,
according to which thaṅ kar and thaṅ prom (< *thaṅ phrom: deaspiration in the onset of the second
syllable) stemmed from two different dialects. The only text in which they both occur is PT 12872,
although they do so in various episodes: thaṅ kar in chapter XI containing the song of Lady of Cog ro
performed in the presence of Khri ’dus sroṅ (676-704) and thaṅ prom in chapter IV relating the reign
of Gnam ri slon btsan (early seventh century)3. The occurrence in the OTC of terms that could have
originated from different dialects would be another argument for the compositional character of the
text.

[T] phar snaṅ gi ya pyi la / “On the heights4 of Phar snaṅ,

thaṅ prom ni rgod ltiṅ (r78) ba’ / a white-winged one, a soaring vulture,
snal sum ni na bźag (read: źags?) ’debs [one], having put three ?threads [together], throws
[it]?.5
źags gi ni (r79) [re myi]6 zin (PT 1052:r77-9) [it] can never be seized with the lasso.”7
rtsaṅ braṅ ni ya stod kyi “In Rtsaṅ braṅ, of the hights
thaṅ prom ni rgod ldiṅ baʼ // a white-winged one, a soaring vulture –
rgod bkum ni zu tses bkum // [one] killed the vulture. Zu tse killed [it].
rgod (223) gśog ni pyag du pul / [He] presented vulture’s wings to [the btsan po’s] hands.
gsab gsob ni lho rṅegs stsald // (PT 1287:222-3) [The btsan po] offered the gsab gsob to Lho and
Rṅegs.”
bya rgod po / thaṅ prom thaṅ g.yag / kyis mthoṅ ste / ya maṅ ya tu bkal (ITJ 734:3r96)
“The wild birds, the white-winged one [and] the black-winged one8, having seen [him], loaded many
companions1.”

1
Compare hereto the note on phrum in MARTIN 2010:148a: “This occurs in the comm. vocabulary in a list of foodstuffs,
corresp[onding] to Tib[etan] kar, which may just as well be Tib[etan] ka ra ‘sugar’.” In the OT context the more plausible
interpretation of dkar mo is the one proposed above.
2
Besides, thaṅ kar is attested in PT 126, PT 1194, and ITJ 731, whereas thaṅ prom in PT 1052, ITJ 734, and ITJ 739.
3
The chapter numbers follow those proposed in DOTSON 2013a:408-9.
4
I assume that ya pyi = ya byi in ITJ 739:12v5 (see below) = CT ya gi, cf. HAHN 1996:82n2. Compare hereto also the phrase ya
stod kyi thaṅ prom ni rgod ldiṅ ba from PT 1287 cited below. Thus, it seems that ya pyi/byi is a synonym of ya stod.
5
Since it is obvious that the third verse of the stanza is to some extent distorted, its translation can be treated only as
tentative. Although it seems plausible that the original version resembled or even was identical with the verse in the
stanza from ITJ 739 cited below, I decided to render it as it has come down to us understanding snal sum as *snal ma gsum
“three threads” that should be put together (bźag) in order to throw them as a kind of lasso.
6
I have reconstructed this fragment by analogy with the passage from ITJ 739 cited below.
7
The same passage occurs also in ITJ 739 quoted below. The wording of the latter text seems to be better preserved.
8
The juxtaposition of thaṅ prom with thaṅ g.yag (cf. thaṅ kar and thaṅ nag in PT 1194 and ITJ 731 cited s.v. thaṅ kar) throws
new light on the origin of the word g.yag that is commonly glossed as “the yak” (J:516b). I would tentatively reconstruct
the latter compound as *thaṅ yag (Ø > g- / -ṅ(velar nasal)σ_, or through folk etymologisation replacing the original *yag with a
better known word g.yag) and assume the analogical development as in case of nag pa “black” > gnag OT “black cattle”.
Alternatively, -g.yag could have resulted from misreading the original *-gnag as -g.yag. This would mean that the document
at our disposal is a copy of another written text.
 255

kye bar snaṅ dag ya byi na / “Oh! On the heights [of] Bar snaṅ,
thaṅ ’phrom nig (read: ni) rgod ltiṅ (v6) ba’ / a white-winged one, a soaring vulture,
rtsal bu ni źabs (read: źags) ’debs kyaṅ / although [one] throws a lasso [towards] the adroit one2,
źags gyis (v7) ni re myi zin (ITJ 739:12v5-7) [it] can never be seized with the lasso.3”

67 thugs ñen
BSODDBAṄ.1992:78n93: ’gro soṅ; BDN:100n18: naṅ ’khor gyi ’gro sgo yin par ’byuṅ (s.v. khab so thugs ñen).
DTH:46: Thugs ñen (proper name - JB); n.3: thugs ñen peut vouloir dire parent, ami; LALOU.1952:354: parents;
DOTSON.2007b:47-8: close relatives; p.48n65: thugs gñen, literally ‘heart relative’, perhaps refers to the hereditary
aristocracy, or more explicitly to the near relatives of the Tibetan Emperor, but its definition is far from certain;
DOTSON.2009:113: should presumably be read as thugs gñen, literally “heart functionaries”. This might be taken to refer to
the hereditary aristocracy, and perhaps more explicitly to the near relatives of the Tibetan emperor.

[S] *thug źiṅ sñen “to receive [sth.] while [it] arrives”
[E] *thug źiṅ sñen pa “receiving while sth. arrives”
[M] (N) supply
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; FORM[VV1+VV1]
[A] thugs ñen attested, as far as I was able to ascertain, altogether three times in OT documents
represents in fact two etymologically independent lexemes: *thugs gñen and *thug sñen. We are
concerned here with the latter that underwent re-analysis of the morpheme boundaries from
*thugσs+ñen to thugsσñen (consonant migration) by analogy with the well known word thugs. There
can be no doubt that this shift was additionally influenced by another, perhaps better known, word
*thugs gñen that, as an honorific, possessed greater esteem.

The underlying structure is reconstructed as *thug źiṅ sñen, lit. “to receive [sth.] while [it] arrives”,
both verbs being near-synonyms, cf.: thug pa “1to reach, arrive at, come to; 2to meet, to light upon;
3
to touch, to hit or strike upon” (J:232b) and sñen pa “1to approach, to come near; 2to propitiate,
soothe, satisfy; 3to accept, receive, admit” (J:201b, s.v. bsñen pa).4 In the passage from ITJ 750 cited
below, we read that deficiency (lhag cad) of thugs ñen was calculated.

Taking these arguments into account, I propose the meaning “supply (N)” for the compound in
question. ’gro sgo “expense, expenditure” glossed in BDN as a semantic equivalent of thugs ñen also

1
I interpret ya maṅ ya tu as a hyperbaton of the original *ya maṅ du “many companions”. For my tentative translation of ya
compare “Ioften with gcig, one of two things that belong together as being of one kind, or forming a pair, also one of two
opponents” (J:504a) and *ya-do* “in W. the common word for grogs and zla bo associate, companion, assistant” (J:504a; s.v.
yaI). Alternatively, one could interpret ya maṅ ya ru as a an hyperbaton.
2
I understand rtsal bu as another metaphor for vulture that refers to its flying skills, cf. hereto: gśog rtsal “ability to fly,
flying skill” (Gs:1109a); rtsal chuṅ Nangchen “small leaps” (CDTD:6626); and rtsal chen Nangchen “big leaps” (CDTD:6627).
For źabs being corrected to źags compare bźag above, in PT 1052:r78, and the following verse. The VP *źags ’debs can be
juxtaposed with the CT źags pa rgyab pa/’phen pa “to throw the noose” (J:471b).
3
For the phrase źags gyis zin compare the CT źags thag gis ’dzin pa quoted by JÄSCHKE s.v. źags although without translation
(471b) but also OT źags breṅ źags mñen gyis bdabsde (read: btabste) (PT 1068:106-7) and źags ’breṅ gis bzuṅ (PT 1136:22).
4
Compare also sñen pa “an approaching; gaining, procuring” (Cs:324a). Its word family seems to include: ñe “Ito be near, to
approach; IInear” (J:189a-b); ñen “a relative” (J:190b); ñer bu “living relatives” (BELLEZZA 2008:512; < *ñe bar?); gñe ba “a
wooer, courter” (J:193a); gñen “1kinsman, relative; 2helper, friend, assistant” (J:193a); rñed “Ito get, obtain, acquire; to meet
with, find; IIprofit, gain, acquisition; property, goods” (J:195b-6a); sñe “to lean against, to rest on” (J:199b); sñe “pillow”
(CDTD:3012); sñed “about, near” (J:200a), also in: ’di/de sñed “so much, so many” (J:200a); sñes pa “inclined, leaned to”
(Cs:324a).
 256

underlines the economic character of the term.1 To sum up, *thug sñen denoted objects that were
received, in our case by khab sos, and were crucial to the functioning of the office.

[T] dgun ʼdun mkhar prag du / blon chen pho khri sum rjes bsduste / khab soe thugs ñen (226) gyi lhag cad
brtsis (ITJ 750:225-6)
“Grand councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having summoned the winter council in the
castle Prag, calculated the deficiency in the khab sos’ supplies.”

68 thoṅ myi
[V] thom myig (PT 1071:r69; assimilation, folk etymology)
boṅ myi (PT 1071:r212; scribal error?)
YeŚes:246b: su’i ’a pug chiṅ, gsod par ’dod pa (s.v. thoṅ mi ba); BYMD:53r1: kümün alaquvar duralaγči (s.v. thoṅ mi ba);
SR.1:945.2-3: raṅ ñid gsod par ’dod pa (s.v. thoṅ mi pa); GC:377a: gsod par ’dod pa (s.v. thoṅ mi ba); BTC:1194a: (rñiṅ) dgra śa
len par yoṅ mkhan gyi mi (s.v. thoṅ myi); p.1194a: (rñiṅ) 1gsod par ’dod pa; 2gśed ma (s.v. thoṅ mi ba); Negi.5:2073b:
manuṣyaghātakaḥ (s.v. thoṅ mi byed pa); DSM:302b: dgra śa len par yoṅ mkhan; [...] ’di la thoṅ myig bris pa’aṅ snaṅ ste (s.v.
thoṅ myi); p.302a: raṅ ñid gsod par ’dod pa (s.v. thoṅ mi pa); BYD:233b: gsod par ’dod pa daṅ gśed ma’i miṅ (s.v. thoṅ mi ba).
BSODDBAṄ.1992:73n15: dgra śa len par yoṅ mkhan (s.v. thoṅ myi); DUṄDKAR:1067a: raṅ ñid gsod par ’dod pa źes pa’i don (s.v.
thoṅ mi pa); p.1067b: dgra śa len par yoṅ mkhan (s.v. thoṅ myi).
Desg:462b: laboureur (s.v. thoṅ mi); R.4:77b: жаждуший убийства, помышляющиц об убийстве; палач; thinking about
murder; executioner (s.v. thoṅ mi ba).
DTH:31: les gens de Bye ’da thoṅ (reads: bye-‘da’-thong-myi - JB); YAMAGUCHI.1975:26: Thoṅ-myi (proper name - JB);
RICHARDSON.1998c:150: homicide; DOTSON.2007b:10: homicide; BELLEZZA.2008:391n114: homicide; DOTSON.2009:85: homicide;
n.141: alternatively: Thoṅ myi (as an ethnic group); HILL.2011:28: homicide; VANSCHAIK.2011:51n22: probably [...] someone
involved in a blood feud.2

[E] *thoṅ myig (< *thoṅ gi dmyigs) gi myi “a man of a suicide/murder attempt“
[M] (N) murderer
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[NPURP+N]+N]
[R] thoṅ myig / pur myi / mu su / mun mag / myi rlag
[A] Although already in OT documents the compounds thoṅ myig (see s.v.) and thoṅ myi seem to
have been confused (see the variants listed above), the contexts in which they were used leave no
doubt that we have to reckon in fact with two independent formations.

As can be clearly seen from the passage in PT 1288:26, thoṅ myi could take the agent-position in the
argument structure of the transitive verb “to kill” (bkum). Thus, it is justified to assume that the
second member of the compound (-myi) should indeed be understood as referring to a human being.

Now, the contexts, first of all those in which the compound occurs in PT 1071 and PT 1072 (see s.v.
thoṅ myig for some examples), clearly demonstrate that it was used in connection with homicide.
Accordingly, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound as *thoṅ myig (<
*thoṅ gi dmyigs) gi myi “a man of a suicide/murder attempt”; for the meaning of thoṅ- see s.v. thoṅ

1
However, two objections could be raised against the meaning proposed by BDN: 1. The verb ’gro shows a different vector
of action, i.e. “to go” as against “to reach” of thug; 2. One cannot really calculate deficiency (lhag cad) of expenses. Similar
objections can be made against the explanation put forward in BSODDBAṄ 1992 (see the Lexicographic section).
2
The compound seems to be additionally attested, albeit in a distorted form, in the phrase lag stoṅ mi śa ~ lag gtoṅ mi śa
“dgra bo’am khon ’dzin can” (GC:851a). -stoṅ/gtoṅ mi- can be identified with the analysed OT thoṅ myi. The shift to stoṅ- has
come most probably into being through folk etymologisation (less known thoṅ- being replaced by a better connoted stoṅ-)
whereas the variant gtoṅ- has resulted from the onset assimilation to the preceding coda: s- > g- / -gσ_.
 257

myig. The variant form with -myig, attested three times in PT 1071 (l.r64: thoṅ myig, twice; l.r69: thom
myig), is assumed to have been influenced by the similar formation thoṅ myig (see s.v.) and a possible
association of the first syllable thoṅ- with the verb mthoṅ.

[T] mdas phogste / ṅa’i mda’ ma yin ces sñon sñon ma chaṅste (read: tshaṅste) / mdas / (r14) phogs gum
yaṅ ruṅ ma gum / yaṅ ruṅ // thoṅ myi daṅ khrims gcigo // sñon sñon pa tshaṅs daṅ / skur pa zan kyaṅ /
(r15) thoṅ myi’i skur pa zan daṅ khrims gcig du dbaṅo (PT 1071:r13-5)
“[If], having shot with an arrow, [the person] denying ‘[It] was not my arrow.’ was not exonerated
(lit. cleared) and [no matter] whether the one shot with the arrow died or not, [it] is one law with a
murderer. [If] the person denying was exonerated, though the ill-fame is cleared (lit. consumed)
[the case] is decided as one law with [the one that applies for persons] cleared from the ill-fame of a
murderer.”
mda’s ni phogste / ṅa’i / (r25) mda’ ma yin ces / mchi / sñon sñon ma tshaṅs daṅ / mda’s phog pa gus (read:
gum) yaṅ ruṅ / ma gum yaṅ ruṅ / thoṅ / (r26) myi khrims bźin du dgum / sñon sñon changsna (read:
tshaṅsna) / skur pa zan kyaṅ / thoṅ myi’i skur pa zan daṅ khrims gcig / (r27) du gbaṅo (PT 1071:r24-7)
“[A person], having shot with an arrow, says ‘[It] was not my arrow.’. [If he] was not exonerated and
[no matter] whether the one shot with the arrow died or not, [he] is to be killed according to the law
of a murderer1. If the person denying, was exonerated, though the ill-fame is cleared (lit. consumed)
[the case] is decided as one law with [the one that applies for persons] cleared from the ill-fame of a
murderer.”
bro stsald pa las (read: la2) / dkar chagsna thoṅ myi daṅ khrims bgyispa gcig go (PT 1071:r30)
“For those who took an oath the enforced law is one with [that of] a murderer [that stands] in
registers.”
mdo smadu kam khri (26) bzaṅ bye ʼdaʼ thoṅ myis bkum ste śa gñard phar lo gchig / (PT 1288:25-6)
“At Mdo smad, a murderer killed Kam khri bzaṅ bye ’da’. [One] took revenge [on him]. So one year.”3

69 thoṅ myig
BYD:234b: thoṅ mig. ’bras kyi miṅ daṅ mig la’aṅ ’jug.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:74n26: ’bras kyi na tsha (deb ther dkar po śiṅ par śog lhe pa’i naṅ du gsal).
DTH:32: se voir; n.8: dans le vernaculaire actuel, voir est mig mthoṅ ba; TLTD.3:141b: seeing eye; DOTSON.2009:88: thoṅ myig;
HILL.2011:25: thoṅ myig (?).

[E] *thoṅ gi dmyigs “intention of a loss”

[M] (N) 1suicide attempt; 2murder attempt
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPURP+N]
[R] thoṅ myi / noṅs myig
[A] Two morphologically comparable compounds, thoṅ myi and thoṅ myig, are documented in OT
texts. thoṅ myig occurs in PT 1071 in phrases analogous to those in which thoṅ myi appears elsewhere
in PT 1071 and PT 1072, cf., e.g.:
thoṅ myig khrimsu dgumo ~ thoṅ myi’i khrims bźin du dgum
thoṅ myig kyi skur pa ~ thoṅ myi’i skur pa

1
Cf. thoṅ myi’i khrims in ll.r34, 95, 118, 231, 245, 262, 285, 298, and thoṅ myi’i bka’ khrims in ll.r76-7.
2
Cf. bro stsald pa la in ll.r18, 44, as well as in PT 1072:22 and 34.
3
According to OTDO, the compound occurs altogether 61 times in PT 1072 and 11 times in PT 1072.
 258

thom myig daṅ bka’ grims gcig go ~ thoṅ myi daṅ bka’ khrims gcig go
As these few examples already demonstrate, both texts are written in an unsettled orthography and
their syntax is highly distorted (for more examples see s.v. thoṅ myi). Apart from these occurrences,
thoṅ myig and thoṅ myi are attested in PT 1288:47 and 26, respectively.

-myig in thoṅ myig is assumed to be an altered form of the stem dmyigs1; CT dmigs “1to fancy, imagine;
to think, to construe in one’s mind; 2thought, idea, fancy” (J:422b-3a), for which compare also the
dialectal data: Nurla ʂmikse tʃo “to act intentionally” and Tabo mīː ncAD “to consider, to have in
mind” (CDTD.V:969); Balti “intrigue, plan against so. else”, Kargil “thought”, Tshangra, Chiktan,
Nubra “plan”. In JÄSCHKE’s dictionary we find additionally the following examples from Milarepa’s
songs: don dmigs pa “to intend a benefit or profit for another person” (423a) and ñes dmigs
“punishment” (423b), “reproach; punishment for faults. In C[entral Tibet] ‘ñe-mig’ is a term for
punishment, penalty” (D:489b), “wrongs, misdeeds, violations, crimes” (Gs:423b). Apart from these,
further compounds and phrases containing the morpheme are lexicographically attested: skal
dmyigs “(rñiṅ) skyin tshab” (BTC:117b); ched dmigs “1specially set aside, specially dedicated to sth.;
2
special, specially” (Gs:373c); gtar dmigs “points from which blood is drawn” (Gs:450c); gdab dmigs
“gdab par bya ba’i dmigs yul” (BTC:1342b); phugs dmigs “(the person or fortune) that a family relies,
depends on for the fortune” (Gs:681c); ’bul dmigs sa źiṅ “fields that can be used as a collateral on a
loan” (Gs:764c); me dmigs “the points or areas on the human body where moxabustion can be
applied” (Gs:817c); gzer dmigs “na tsha yod sa’i gnad gsaṅ” (BTC:2510a). The original meaning of
dmigs- in all these formations can be traced back either to the verb *“to intend” or to the noun
*”intention”.

thoṅ-. A few lexemes and phrases occur in PT 1071 and PT 1072 that, on the one hand, are somehow
related to homicide and, on the other hand, demonstrate a strikingly similar morphology to the
analysed thoṅ myig. We find, namely:
stoṅ mñam “to equal a stoṅ”
stoṅ ’jal du yaṅ myi gnaṅ “not to be allowed even to repay a stoṅ”
myi stoṅ “a man’s stoṅ”
thoṅ myi daṅ khrims gcigo “to be one law with thoṅ myi”
thoṅ myi’i skur pa “ill-fame of a thoṅ myi”
All these are connected to the notion of homicide and refer to a penalty that should be imposed on a
man who is responsible for somebody’s death. stoṅ is glossed in lexicographic works as “2a fine for
manslaughter, to be paid in money or goods to the relatives of the person killed” (J:222b). I assume
that it is a cognate of CT stoṅ pa “empty, clear” (J:222b) and stoṅs “2to make empty; to be empty, to
become waste or desolate” (J:223a). CDTD.V:533 glosses the following dialectal meanings for the verb

1
The change from *-dmyigs to -myig might have been triggered by the connection of thoṅ (wrongly interpreted as related
to mthoṅ-) with myig “eye” and/or by associating the compound with the similar formation, i.e. thoṅ myi (see s.v.).
 259

stoṅ: Balti ncA “to lose, to be lost”, Kargil ncA “to go blind”, Tshangra ncA “to diappear, to be lost”,
Sapi ncA “to disappear, to disintegrate”, Khalatse ncA “to vanish, to be deserted”, Nurla ncA “to
disintegrate”, Leh ncA “to disappear, to vanish, to die out”, Nubra ncA “to die (out)”, Southern
Mustang ncA “to thin out, to decrease”, Western Drokpas ncA “to become empty, to become
desolate”, Kyirong ncA “to be deserted, to be without descendants”, Yolmo “to die out”, Shigatse
ncA “to be without descendants”, Dzongkha “to be empty”. On this evidence I propose to
reconstruct the meaning of the previously mentioned noun stoṅ as *”a loss”. As further CT cognates
the following lexemes could be introduced:
thoṅs in: thoṅs ’dzin “a receipt” (D:593a);
mthoṅs “free place” (CDTD:3696);
mthoṅs pa “to lose one’s senses; one who has lost his senses” (D:605a);
doṅ “1a deep hole, pit, ditch; 2depth, deepness, profundity” (J:258a), Balti, Leh “hole
in the earth for storage” (CDTD:3919);
’doṅ ba “to go, to proceed” (J:280a).1
thoṅ- in thoṅ myi is assumed to belong to the same word family. Its original meaning seems to have
been “a loss”. stoṅ proposed above to have had the same meaning constitutes in all probability a
secondary variant that was created by analogy with stoṅ *”to make empty” - a derivative by means
of the causative prefix s- from *thoṅ *“to go away, to get lost” (cf. sthoṅ in myi sthoṅ, PT 1071:r146) -
or stoṅ “thousand” through the association of the fine with the amount of money or goods to be paid
for manslaughter.2 One could speculate whether thoṅ has not been derived from V4 of gtoṅ ba “1to
let; ato let go, to permit to go, to dismiss; to let escape; to let loose; to leave, abandon, renounce; bto
let in, to admit; 2to let go, to make go, to send; 3to let have, to give; 4to make, to cause” (J:208b-9a). In
this case, the etymological meaning of thoṅ could be proposed as *“what shall be lost”.

Conclusions. By analogy with other formations containing the morpheme -dm(y)igs, we can
reconstruct the compound under consideration as *thoṅ gi dmyigs “intention of a loss”3, i.e., “1suicide
attempt; 2murder attempt”, cf. Ger. (Selbst)mordversuch. In PT 1288:47 we read that thoṅ myig
appeared (byuṅ) apparently in connection with the return of the councillor Mgar stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ
to Tibet. The councillor died next year (PT 1288:48). Contrary to the case of Kam khri bzaṅ bye ’da’
(PT 1288:25-6), no vengeance was taken after his death. This makes room for the interpretation
according to which thoṅ myig connoted also a suicidal wish. The reconstruction of -myig as *dmyigs-

1
Compare hereto Lepcha toṅ “(T[ibetan] doṅ gone) to be extinct, as race; to be obsolete, as word” (MG:140a); toṅ “T[ibetan]
stoṅ (pa); 1empty, void; unpopulated, uninhabited” (MG:140a).
2
The alternation thoṅ ~ stoṅ is additionally confirmed by the phrase lag stoṅ mi śa ~ lag gtoṅ mi śa glossed in GC with “dgra
bo’am khon ’dzin can” (851a) in which we recognise OT thoṅ myi (see s.v.). gtoṅ- in the second variant of the phrase
resulted probably from the assimilation of the initial s- to the final -g of lag.
3
Another argument for this interpretation is provided by the analogically formed compound noṅs myig (see s.v.). The
latter is also a subject of the verb ’byuṅ (Źol N 22-3) just as thoṅ myig in PT 1288:47 is.
Both words thoṅ(s) and dmigs occur together in one phrase in PT 1289 the exact sense of which remains unfortunately
obscure, cf.: yar ñe yar ñena luṅ gi ya phu ya kon ya ’brug / skad thoṅ se thoṅs dmyig gchig / mye ltar tsher te tsherd (PT 1289:r3.3-
4) “[...] like fire shining, shone.”.
 260

with the meaning “intention” is additionally confirmed by the Tibetan lexicographic tradition
which, although confusing thoṅ m(y)i with thoṅ m(y)ig (for more details see below), explains the
former as, e.g., gsod par ’dod pa (GC:377a); for other examples, also from Mongolian sources, see the
Lexicographic section s.v. thoṅ myi.

In later lexicographic sources (see the respective sections above and s.v. thoṅ myi), we observe
further confusion concerning the original compounds thoṅ myi and thoṅ myig. It appears as if the
authors of the glosses had serious problems with the interpretation of the nominal particle pa in
gsod par ’dod pa, sometimes explaining it as a particle of present participle (“wishing to kill”; cf. CM
duralaγči), sometimes as a particle of affiliation (“a person connected to...”; cf. dgra śa len par yoṅ
mkhan (gyi mi), gśed ma, Skt. manuṣyaghātakaḥ). I assume that exactly these problems were
responsible for bringing to life the form thoṅ m(y)i pa/ba in which the particle pa/ba would in fact be
superfluous if the element -m(y)i were unanimuously given the meaning “man”.1 Thus, we can infer
that even in later times, a meaning was given to thoṅ m(y)i that did not connote human being but
rather an abstract notion.

[T] 1 stagi lo la bab ste / btsan po zrid gyi ldu nag slad ma na bźugs śiṅ / blon che stoṅ rtsan ʼa źa yul nas slar
(47) ʼkhord te / zrid mdaʼr thoṅ myig byuṅ bar lo gchig / (PT 1288:46-7)
“It fell on the year of the tiger: while the btsan po was staying in Ldu nag slad ma2 of Zrid, grand
councillor [Mgar] stoṅ rtsan [yul zuṅ] came back from the land of ’A źa. [He] attempted suicide (lit. a
suicide occurred) at Zrid mda’. Thus one year.”
2
bsñad ṅag ’dogs na’ // thoṅ myig daṅ byor ba’i myi (read: myi’i) khrims bźiṅ gñer stsol (v2) la dpaṅ po gaṅ
na’ mchis pa ’i sar thus źig // (ITN 267:v1-2)
“If [one] is blaming [me], gñer-officials shall be sent according to the law of a person adhering to a
murder and [they] shall gather at the place where witnesses stay!”

70 mthiṅ braṅ
BDN:390n8: gtiṅ braṅ ste chu naṅ du nub pa’i khaṅ ba’am mthaṅ braṅ ste ’og khaṅ daṅ. yaṅ na thaṅ braṅ ste khaṅ pa med
pa’i thaṅ stoṅ gi gnas mal du ’jug pa ’dra’aṅ. chu yin par bśad pa’aṅ yod; BTK:78n3: chu mig gi brda rñiṅ ṅo.
DTH:162: les demeures d’azur; THOMAS.1957:156: blue-breast, a particular species of bird (duck or goose); DOTSON.2013a:298:
canals.

[E] *mthiṅ gi ’phraṅ “path/course of water”

[M] (N) stream
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] We gather from ITJ 738 cited below that mthiṅ braṅ is a support (rkyen) for rivers. The passage in
PT 1287, on the other hand, makes use of two metaphors to express the impossibility of a subject to
become a lord; namely, it would be like a mthiṅ braṅ turning uphill or a pa boṅ, CT pha boṅ “a large

1
In PT 1071:r269 we find the form thoṅ myi pa in thoṅ myi pa’i khrims daṅ khrims gcig instead of the usual thoṅ myi daṅ khrims
gcig. As far as I was able to ascertain, this is the only occurrence of this lexeme in OT sources.
2
As can be clearly seen from other entries (cf. PT 1288:45, 50, and ITJ 750:249) the place name was Ldu nag, which was
located in Zrid (zrid gyi ldu nag). slad ma is an obvious mistake but its actual position in the sentence makes it to one phrase
together with ldu nag, i.e. ldu nag slad ma na “in Ldu nag slad ma”, as against DOTSON’s interpretation, who takes it to be an
adverb “again” (2009:88), in which case, one would, however, expect slad ma to stand in ABS at the beginning of the clause.
 261

rock or block” (J:339a), rolling (’gyur) up the mountain. Thus, we can infer that a mthiṅ braṅ is
somehow related to water systems and runs usually downhill.

As regards mthiṅ, we read in ITJ 739:1v6-7 that otters are swimming in a mthiṅ (mthiṅ la phyo; see s.v.
gyur sram); a clause that can be juxtaposed with gser mtsho ni gyur bu ’phyo (PT 1052:r241) “[In] a
golden lake a gyur bu swims.”. Hence, it seems that mthiṅ, “1mountain-blue (which is found, together
with malachite, in the hills of Lhasa); 2from the resemblance: indigo-colour, and esp. a light sky-blue,
azure” (J:240b), was a metaphoric expression used with reference to natural phenomena which are
of indigo-like colour.1

-braṅ < *’phraṅ, CT “a footpath along a narrow ledge on the side of a precipitous wall of rock”
(J:359a): ph- > b- / -ṅσ_r- (word-internal voicing between the voiced -ṅ and -r- after the elision of the
word-internal ’a-: ’a- > Ø / -ṅσ_CC-). ’phraṅ is a cognate of ’braṅ ba, “to follow, to walk at another’s
heels” (J:399b), that denoted primarily any continuous line of considerable length, thus “a path”, but
also more generally *“a course”. For other cognates see s.v. stag ’phraṅ.

[T] bya pu ni luṅ chuṅs na // “In the upper part of the Bya valley, in a small
vale,
ʼbaṅs śig ni rje ru re / a subject hopes [to become] a lord.
mgar bu ni rje ru re / The son of Mgar hopes [to become] a lord.
snal (read: sbal)2 pa ni ʼpur du re // A frog hopes to fly.
ʼbaṅs las ni rje re ba / The one wishing [to become] a lord from [being a]
subject
(463) mthiṅ braṅ ni gyen du ʼgyur / [is like] a stream turning uphill;
pa boṅ ni ri la ʼdril / (PT 1287:462-3) [like] a pa boṅ rolling up the mountain.”
kye ṅaṅ ṅur ni gser ma g.yu // “Oh! geese and ducks, neither golden nor
turquoise
mthiṅ braṅ ni chab gi rkyen / [on] streams, rivers’ support,
men tog ni hva lo then // picked the leaves of hva-flowers.
ne’u siṅ (v114) ni spaṅ kyi rgyan // Grass plots - meadows’ ornament -
spaṅ rgyan ni mthon ste bkra // meadows’ ornament, [the flowers] being high, are
beautiful.
bzaṅ ldan lus ’tshogs // The fine ones hanged (lit. gathered) on the
bodies3,
blta sdug ni dmyig lam bkra // [the flowers], nice when looked at, are beautiful
objects of vision.
(115) spos dri ni śaṅs4 na gda’ (ITJ 738:3v113-5) [Their] incense fragrant is present in the nose.”

1
The word appears to belong to one word family together with ’diṅ “to spread on the ground” (J:276a); gtiṅ “bottom;
depth” (J:207a); Balti, Kargil, Tshangra, Nubra ’thiṅ “to spread” (CDTD.V:569); MT *ldiṅ “to make flat by pressing”
(CDTD.V:678), etc. The original meaning *“spread one” or *”sth. spreading” for mthiṅ made it applicable to the sky or
water. Later, the term started to connote not the extent of these phenomena but another trait they had in common, i.e.,
the colour. Thus, its semantic development could be sketched as follows: *“sth. spreading” > “the sky, water” > “blue one”
> “indigo”.
2
Compare also snaṅ for sbaṅ in l.268. The reason for confusing the ligature sb- with sn- remains unclear.
3
Compare [...]n ni lus la ’tshogs in ITJ 738:v2:30.
4
OTDO: gaṅs.
 262

mthiṅ braṅ ni bre (v6) legs pa / “A stream of good length (lit. measure?)
dog me ni nan du mnan / (ITJ 739:1v5-6) quenched ?in urgency? fire [on] earth.”

71 dog mon
BDN:389n2: dog mo ste sa bźi daṅ don gcig; BTK:77n1: sa dog mo’o; STK:195n4: dog mo ste sa gźi daṅ don mtshuṅs.
Gs:543a: sm. dog mo (dog mo “1sm. dog pa; 2sm. dog ma”, Gs:543a; dog pa “1pod (pea); 2thread; 3sm. dog po; 4stamen (of a flower);
5
sm. dog po”, Gs:542c; dog po “1ball of yarn; 2narrow, closed in, crowded together; 3sm. ṅan dog”, Gs:542c-3a; dog ma “1earth;
2
arc. front”, Gs:543a).
DTH:162: la terre; n.1: Le terme ancien est dog mo. En raison du “ni” qui suit, il est probable que mon au lieu de mo marque
simplement la liason transcrite par ignorance, faute d’orthographe très commune au Tibet; DOTSON.2013a:298: the dark
earth.

[E] *sa dog mun pa “a dark narrow space”

[M] (N) dark earth
SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[[N+A]+A]
[R] skya sa / sṅo sa / rje sa / dog yab / dog srin / sa dog
[A] In the passages cited below, dog mon is paralleled by dguṅ sṅo, “blue sky”.1 Thus, I assume that -
mon, by analogy with the colour term -sṅo, stands here for -mun ~ CT mun pa “1obscurity, darkness;
2
obscure, dark” (J:416b), for which compare also the gloss s.v. mon “2sometimes for mun” (J:420a)2.
The original *-mun has undergone a progressive vowel assimilation: -u- > -o- / -o-σC_. The sound
change might have additionally been triggered by the association with the place name mon ka
occurring in ll.221, 467, and 483 of the same document.

For the first syllable dog- I reconstruct *sa dog for which see s.v. For the abbreviation of sa dog to dog
in compounds compare, for instance, dog in PT 1287:236 and sa dog rum (ITJ 731:v28) vs. dog rum (PT
1052:r113; ITJ 739:4v10).

[T] kye gnaʼi ni thog ma ru / “Oh! At the beginning of ancient times,

gźe ʼi ni daṅ po la / (457) on the first [day] of [ancient] times,
dguṅ sṅo ni ma ʼog gi / above the dark earth
dog mon ni ya steṅs na // [which is] below the blue sky,
gtsug btsugs ni btsugs legste / [one] established the crown. Being well
established,
mthos te ni dguṅ myi rdib // being lofty, the sky does not fall down;
dog mon (458) ni sdiṅ myi ñams / (PT 1287:456-8) the bulk [of] the dark earth is unimpaired.”
ʼbaṅs kyis ni rje bkol tam / “Did the subject subjugate the lord or
rje ʼis ni ʼbaṅs bkol baʼ / did the lord subjugate the subject?
(474) dgu (read: dguṅ) sṅo ni ya bi mkhyen / - The blue sky above knows [it].
myi ʼis ni rta bźon nam / Did the man ride the horse or
rta ʼis ni myi bźon ba // did the horse ride the man?

1
Cf. DOTSON’s (2013a:349n1) perceptive remark on a parallelism with the phrase “the blue sky above and the reddish-
brown earth below” that occurs in the Old Turkic inscription of Kül Tigin; for a translation see TEKIN 1968:263. For OTurk.
yaγīz, translated here as “reddish-brown”, TEKIN gives also the meanings “brown, dark” (ibid., p.395b), the latter
corresponds with the meaning of CT mun pa.
2
-mon seems to have replaced -mun also in the following CT examples: khri mon “= khri mun” (GC:92b); khro mon “ein
Gefängniss” (Sch:56b; < *khri mun “total darkness”, BELLEZZA 2008:426).
 263

pywa ʼi ni gtsug mkhan mkhyen / - The one who understands principles1 of pywa
knows [it].
rtsi ʼis ni zor gchad (475) dam / Was the sickle cut with the grass or
zor gyis ni rtswa gchad pa / the grass was cut with the sickle?
dog mon ni ma bi mkhyen // - The dark earth below knows [it].
da tsam ni dguṅ mthaʼ yan // Right now, as far as the horizon [extends],
gñi zla ni spyan gyis gzigs / the sun and the moon see with [their] eyes,
(476) dguṅ sṅo ni sñan gyis gsan // (PT 1287:473-6) the blue sky hears with [its] ears.”

72 dog yab
DTH:127: fécondant le sol; p.86: fécondant la terre; HAARH.1969:313: the personified representatives of the world of these
powers (i.e. of sa dog ~ sa bdag - JB); p.417: the Fathers of the Powers (of Earth); HILL.2006:96: father’s ears (of grain);
ZEISLER.2011:108: the patron of the inhabited places; p.173: the patron of the (narrow) earth; p.177: the patron of the
provinces; DOTSON.2013a:263: fathers of the soil; p.264: soil; p.314n10: I have taken dog in dog yab to refer to the earth by
metonymy; it often occurs in the phrase sa dog, which can mean “narrow earth” or “dark earth”; I am not entirely sure on
how to interpret yab in dog yab; “fathers of the earth” is literal translation, but one might also think of g.yab “shelter”;
p.323n35: the term dog yab occurs in parallel with yul yab, and is perhaps a synonym of sa dog.

[E] *sa dog gi yab “a covering of the narrow one”

[M] (N) the sky
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[N+A]OBJV+N]
[R] skya sa / sṅo sa / rje sa / dog mon / dog srin / yul yab / sa dog
[A] dog yab occurs always in OT sources determining the word char “rain”. In PT 1286, the phrase
dog yab kyi char forms an apposition to yul yab kyi rje and thus Khri/Lde ñag khri btsan po is said to
have come down to earth (sa dog, see s.v.) as a lord and as rain. The same motif is alluded to in PT
1287 where a lord is juxtaposed with rain: the lack of a lord has similar consequences for the
country as the lack of rain has for agriculture. Only if the country has a lord it is secured just like
rain secures harvest.

Compounds containing the morpheme -yab can be divided into three groups according to the
surface meaning of yab-:
1. ”fan”: rṅa yab “1a yak’s tail, used for fanning and dusting” (J:133b; ~ rṅa g.yab, Gs:318a)2; dar yab “a
silk-fan” (D:622a); sbraṅ yab “fly brush” (J:507b; ~ sbraṅ g.yab, Gs:781c, BTC:2033b); rluṅ yab
“ventilating- or cooling fan” (J:507b), Ndzorge “fan” (CDTD:8184; ~ rluṅ g.yab, Gs:1054b,
CDTD:8184); bsil yab “pankah, a large fan suspended from the ceiling and set in motion by means
of a string” (J:507b);3

1
For the reading *gtsug lag instead of gtsug see s.v. gtsug lag.
2
The etymologisation of rṅa yab in DAS as “the father of tails” (368a) is an obvious failure since –yab stands here
indisputably for yab/g.yab mo “1the act of fanning, waving; 3fan” (J:507a).
3
Apart from the already cited allomorphs with the second element -g.yab, the following compounds are attested only, as
far as I was able to ascertain, with -g.yab: sgro g.yab “fan made of feather” (Gs:287c); ldiṅ g.yab “ras g.yab” (BTC:1453b); rtswa
g.yab “2fan made from grass” (Gs:867a).
 264

2. ”a covering”: mda’ yab “1balcony under the dome of a temple made in Chinese style; 2acc. Lex. = pu
śu parapet, railing; 3a covered gallery on the top of a house” (D:673b-4a; ~ mda’ g.yab, Gs:568a);
gseṅ yab “balcony” (D:1308b), “porch, verandah” (Gs:1158b; ~ gseṅ yab, BTC:3020a);1
3. ”father”: rgyal yab “title, term of address for the Dalai Lama’s father” (Gs:265a); OT spun yab
“father of family” (TLTD.3:153b); p(h)a yab “father” (cf. OTDO for multiple occurrences).2
Now, we observe that the interpretation of the second element -yab as an honorific kinship term
“father” is admissible only in those cases where the first element denotes a human being, or even
rather consists of another kinship term. The latter observation allows us to concentrate on two first
meanings when analysing dog yab.

The morpheme -yab in its two first meanings glossed above can be related to two CT verbs: g.yob “to
move about, to swing, brandish” (J:520a) and yab ~ g.yab “1to lock, lock up, secure, cover over”
(J:507a), respectively. As far as I am aware, yab-, apart from representing a kingship term, is attested
in OT sources only in two kinds of phrase:
1. yab bor (ITJ 739:2v7) ~ g.yab bor (PT 1136:41; PT 1287:414; ITJ 739:3r8), g.yab ’bor (ITJ 739:2r9), g.yab
’dor (PT 1287:413), lit. “to throw a (g.)yab”;
2. g.yab gyis tob (= V4 < ’debs) śig (PT 1134:216, 237), lit. “to throw with a g.yab”.
Here, the term is cognate to the CT verb g.yob the root of which, as the dialectal data presented in
CDTD.V:1181 prove, should be reconstructed as *g.yab.3

On the other hand, apart from the already listed compounds with the second element (g.)yab “a
covering”, the same meaning could be detected in CT formations like: yab riṅ po “portico, veranda”
(J:507a); g.yab “any roof-like projection, a veranda, porch” (Gs:1010c), Nurla “terrace on the roof”,
Southern Mustang “overhang, overhanging roof”, Yolmo “porch (covered, with or without wooden
railing)”, Dingri “veranda”, Shigatse “roof over a terrace” (CDTD:7819); g.yab pa “2projection of a
roof” (D:1150b).4 Accordingly, the underlying structure of the compound under consideration is
proposed to have been *sa dog gi yab “a covering of the earth (lit. the narrow one)”.5

On account of the fact that dog yab is connected in OT sources with rain (char), I interpret dog yab as
a metaphoric expression denoting the sky. The genitive in dog yab kyi char would be one of origin, i.e.

1
As in the first group, also here we find compounds attested exclusively with the allomorph -g.yab: ’khor g.yab “sm. ’khor
khyams” (Gs:162b; ’khor khyams “courtyard, corridor”, Gs:161a); thog g.yab “verandah” (Gs:504b); bya g.yab “canopy”
(Gs:731a); brag g.yab “1shelter under an overhanging rock” (Gs:739c); rtswa g.yab “1grass roof” (Gs:867a); ras g.yab “cloth
canopy” (Gs:1032a); seṅ g.yab “the open area in the middle of some traditional Tibetan houses” (Gs:1127).
2
Theoretically, the compound sa yab, “(sovereign, ‘father to a country’) a not unfrequent perversion of the title sa heb W.”
(J:570b; see also LAUFER 1916:483-4), could be included in this group as well. However, on account of the fact that it is a
loanword that has undergone folk etymologisation to conform to a better known compound pattern, it should be excluded
from our semantic analysis.
3
Another member of this word family is byab “1to clean, cleanse, wash, wipe; 2to take up, to gather with both hands”
(J:375b). Cf. also the reconstructed PTB stem *g-yaːp “FAN / WINNOW / PADDLE / WAVE (v.)” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-
cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/2790; 25.03.2015).
4
I assume CT skyob (V2 bskyabs, V3 bskyab, V4 skyobs) to be a further derivative of the same etymon *yab, cf. also CDTD.V:64.
yab “resp. for pha, father” (J:507a) is assumed to belong to the same word family with the etymological meaning *“securer,
protector”.
5
For the reconstruction of *sa dog for dog- see s.vv. dog mon and sa dog.
 265

*“rain [that comes] from (lit. of) the sky”.1 Theoretically, one could also understand dog yab as
referring to clouds, but the following two OT compounds speak against the latter interpretation:
dguṅ char “rain [from] the sky” (PT 1043:85)2 and gnam char “id.” (PT 1052:r164). These support my
hypothesis that the place of origin of rain was conceived of as being the sky and not clouds.

[T] (30) lha gnam gyi steṅ nas gśegs paʼ // gnam lhab kyi bla na // yab lha bdag drug bźugs pa ʼi sras / gcen
(31) gsum gcuṅ gsum na / khri ʼi bdun tshigs daṅ bdun / khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras / khri ñag khri btsan poʼ
// (32) sa dog la yul yab kyi rje / dog yab kyi char du gśegs sʼo // (PT 1286:30-2)
“The ones who came down from the heights of the gods’ sky: the sons of Yab lha bdag drug, who
dwells in the heigths of the broad sky, together with Khri ’i bdun tshigs, [who was] between the
three elder brothers and three younger brothers, [were] seven. The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Khri
ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over (lit. of) living space, as the rain
from (lit. of) the sky.”
(42) gnam lhab kyi bla na yab bla bdag drug bźugs pa pa ʼi (read: bźugs pa ’i) sras // gcen gsum gcuṅ gsum
na // khri ʼi bdun tshigs daṅ bdun // (43) khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras // lde ñag khri btsan po / sa dog la yul
yab kyi rje dog yab kyi char du gśegs nas // (PT 1286:42-3)
“The sons of Yab lha bdag drug, who dwells in the heigths of the broad sky, together with Khri ’i
bdun tshigs, [who was] between the three elder brothers and three younger brothers, [were] seven.
The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Lde ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over
(lit. of) living space, as the rain from (lit. of) the sky.”
yul yab (52) kyi rje myi bźugs na / “If the lord over (lit. of) living space does not reside,
pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs pyol pyol gyi cha ʼo / [one] will be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of the country].
dog yab kyi char ma mchisna / If the rain did not come from the sky,
sa ʼon bu spur (53) khog khog (PT 1287:51-3) seeds, blown away and flying, were withering.”
(59) yul yab kyi rje ru gśegs so / “[He] came as the lord over (lit. of) living space.
yul pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs myi pyol gyi cha ʼo / [One] will not be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of] the country.
dog yab kyi chab mchis (60) kyis / For the rain3 from the sky came,
sa ʼon bu spur myi khog gi cha ʼo / (PT 1287:59-60) seeds, blown away and flying, will not wither.”

73 dog srin
DTH:162: ver de terre; DOTSON.2013a:298: an earthly insect.

[E] *sa dog gi srin bu “a worm of earth”

[M] (N) an earth-worm
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[N+A]ORIG+N]
[R] skya sa / sṅo sa / rje sa / dog mon / dog yab / sa dog

1
The mythological connection between a descent from the sky and the sky as a rain-giver is broached also in Mra myths
where one word, nyido, is used to denote both the sky and the rain (cf. HUBER 2010:306n14, 313ff.); cf. also the latter
author’s comment: “Descent from the sky is a more widespread origin notion among highlanders of western Arunachal
Pradesh. Atsuko Ibata’s Aka informants believe they descended from Nyido or the ‘sky’ [...]. Puroik (Sulung) believe that
they are descendants of divine beings in heaven whom the god of rain (Kamug) ordered down to earth.” (ibid., p.308-9n18).
2
In: dguṅ char ’bab ste (PT 1043:85), lit. “The sky-rain comes down.”.
3
The manuscript reads chab. However, on account of the fact that the remaining passages have clearly char, I amend the
text replacing chab by char.
 266

[A] For the reconstruction of *sa dog for dog- see s.vv. dog mon and sa dog. The lexeme srin bu is
attested in PT 1052:r59.

[T] gye di riṅ ni saṅ lta na // “Oh! Today, like yesterday,

dog srin ni sbur bu ʼis // an earth-worm, a little buzz,
bya ltar ni bcos (460) bcos ste / having pretended [to be] (lit. made like) a bird,
gnam du ni ʼphur ʼdod kyaṅ / although [it] wanted to fly to the sky,
ʼphur du ni ʼdab ma mchis / (PT 1287:459-60) [it] had no wings to fly.”

74 doṅ ral
[V] ral (PT 1287:480; truncation)
DSM:334b: mda’ ltoṅ.
DUṄDKAR:1108b: spyir na doṅ pa zer ba mda’ blugs sa’i śubs la zer źiṅ. doṅ ral ni rwa co sogs sbubs stoṅ can gyi naṅ du me
rdzas blugs nas me ’bar ba des groṅ khyim sogs bśib thub pa źig.
DTH:165: carquois; HAARH.1969:449n12: doṅ “quiver” (?); ral = ral gri “sword” (?); DOTSON.2013a:300: quiver.1

[E] *(l)doṅ po ral ba “an open, tube-like vessel”

[M] (N) quiver
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+VAV2]
[R] mdor cod
[A] From PT 1287 we gather that doṅ ral can be made of gold, can contain arrows and when the last
arrow is shot, it is emptied. It appears that doṅ ral is a kind of receptacle in which arrows are held
when ready to be shot. Thus, it denotes apparently a kind of quiver. This assumption is partly
confirmed by the fact that CT doṅ po ~ ldoṅ po is glossed with “1tube, any hollow cylindrical vessel; 2a
shuttle, made of a piece of bamboo” (J:258a) and CT mda’ doṅ with “a quiver” (J:258a).

As regards -ral, its interpretation is much more problematic. Let us first list some CT compounds
that contain this syllable and seem to be relevant for the present analysis: ral śubs “das
Bogengeräthe, Bogenfutteral” (Sch:542a)2; khab ral “also rtse ma khab ral needle-case” (D:139b), “sm.
khab śubs” (Gs:115b), “khab snod” (LCAṄSKYA.2006:274); stag ral “mda’i śubs sam sag thag. stag doṅ”
(GC:352a), “tiger-skin quiver” (KARMAY 1998:273). To these we can add Dzongkha so ral “quiver”
(EDPD:733a; < *so pa’i doṅ ral, lit. “spotter’s quiver”; but compare DAS: “irregular teeth, teeth having
space between them”, 1281b).3 From these it appears that -ral was understood as an equivalent of
śubs “case, covering, sheath, paper bag” (J:560b) and either stood for *doṅ ral or was a synonym of
doṅ- since we find stag ral explained as stag doṅ in GC:352a.

1
SUMATIRATNA glosses doṅ ral with “to ko ma dmar thig gam ’bri mog; barimuγ” (SR.1:1019.4). It is obviously a different
lexeme unrelated to the one examined here. Additional studies on loans from and into Mongolian are needed to ascertain
the direction of borrowing in case of ’bri mog and barimoγ which are apparently related to each other.
2
Although JÄSCHKE defines it as “scabbard of a sword” (525a) in which case the underlying structure of the compound
should be reconstructed as *ral gri’i śubs instead of *doṅ ral śubs. Here, compounding has possibly caused an infrequent
situation of homonymy, ral śubs = lit. “a case for sword” and “a quiver that is a sheath”, respectively.
3
Dzongkha-English dictionary glosses so ras (sic!) with “quiver, arrow-case” (file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/28-04-SO.html; 24.07.2014).
 267

Despite the fact that these examples do not provide us with sufficient information necessary for the
definitive explanation of the compound under consideration, we can gain a better comprehension of
-ral by juxtaposing the above compounds with the following ones: mgo ral “scars on the head”
(Gs:233b); mchu ral “sm. mchu śo” (Gs:380b; mchu śo “hare lip”, Gs:380b); ltag ral “a vein on the back of
the head from which blood is drawn to cure headaches, earaches, etc.” (Gs:465c); mtheb ral “ba so’i
bre god lta bu’am krad kor. mtheb kor” (GC:383a; krad kor “a thick ring worn by men on the thumb
(originally used for shooting arrows, later decorative)”, Gs:11b); rmig ral “1a disease that causes
hooves to tear; 2cloven hoof” (Gs:835a).1 All these seem to denote objects that have a kind of break in
their construction, a hole, or a cleft. Thus, I relate -ral in this group of compounds to the verb ral “vi.
to get torn, ripped” (Gs:1031a) for which compare also Balti and Nurla meanings “to get torn, to get
ripped, to come open (seam)” (CDTD.V:1191) and Lepcha ral ~ a-ral “1direct, straight; open, not
closed” (MG:331b).

This being said, I propose to reconstruct the analysed compound as *(l)doṅ (po) ral ba, lit. “an open
tube”.2 Originally, doṅ ral could have denoted any sort of open vessel of a tube-like shape, and first
when used in relation to archer’s utensils acquired the meaning “quiver”. Its primarily broad
meaning would account for its later usage in other compounds like those quoted above, e.g., mtheb
ral < *mtheb kyi doṅ ral, lit. “an open tube [worn on] the thumb” > “archery finger tab”.

[T] di riṅ ni saṅ lta naʼ // “Today, like yesterday,

bya pu ni luṅ cuṅs su / at Bya pu, a small valley,
ʼur bu ni khyu chig po / because (pas) a swarm of warblers,
ʼur bas ni bskyod drags pas / warbling, agitated a lot,
ma mo ni (479) khra ʼis ʼtshal // [their] mother was eaten by a falcon.
ʼur prug ni thaṅ la gram // The birdies were scattered on the plain.
saṅ pyi ni gnaṅs slad na / Tomorrow evening and thereafter,
noṅs śiṅ ni ma ʼgyod chig // while committing a fault, do not ?repent?!
gser gyi ni doṅ ral na In a golden quiver,
(480) g.yu ʼi ni mdaʼ chig ma // [there is] a sole turquoise arrow.
ma ʼphaṅs ni śa myi khums / Had [one] not shoot [it], a stag shall not be killed.
ʼphaṅs na ni ral yaṅ stoṅs // Had [one] shot [it], the quiver would indeed
become empty.

1
To this group one could probably add gdoṅ ral “a type of head ornament” (BELLEZZA 2008:328) and perhaps baṅ ral yoṅ
“khrims sgrog pho ña yoṅ lta bu” (GC:556b; cf. baṅ chen “swift messenger, courier”, J:364a). baṅ ral could have originally
denoted a kind of footwear (< *baṅ gi doṅ ral?) and later started to be used metonymically to refer to a person that was
wearing this kind of shoes.
2
Compare the general decription of Tibetan quivers given in LAROCCA 2006a:187a: “One of the earliest types of quivers [...]
has the form of a long, narrow container, with an open cowl at the top and a flared or triangular base [...].” For more
detailed accounts of Tibetan quivers from later centuries see LAROCCA 2006a:187ff.
Alternatively, one could reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound under discussion as *[mda’ doṅ] ral ba, lit.
“an open tube for arrows”. However, since mda’ doṅ does not seem to be attested in the known OT sources, I refrain for the
moment being from accepting this hypothesis.
I hypothesise that in compounds like, e.g., stag ral (< *stag lpags kyi doṅ ral) the second syllable was chosen to represent
the compound doṅ ral in order to avoid the possible misunderstanding in case of *stag doṅ, which could also be taken to
mean *”tiger’s hole”, i.e., a pit in which a tiger stays, even though the latter compound is indeed attested in later
lexicographic sources as “mda’i śubs sam sag thag” (GC:352a).
 268

re na ni gthaṅ du na / [Your] hopes afflict [you]. [They] afflict [you] as a

gthaṅ.
re dkuʼ ni (481) mtshul du dkuʼ // (PT 1287:478-81) [Your] hope rise. [They] rise to [your] nose1.”

75 dra cen
DTH:65: a great net-work; URAY.1962a:223: a great army, great expeditionary army; a great campaign; DOTSON.2009:132: a
great campaign.

[E] *ra ma chen po “great advance force”

[M] (N) great [expeditionary] force
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] ram ’da’
[A] By comparing the following passages with those quoted in the Text section, we observe that the
phrases dra ma draṅ(s) and dra cen draṅ(s) occur in exactly the same contexts, namely when speaking
of warfare:
dra ma draṅ pa la btab na’ / sa la ru mod / (25) bab pha dgra bla ṅo ste / dra ma lan chig ni legs pha’i ṅo
(PT 1047:24-5)
“If [one] threw [the dice] for leading a dra ma, [...].”

ʼuṅ gi rjes la / ziṅ po rje la dra ma ma draṅs par / (164) rgyal stag bu dguṅ du gśegso // (PT 1287:163-4)
“Thereafter, [Spu] rgyal stag bu died without having led a dra ma against Ziṅ po rje.”

dgun btsan pho ñen kar naʼ (196) bźugs / dgun ʼdun mnon du blon khri sum rje rtsaṅ bźer gyis / bsduste /
ʼbon da rgyal daṅ / blon chen pho (197) khri gzigs gñis gyis / ʼbu śiṅ kun du dra ma draṅste / slar ʼkhord
par lo gchig / (ITJ 750:195-7)
“In the winter, the btsan pho stayed in Ñen kar. Councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje rtsaṅ bźer
convened the winter council at Mnon. Both, ’bon da rgyal [Btsan zuṅ] and grand councillor [Dba’s]
khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having led a dra ma to ’Bu śiṅ kun, returned. Thus one year.”

jaṅ lag du dra ma draṅ ba (ITJ 1247:4)

“the one leading a dra ma to Jaṅ lag”

blon khri bzaṅ daṅ / źaṅ stoṅ rtsan gñis gyis / mkhar teʼu cu phab / rma grom pyir btsugste / źaṅ mdo
(14) bźer rma grom gyi dmag dpon du bkaʼ stsald / mdo smad gyi dbyar ʼdun dbu le lam nag du / blon khri
sgra daṅ / maṅ rtsan (15) ʼpan gaṅ daṅ / blon mdo bźer las stsogs phas bsduste / teʼu cur dra ma draṅste
(Or.8212.187:13-5)
“Both, councillor [Mgos] khri bzaṅ [yab lag] and Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan, conquered the fort Te’u cu.
Having re-established Rma grom, Źaṅ mdo bźer was appointed as the army commander of Rma
grom. Councillor Khri sgra [stag tshab], Maṅ rtsan ’pan gaṅ and councillor [Źaṅ] mdo bźer,

1
DSM:734b glosses mtshul as “1mdzes pa”, among others, equating it apparently with CT mtshar ba “1fair, fine, beautiful;
2
wondrous, wonderful, marvelous” (J:456a). For the time being I am not able to propose any rational solution to the
understanding of gthaṅ here. For a more thorough discussions concerning the last couplet see DOTSON 2013a:351n19 and
BIALEK (forthcoming b).
 269

among others, having convened the summer council of Mdo smad at Dbu le lam nag, led a dra ma
to Te’u cu.”

blon khri bzaṅ daṅ skyes bzaṅ (33) stag snaṅ las stsogs pas khar tsan leṅ cu phyogsu dra ma draṅs par lo
cig / (Or.8212.187:32-3)
“Councillor [Mgos] khri bzaṅ [yab lag] and [Dba’s] skyes bzaṅ stag snaṅ, among others, led a dra
ma towards Khar tsan leṅ cu. Thus one year.”

As regards the position of dra ma and dra cen in a sentence, they always precede the verb draṅ(s) and
thus form its direct object. Therefore, we can identify the first element of the compound dra cen
with dra ma and provisionally translate the compound in question as *“a great dra ma” < *dra ma
chen po; *dra chen > dra cen due to the deaspiration of the onset of the second syllable.

Apart from dra ma or dra cen, the sentences contain additional elements that can enhance our
understanding of the respective verbal phrases and their argument structure. To wit, we find:
[ziṅ po rje la]ALLAT dra ma draṅs “led a dra ma against Ziṅ po rje”;
[[...] gñis gyis]ERG / [ʼbu śiṅ kun du]TERM dra ma draṅs “both led a dra ma to ’Bu śiṅ kun”;
[teʼu cur]TERM dra ma draṅs “led a dra ma to Te’u cu”;
[[...] stsogs pas]ERG [khar tsan leṅ cu phyogsu]TERM dra ma draṅs “[...], among others, led a dra ma towards
Khar tsan leṅ cu”;
[[...] stsogs pas]ERG / [keṅ śir]TERM dra ma draṅs “[...], among others, led a dra ma to Keṅ śi”.
The sentence structure that would contain all these elements could be schematically sketched as:
*XERG YALLAT ZTERM dra ma/dra cen draṅs “”X led a dra ma/dra cen to Z against Y.”

As already pointed out by URAY (1962a:223), when analysing the meaning of dra ma, one must take
into consideration its relationship to the much more commonly used dmag “1army, host; 2multitude,
number, host” (J:421b), for which compare the following OT examples:
ston sla ra ba ṅo la dmag draṅ (PT 1082:13)
“[One] leads the army in the first half [of] the first autumn month.”

źa ma (582) kha gan gyis // dmag draṅs na // dmag ni ma thar (PT 1283:581-2)
“If the kha gan Źa ma had led the army, the army would not have been able to pass through.”

’bug chor gyi rgyal po / źa ma kha (602) gan gyi srid bde ba’i tshe // ’di phyogs na / dmag drang na /
dmag gis / ma thar te (PT 1283:601-2)
“The king of ’Bug chor was not able to pass through with [his] army when during the happy reign
of the kha gan Źa ma the army was led in this region.”

’uṅ gyi ’og du rgyal po gcig la gcig dmag draṅs ste / rgyal po naṅ ’thab par ’oṅ ṅo (ITJ 733:41)
“Thereafter, the kings, having led the armies against each other, started an internal regicidal
fight (lit. were going to fight among kings).”
 270

’uṅ nas gcig la gcig dmag draṅ ste res ’ga’ [s]us rgyal res ’ga’ sus (45) pham bar ’oṅ ṅo’ (ITJ 733:44-5; trslr.
after THOMAS 1957:47-8)
“Subsequently, having led armies against each other, sometimes one was victorious, sometimes
one was defeated.”

dmag dru gu yul du draṅs pha slar ʼkhord par lo gchig / (ITJ 750:255)
“Those who had led the army to the land of Dru gu returned. Thus one year.”

dmag myi draṅ // yul myi (33) mrnam // (ST Treaty W 32-3)
“The armies shall not be led. The land shall not be seized.”

ṅan lam klu khoṅ gis // rgya yul gyi thild / rgya (54) rje’i pho braṅ keṅ śir / bod gyis dmag draṅ (55) ba’i
bka’ gros gyi mgo chen pho gsold nas / (Źol S 53-5)
“Ṅan lam klu khoṅ started (lit. gave a great start of) a council [that concerned] the leading of the
army by Tibetans to Keṅ śi, the centre of China [and] the court of the Chinese ruler.”

From the scarce evidence on dra ma in OT documents it appears that it did not form the main part of
a regular army since in no passage do we read that leading a dra ma led directly to conquering a fort.
In Or.8212.187:15 we even read that dra ma was led to Te’u cu although this fort had already been
conquered the very same year (l.13). The opposite can, however, be proven true for dmag, compare,
e.g.:
blon khri bzaṅ daṅ źaṅ stoṅ rtsan daṅ / kag la boṅ gsum (22) gyi dmagis / se cu phab (Or.8212.187:21-2)
“The armies of the three, councillor [Mgos] khri bzaṅ [yab lhag], Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan, and Kag la boṅ,
conquered Se cu.”
and the fragment from the Źol inscription that immediately follows the clause quoted above which
mentions a campaign (dmag draṅ):
(56) keṅ śir draṅ ba’i dmag dpon chen phor // (57) źaṅ mchims rgyal rgyal zigs śu theṅ daṅ // (58) blon
stag sgra klu khoṅ gñis / bka’ stsald te / (59) keṅ śir draṅs nas // ci’u cir gyi rab ṅogs (60) su rgya daṅ
thab mo chen pho byas te / bod gyis g.yul (61) bzlog nas // rgya maṅ po btuṅs pas // rgya rje kwaṅ (62)
peṅ ’waṅ yaṅ / keṅ śi’i mkhar nas byuṅ ste’ / (63) sśem ci’ur bros nas / keṅ śi phab (Źol S 56-63)
“The two, Źaṅ mchims rgyal rgyal zigs śu theṅ and councillor Stag sgra klu khoṅ, were appointed
as great army commanders that were to lead [the army] to Keṅ śi. Having led [the army] to Keṅ
śi, [they] made a great battle against (lit. with) Chinese at the ford of Ci’u cir. Because Tibetans
killed many Chinese after [they] had won the battle, even the Chinese ruler Kwaṅ peṅ ’waṅ,
having left the fort of Keṅ śi, fled to Sśem ci’u. Thereafter, [the Tibetans] conquered Keṅ śi.”
One can presume that dra ma, when compared with dmag, was not sufficient to fight a battle
independently.1 First leading a dra cen seems to have resulted in a warfare.

1
Compare also the remark of URAY: “[...] dra ma occurs only in connexion with military expeditions against foreign
territories or with the termination of the former.” (1962a:224). However, if we compare the passage from the Źol
inscription (S 53-63, see above) with Or.8212.187:51-5 (see the Text section), we observe that both relate the conquest of
 271

dra ma has been rendered in previous studies as: “army or troop sent on an enterprise or campaign,
expeditionary army” (URAY 1962a:223), “expeditionary force or host” (COBLIN 1991b:528b), “military
campaign” (DOTSON 2009:259), “elite expedition corps” (ZEISLER 2010:393n25), “dmag dpuṅ”
(BDN:30n18), “dmag dpuṅ ṅam dmag mi la’o. bzaṅ po’i don la’aṅ ʼjug go. yul śul kha skad du mi bzaṅ
po la mi dra ma źes ʼbod srol yod” (BTK:108n5), “dmag sde’am dmag dpuṅ” (STK:137n21).1 These,
although rendering an apparently correct translation of the term, do not enhance our
understanding of its origins.

Various lexicographic sources on CT provide us with compounds and phrases that contain the
syllable dra2 and that can indeed help us better comprehend the semantics of the term in question.
These are: dra rkyen “dmag gi rgyu rdzas” (DSM:338b)3, “the requisites for an expedition” (COBLIN
1991b:528a); dra sñigs “rgod g.yuṅ ṅam bzaṅ ṅan gyi dbye ba phye ba ste” (DSM:338b); dra ma’i rkyen
“dmag gi dgos mkho’i rgyu rdzas” (DSM:339a); la dra ma “dmag” (BYD:540b). Here the morpheme dra
appears to have connoted the concept of “military forces” (dra rkyen, dra sñigs, la dra ma). By analogy
with khra ma ~ khram, etc. (for more examples of clipping see the chapter on Compounding in Old
Tibetan), I propose to enlarge the group of cognates by adding ’dram po “ñul ma” (BYD:268a) and ram
(< *ram ’da’, see s.v.) “Hilfe” (CÜPPERS 2004:90) to the word family.

the Chinese capital Keṅ śi; the first text uses dmag when referring to military forces that conquered the city, whereas the
latter text has dra cen and dra ma instead. The reason for that could perhaps be sought in the obviously more negligent
character of the Or.8212.187 as compared with PT 1288 and ITJ 750. Additionally, it appears that the passage from
Or.8212.187 uses dra ma in lieu of dra cen for we read first that Źaṅ rgyal zigs and Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan led a dra cen (l.51) and then
that Źaṅ rgyal zigs, the councillor Stag sgra, Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan, and Źaṅ btsan ba led a dra ma to Keṅ śi (ll.53-4) which was
subsequently conquered. Another reason why the discourse of the passage could be perceived as distorted is that Źaṅ
[mchims rgyal] rgyal zigs [śu theṅ], first, conquered many Chinese forts (ll.51-2), then went back to Tibet (ll.52-3),
conquered Keṅ śi (ll.53-4), and once more returned to Tibet, and all that in only two years.
1
The first contextual analysis of dra ma has been provided by URAY (1962a). Apart from the occurrences cited above, we
find dra ma also in the following OT passages:
dra ma / slar log nas (Or.8212.187:55)
“The dra ma returned.”
phyin cad dgra chos spyad myi dgos te // dra ma’i rkyen myi dgos pas // (93) dmag myi brgyags khal gnag rta rnams // raṅ ñam du
yan par thoṅ śig ces bsgo nas (PT 986:92-3; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:308b)
“[He] ordered: ‘Therefore, on account of the fact that, it not being necessary to resort to warfare, the support for dra ma
is not needed [anymore], send soldiers, provisions, loads, yaks, and horses free on their own!” (For a different translation
see COBLIN 1991a:313b.)
Two further occurrences of dra ma are documented (Or.15000/426:3 and ITN 189r1) although due to the fragmentary
character of the passages it is not certain whether the same lexeme is concerned there or not.
The meanings glossed for dra ma, “erfahren, geprüft, gelehrt” (Sch:256b), “experienced, practiced, very good (at
something); nobility (ya rabs)” (B:261b), “1good, excellent” (Gs:548b), Shigatse “good”, Nangchen “to be experienced (in), to
be good at (adv.)” (CDTD:3958), and “la noblesse” (DTH:136), could be traced back to the phrases mi dra ba “(rñiṅ) 1mi kha
stabs can nam kha bsod can; 2mi ’jon thaṅ yod pa” (BTC:2071b) and mi dra ma “mi kha stabs can nam kha bsod can daṅ. mi
bzaṅ po’am mi ’jon thaṅ yod pa” (BYD:393b). These, in my opinion, should be reconstructed as *mi ’dra ba “unequal” that
underwent a syntactic re-analysis in which the negation mi has been re-interpreted as a noun “man” resulting in a reading
“unmatched man” and thus providing (’)dra ba/ma with a new meaning “excellent, good”. As a further derivative one
could consider the verb bra “1vi. to dare to” (Gs:739a), Themchen “to be able to cope with”, Bayan “can” (CDTD.V:843) in
connection with which also the following additional formations could be quoted: mi bra ba “mi nus pa’am mi phod pa daṅ
mi thub pa” (DSM:635b; ~ mi dra ba), and bra bo gsum gśags “dividing into three exactly equal parts” (Gs:739a). In the latter
phrase, bra bo seems to be a variant reading of ’dra bo. Already JÄSCHKE has observed that two additional orthographic
variants of dra ma are attested: bra ma and tra ma (260b).
2
Sometimes also written ’dra, probably by analogy with ’dra ba “similar, equal” (J:282a).
3
For dra rkyen (PT 986:101) < dra ma’i rkyen, which is also attested in the same text (l.92, see above), cf.:
dra rkyen gyi rta ni yul (102) hwa śan du yan du bkye (PT 986:101-2; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:309a)
“As regards horses for (lit. of) dra ma-support, [they] should be set free in the Hwa śan region.”
 272

As concerns the morphology of dra ma, on account of the fact that, apart from its derivatives and
ram, there seem to be no other cognates of the word, I assume that the word should be traced back
to the form *ra ma (for details see s.v. ram ’da’): *ra ma ’draṅ > dra ma ’draṅ (onset assimilation under
the influence of the consonant cluster (’)dr- of ’draṅ triggered by the phonetic similarity of the initial
ra- ~ ’dra-). This unusual assimilation across the word boundaries (draσma#’draṅ) might have occurred
due to the almost exclusive usage of the original *ra ma with the verb ’draṅ and the resulting
lexicalisation of the phrase.

With regard to the etymological analysis of *ra ma as presented s.v. ram ’da’, one could tentatively
render dra ma ’draṅ as *“to lead the advance guard”. dra ma as occurring in this and similar phrases
seems to have undergone a semantic generalisation from the original *“advance guard” (“to lead
advance force”) to *“[expeditionary] force” (“to lead [expeditionary] force”) due to the contextual
parallelism with the usage of dmag ’draṅ.

[T] źaṅ rgyal zigs daṅ źaṅ stoṅ rtsan las stsogs / pas / bum liṅ lcag zam rgal te // dra cen draṅ ste / (52) ʼbu
śiṅ kun daṅ zin cu daṅ ga cu las stsogs pa / rgyaʼi mkhar maṅ pho phab / ste / źaṅ rgyal zigs (53) slar bod yul
/ du / mchis te / źaṅ rgyal zigs // daṅ / blon stag sgra daṅ źaṅ stoṅ rtsan daṅ źaṅ / (54) btsan ba / las /
stsogs pas / keṅ śir dra ma draṅste ke śi phab /// rgya rje bros / nas / rgya rje gsar du bcug / (55) nas / dra
ma / slar log nas // (Or.8212.187:51-5)
“Źaṅ rgyal zigs and Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan, among others, crossed the branch bridge [of] Bum liṅ, led a great
[expeditionary] force, [and] conquered many Chinese forts, like ’Bu śin kun, Zin cu and Ga cu, among
others. [Thereafter], Źaṅ rgyal zigs returned to Tibet. Źaṅ rgyal zigs together with councillor Stag
sgra, Źaṅ stoṅ rtsan, and Źaṅ btsan ba, among others, having led the [expeditionary] force towards
Keṅ śi, conquered Ke śi. The Chinese ruler fled away. [They] installed a Chinese ruler anew [and] the
[expeditionary] force returned.”
bum riṅ lcag zams (82) rgyal (read: rgal) de dra cen draṅ de lastsogs pa bum liṅ lcag zam rgal te dra cen draṅ
(83) sde źaṅ rgyal zigs daṅ źaṅ sdoṅ stsan las stsogs pa bum ruṅ lcag zam (84) rgalde dra cen draṅ sde ʼbu śiṅ
kun daṅ zin cuṅ las stsogs pa rgyaʼi mkhar (85) maṅ po phabde (Or.8212.187:81-5)
“Having crossed the branch bridge [of] Bum riṅ, [they] led great [expeditionary] force. [...], among
others, having crossed the branch bridge [of] Bum liṅ, led great [expeditionary] force. Źaṅ rgyal zigs
and Źaṅ sdoṅ stsan, among others, crossed the branch bridge [of] Bum ruṅ, led great [expeditionary]
force [and] conquered many Chinese forts, like ’Bu śiṅ kun and Zin cuṅ, among others.”1

76 mdo lcags
SR.1:1081.3: temür serege (s.v. mda’ lcags skam kha ma); DSM:359b: gri mdo gcod (s.v. mdo lcogs).
STK:197n31: mdo gcod de gri yi brda rñiṅ du ’jug skad do (s.v. mdo lcogs).
DTH:166: [hachette et lame] en fer du Mdo; DOTSON.2013a:301: Mdo iron.

[E] *mda’i lcags “iron part of an arrow”

[M] (N) iron arrowhead
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NSOUR+N]

1
This passage, apart from the fact that its grammar is highly distorted, reiterates merely the information contained in the
first fragment and does not contribute to our understanding of the compound in question.
 273

[A] The stanza quoted below from PT 1287 consists of four couplets - all of identical structure: the
first verse names an attribute and the second one lists objects, animals, or humans that are
considered to possess the respective quality. The referents for each attribute are: mighty Chinese
and Turks, swift śu ma and mare, strong tips of a bow, and a sharp mdo lcags.

Just like many other terms denoting primarily a kind of material, lcags as a second member of a
compound, refers to an object made of the material and not to the material itself; cf., for instance:
sgo lcags “door-bolt” (TAKEUCHI 1995:192); gtar lcags (PT 1042:117) “a bleeding instrument”; thaṅ lcags
“plow” (BELLEZZA 2008:448); gnam lcags “meteoric iron” (BELLEZZA 2008:577); me lcags “fire-steel,
pocket-fire” (J:417a), “flint striker” (Gs:816a); rmo lcags Kargil, Chiktan “ploughshare”, Tshangra
“iron ploughshare” (CDTD:6475; < *rmo ba’i lcags, lit. “an iron [instrument] for ploughing”).1 Hence,
the proposed translation “an object made of iron” for -lcags in mdo lcags.

mdo lcags is described as being sharp (rno). This observation makes it probable that -lcags as “an
object made of iron” (N) forms the head of the compound and is further determined by mdo-. I
assume that mdo- has replaced here another syllable. Now, let us have a look at some phrases from
OT sources:
rno dgu dag ’da daṅ mduṅ (PT 1067:11) “sharp ones: arrow and spear” (see s.v. rje blon);
mde’u rtse rno (PT 1285:v146) “a sharp peak [of] an arrow-head”;
rno dgu dag mda’ daṅ mduṅ / (PT 1290:v11) “sharp ones: arrow and spear” (see s.v. rje blon).
All of them share two elements with our passage: rno and a syllable that morphologically resembles
mdo: mde’u, ’da, or mda’. As regards the original syllable that has been substituted by mdo, the
alternation of mdo and mda’ in the meaning “the lower part of a valley” is attested in PT 1287 (cf.
ll.413, 414, 504). One could hypothesise that mdo lcags is a folk etymology: mdo has replaced mda’
“arrow” - a process prompted additionally perhaps by the occurrence of another mdo- (mdo grags
l.487) in the same song or by the association with the region known in OT sources as Mdo smad.
Thus, the underlying structure of the compound would have been *mda’i lcags “an iron [part] of an
arrow” for which compare mda’ lcags “iron arrow head, point” (Gs:567b)2.

Now, as concerns the second part of the verse, DSM glosses mda’ ste’u kha ma with “mda’i rtse mo
ste’u ’dra ba’i mda’i bye brag cig” (357a). Compare also DAS’ comment on mde’u “the arrow-head is
made of various designs some with three points, others like a miniature pick-axe” (675a-b). The
same author cites few names given apparently to arrowheads according to their shape (D:675b):
mde’u be’u’i so ‘dra ba “arrow-head like calf’s teeth” (cf. Mvy:6098: mde ’u be ’u so ’dra ba
“vatsadantaka”); mde’u byi’u sñiṅ ma “arrow-head like a bird’s heart” (cf. Mvy:6101: mde ’u byu ’u sñiṅ

1
Compare hereto also the meaning of *zaṅs tiṅ in the phrase *rgya ma zaṅs tiṅ “a wide receptacle, a copper-brass vessel”
that has been reconstructed as underlying the compound zaṅs brgya (see s.v.).
2
Cf. also mde’u lcags rgod ma “ungeschliffener, angerosteter Pfeil” (Corff.1:250b, 1053.4), lit. “unprocessed (lit. raw) iron
part of an arrowhead”.
 274

ma ’dra “mudgalikā (mūrkhalikā)”); mde’u zur bźi pa “an arrow with four-bladed head” (cf. Mvy:6099:
mde ’u zur bźi pa “tilakocavaka”).1

On this evidence, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of mdo lcags as *mda’i lcags “an
iron part of an arrow”, which in PT 1287 is qualified by ste’u kha ma “having an axe-blade [shape]”
(see s.v.). Interestingly, the same phrase is found in later lexicographic works in obviously distorted
forms as mda’ lcags skam kha ma “temür serege dü sumu” (SR.1:1081.3)2 and mda’ skam kham “ser ge”
(YeŚes:278b; CM serege “table fork, pitchfork; trident; fishing spear, harpoon; arrow with several
points”, Less:689a).

[T] btsan te ni myi mkhas pa “[Those] being mighty [but] not skilled
rgya drug (484) ni dguṅ mthaʼ rje // [are] the lords of the horizon, Chinese and Turks.
mgyogste ni myi mkhas pa / [Those] being swift [but] not skilled
śu ma ni rgyal ma gñis / [are] both, a śu ma and mare.
drag ste ni myi mkhas pa [Those] being strong [but] not skilled
mcho gar ni ʼbroṅ gi ru / [are] the white tips [of a bow strengthened] with
wild yak’s horn.
rno ste ni myi (485) mkhas pa [Those] being sharp [but] not skilled
mdo lcags ni steʼu ka ma / (PT 1287:483-5) [are] the iron arrowheads [called] ‘(those) having
an axe-blade[-shape]’.”

77 mdor cod
DSM:878b: gri śubs raṅ ’grig (s.v. ral gyi mdor gcod).
BNY:156n12: gri śubs cha sbrags (s.v. ral gyi mdor cod).
DTH:144: tranchent jusqu’à la base; DOTSON.2013a:285: crossed sword.

[E] *mdoṅ (po) chod pa “a tube-like case that is a cover”

[M] (N) sheath
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTappositional; STRC[N+N]
[R] doṅ ral
[A] Tibetan lexicographic tradition (see the Lexicographic section) seems to have preserved the
original meaning of mdor cod that appears to be hardly comprehensible when approached from the
actually documented form of the lexeme. However, the gloss given in later Tibetan sources, namely
gri śubs, “case, covering, sheath” (J:560b, s.v. śubs), fits well in the context of PT 1287 where the word
occurs determined by the phrase “of swords”.3

I understand -cod as cognate to CT IIchod pa “to cover over, put into shade; also a shade, cover”
(D:428a) for which compare also cod pan “ornament for the head, worn by kings, tiara, diadem,
crown; the crest of gallinaccous birds” (J:142b; < *chod phan “hanging ornaments4 of a headgear (lit.
[head-]cover)”) and khrom thog chod “a person well dressed, well equipped, and possessed of personal

1
Various kinds of arrowhead can be seen on the pictures 96 and 98 in LAROCCA 2006a:195 & 197, respectively.
2
Cf. also mda’ śiṅ skam kha ma “modun serege” (SR.1:1082.7).
3
For the interpretation of ral gyī (inverted gi gu) as ral gyi’i see the Introduction.
4
See s.v. Iphan in J:340a.
 275

accomplishments; one above the crowd; above his fellows” (D:177b). Further cognates include
possibly: *chod po/mo “great” (CDTD:2669, 2671) and mchod pa “I.1to honour; 2to eat, drink, take, taste;
II
offering, oblation, libation” (J:166b; < *”to cover; to set/lay the table (for dinner)”1, cf. Pol. nakrywać
do stołu < kryć “to cover”).

One lexeme has already been analysed in the present study that shows some semantic resemblance
to the compound under consideration. doṅ ral, namely, was interpreted as referring to a kind of case
and its second member has been reconstructed as ral ba *”open”. Now, mdor cod denoted obviously a
case or a sheath too. Thus, I propose to reconstruct the compound in question as *mdoṅ chod < *mdoṅ
chod pa, lit. *“a tube-like case that is a cover”.2 For the alternation mdoṅ ~ ldoṅ see CDTD:4178.3 On
the other hand, doṅ po and ldoṅ po are, according to JÄSCHKE, variant readings of one and the same
word: “1tube, any hollow cylindrical vessel; 2a shuttle” (J:258a). Whether doṅ ~ ldoṅ ~ mdoṅ should be
related to CT doṅ “1a deep hole, pit, ditch; 2depth, deepness, profundity” or rather to doṅ ~ ldoṅ
*”copper” (see s.v. ldoṅ prom) > *“a copper vessel, case” remains to be clarified, although, for the
time being, the first alternative seems more plausible.

[T] sku rten du khrab bseʼ sna bcu daṅ / ldoṅ prom gyi ral gyi (read: gyi’i) mdor cod / (263) gñis gsol to //
(PT 1287:262-3)
“[Dba’s dbyi tshab] offered as sku rten ten kinds of varnished lamellar armour and two sword sheaths
(lit. sheaths for swords) [made from] (lit. of) white copper.”

78 ldeg ren pa
DTH:40: lDeg ren pa’ (PN - JB); PETECH.1988a:294: un titolo; ; HILL.2008:76: Ldeg ren pa (PN - JB); DOTSON.2009:103: Ldeg Ren pa
(PN - JB); n.221: ldeg ren pa (name of a revolt).

[S] *ldog par ’dren “to pull so that (one) turns away”
[E] *[ldog par ’dren pa]+pa “one related to pulling so that (one) turns away”
[M] (N) instigator
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[A] ldeg ren pa cannot, as accepted by previous scholars, be a proper name for, apart from the fact
that its morphological form would be unusual for a proper name, it takes a position in a sentence
which is otherwise reserved for a word denoting, e.g., a function or an office.4 Furthermore, would it
be a proper name, then one would expect a COM particle daṅ following it as is the case with “Mnon
snaṅ grags and (daṅ) Khe rgad mdo snaṅ” in the passage quoted in the Text section.

1
Cf. also the dialectal meaning “to wear” attested in Gar, Gergye, Gertse, Lhasa, Purik, Ruthok, Shigatse, and Tholing
(CDTD.V:380).
2
I assume that the replacement of mdor- for *mdoṅ- occurred as a scribal error in the course of copying the original text.
*mdoṅ chod > *mdoṅ cod resulted from deaspiration of the onset of the second syllable.
3
Compare also the gloss from SUMATIRATNA: ldoṅ mo “chu yis snod; mdoṅ mo” (SR.1:1146.3) as well as the pair ldoṅ ba “to
become blind, to be blind” (J:292a) and ldoṅs ~ mdoṅs “blind, infatuated” (J:292a, 274a).
4
Compare the following sample phrases from the OTA that consist of two elements: 1a denotation of an office, function or
kinship relation, and 2a proper name:
bruṅ pa Gnubs kho ma re (ITJ 750:162);
mṅan Laṅ gro sña brtsan khoṅ lod (ITJ 750:227-8);
grand councillor (blon chen po) Khri gzigs (ITJ 750:161);
btsan po, the elder brother (gcen) Lha bal po (ITJ 750:152), etc.
 276

I propose to reconstruct ldeg ren- as *ldog ’dren; for further examples of word-internal vowel
assimilation see the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.1 The onset of the second syllable *-’dren
has been reduced between -g and -r- (’d- > Ø / -gσ_r-).2

As has been demonstrated by BIELMEIER (2004b:405-6), the CT paradigm of ’dren is suppletive and
combines forms of two originally independent verbs ’dren and (’)draṅ. The latter verb is attested in
OT documents with the meaning “to lead” (cf. dra cen/dmag draṅ, see s.v. dra cen), whereas the
former seems to have had the meaning *”to pull, drag; to attract”, as in the following well known
expressions: rkaṅ/źabs ’dren, lit. “to pull [out] one’s feet”; gdan ’dren, lit. “to pull, drag a dish”;
spyan/mig ’dren, lit. “to attract sight”.

Concerning the structure of the discussed lexeme, the second occurrence of ldeg ren pa, in which it
acquires the attribute log pa (ldeg ren pa log pa rnams), proves that it is derived from a compound
(*[ldog ’dren]+pa) for otherwise, if ren pa would be an attribute of ldeg, we would rather have to
reckon with the phrase *log pa’i ldeg ren pa, lit.*”ren paATTR ldeg who revolted”.

The morpheme ldog is only scarcely attested in OT documents. The following three examples could
be found so far:
phyir myi ldog pa’i go ’phaṅ thob pa (PT 16:22v4)3
“one who reached the stage of a one who does not return”

dgrar ni grogs ldog (PT 1283:41)

“A friend returns as an enemy.”

slar ma ldog par / bdagis phyin chiṅ rig par (507) byos śig (PT 1283:506-7)
“Not having come back, I shall act so that I perceive [it] while arriving.”

Although according to some authors log is a V2 of ldog (Sch:569a, J:552b), the second example quoted
from PT 1283 where ldog is negated with ma proves that they should rather be understood as
separate verbs.4 An assumption is made that ldog has been derived from log with the same prefix d-
by means of which ’dral was derived from ral; compare hereto also the pairs of verbs laṅ ~ ldaṅ, lug ~
ldug, loṅ ~ ldoṅ, lob ~ ldob, etc.5

1
Compare also phyir myi ldeg pa for phyir myi ldog pa in Or.15000/455:r4, trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:191, text 571.
2
I was able to trace only one OT compound with the second syllable -’dren: rkaṅ ’dren (PT 1283:438), but at least few other
are attested in CT, cf., for instance, mgo ’dren “protector, patron” (J:91b); sna ’dren “guide, leader” (SÁRKÖZI 1984:277);
spyan ’dren “Anrufungszeremonien” (TUCCI/HEISSIG 1970:137); ru ’dren “horn(brigade)-leader” (TLTD.3:182b), “commander”
(BELLEZZA 2008:337).
According to RKTS, ren is attested in the phrase ren par three times in Derge Bstan ’gyur. However, as a closer examination
has revealed, in all three cases it is a misspelling for ran par.
3
But compare phyir myi log pa’i byaṅ cub sems dpa’ rnams in ITJ 751:40r4, although Mvy attests to ldog in the following
formations, among others: phyir ldog “pratikramati” (5097); phyir ldog pa “apratinirvartī” (5110); phyir mi ldog pa
“avinivartanīyaḥ” (740).
4
This conclusion is confirmed by the evidence from modern spoken dialects, cf. CDTD.V:688 and 1237.
5
It seems that in some cases the prefix d- could form INTR verbs from resultatives or from adjectives; thus, log *”(to be)
reversed” > ldog *”to reverse, turn away”.
 277

Conclusions. An expression resembling to a great extent the reconstructed *ldog ’dren is documented
in CT. To wit, we find log ’dren pa glossed with “falsch, verkehrt oder entgegengesetzt ziehen”
(Sch:569b), “opp. to ‘to lead to happiness, felicity’” (J:284b, s.v. ’dren pa), “*log ’drén pa* to mislead,
seduce B[ook-language]” (J:553a, s.v. log pa).1 Thus, *ldog ’dren could be explained as a primarily
verbal compound < *ldog par ’dren, lit. *“to pull so that one turns away”, i.e., *“to instigate, foment”.
For the reconstructed underlying structure compare:
log par draṅs pa ñes che’o (PT 1283:144)
“Those who instigated (lit. pulled to being reversed) are of great evil.”
I assume that the contracted form *ldog ’dren has undergone lexicalisation as a noun with the
meaning *“instigation, fomentation”. Thus, ldeg ren pa would denote a person that is attached to an
instigation, i.e. instigates against or opposes to the authorities. One can infer from ITJ 750 that ldeg
ren pa appeared after the death of the btsan po Khri ’dus sroṅ (they are mentioned in the year 705/6),
probably in protest against the fact that the rightful heir to the throne, Lha bal pho, should be
dethroned (see the quotation below) in favour of a newly born child, the later ruler Khri lde gtsug
brtsan.

[T] (150) sbrul gyi lo la bab ste / btsan po sras rgyal gtsug ru daṅ / pyi khri ma lod dron na bźugs / ldeg ren
paʼ (151) mnon snaṅ grags daṅ / khe rgad mdo snaṅ las stsogs pa log ste bon mo na la tser ldeg ren pa log
(152) pa rnams bkum / poṅ lag raṅ du btsan po gcen lha bal pho rgyal sa nas phab / (ITJ 750:150-2)
“It fell on the snake year: the btsan po, son Rgyal gtsug ru and [his] grandmother Khri ma lod stayed
in Dron. Instigators Mnon snaṅ grags and Khe rgad mdo snaṅ, among others, revolted. At Bon mo na
la tse2, [one] killed the revolting instigators. At Poṅ lag rag, [one] dethroned (lit. deposed from the
throne) the btsan po, the elder brother Lha bal pho.”

79 ldoṅ prom
BNY:156n11: (ldoṅ srom. mdoṅ gsol.) dmag sa nas thob pa’i dṅos po; STK:171n9: g.yul ṅo nas thob pa’i dṅos po la zer.
DTH:144: (not translated? - JB); DOTSON.2013a:285: Ldoṅ prom3.

[E] *ldoṅ phrom “white copper”

[M] (N) white copper
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] thaṅ prom
[A] I relate ldoṅ to doṅ in doṅ tse “copper coin, especially of Chinese coinage, money” (LAUFER
1916:506-7)1. doṅ could be a loanword from Chinese tong 铜 “bronze, copper” reconstructed by

1
Besides, we find log ’dren as an equivalent of Skt. vināyaka (Negi.15:6756b; see also D:1223b s.v. log ’dren bgegs kyi rgyal po);
Skt. vināyaka “taking away, removing; ‘Remover (of obstacles),’ N. of Gaṇeśa; a leader, guide; a Guru or spiritual preceptor;
an obstacle, impediment” (MW:972a; < vi-√nī “to lead or take away, remove, avert; to throw off, drive away, dispel, expel”,
MW:971b). According to THOMAS, log ’dren is also attested in PT 434 (TLTD.3:184, s.v. log gcod), a manuscript of the Buddhist
Mahābalanāma-mahāyānasūtra (LALOU 1939.1:106).
2
I understand Bon mo na la tse as a place name although its morphological form is rather unusual. But compare another
sentence from the same text, where the location of the action referred to by bkum is marked in TERM:
mdo smadu kam khri (26) bzaṅ bye ʼdaʼ thoṅ myis bkum ste śa gñard phar lo gchig / (PT 1288:25-6)
“At Mdo smad, a murderer killed Kam khri bzaṅ bye ’da’. [One] took revenge [on him]. So one year.”
3
DOTSON (2013a:340n12) identifies ldoṅ prom in PT 1287:262 with a place name Nam ldoṅ prom from ITJ 750:140.
 278

SCHUESSLER as LH doŋ, OCM *lôŋ or *d(l)ôŋ ? (2007:499).2 ldoṅ- in ldoṅ prom (< *ldoṅ phrom through
deaspiration of the word-internal ph-: ph- > p- / -ṅσ_r-) and doṅ- in doṅ tse could have been borrowed
independently in different periods.

Alternatively, ldoṅ could have been an OT colour term inherited from the common ST lexicon, for
which compare CT ldoṅ ros “name of an earth used to stain yellow the walls of house, bole, ochre”
(Cs:281b), “manaḥ-śilā” (Mvy:5924; Skt. manaḥśilā “realgar, red arsenic”, MW:783c)3 and the
following comment on the term ‘copper’ by SCHUESSLER: “metals are typically associated with color,
therefore the word is probably related to tong 彤 ‘red’” (2007:499).4 For the meaning of -prom see s.v.
thaṅ prom.

ldoṅ prom corresponds to or is perhaps even a loan translation of Chinese baitong 白銅 “white copper”
- a term known as paktong in English and denoting an alloy of copper and nickel; cf. the following
remark: “the Chinese metal so renowned among the Arabic alchemists as khārṣīnī (Chinese arrow-
head metal) or ḥadīd al-Ṣīnī (Chinese iron), used for mirrors, and counted by them as the seventh of
the standard metals.”5, and LAUFER’s elucidation: “It is well known that the Chinese have a peculiar
alloy of copper consisting of copper 40.4, zinc 25.4, nickel 31.6, iron 2.6, and occasionally some silver
and arsenic. It looks like white or silver-like in the finish, and is hence called pai-t’uṅ (“white
copper”). [...] It is mentioned as early as A.D. 265 [...]. The Persians say that the Chinese make this
alloy into mirrors and arrowheads, a wound from which is mortal. [...] Qazwīnī speaks of very
efficient lance-heads and harpoons of this metal. The Persians have further the term isfīdruj, which
means “white copper,” and which accordingly represents a literal rendering of Chinese pai-t’uṅ. [...]
Dimašqī, who wrote about 1325, eplains xār-ṣīnī as a metal from China, the yellow color of copper
being mixed with black and white, the mirrors imported from China, called “mirrors of distortion,”
are made from this alloy. It is an artificial product, hard, and fragile; it is injured by fire, after being
wrought. Qazwīnī adds that no other metal yields a ring equalling that of this alloy, and that none is
so suitable for the manufacture of large and small bells.” (1919:555).

1
Cf. also gser gyi mdoṅ (sic!) tse “im Herbst blühende gelbe Blume, deren Knospen wie Kupferkäsch aussehen” (Corff.2:894b,
4103.4; emphasis - JB).
2
As the latter author notices, “The word ‘copper’ occurs in some SE Asian l[anguages] with initial l-: Tai-Wuming luːŋ,
Palaung məlɔŋ ‘copper’.” (SCHUESSLER 2007:499). An hypothesis could be put forward according to which CT me loṅ “1mirror,
looking-glass” (J:417b; as far as I am aware, attested in OT sources only in Tu 74:A7 (me loṅ), see TAUBE 1980:133, and in PT
981:200; I would like to thank Brandon DOTSON for the latter hint), would be a loanword borrowed from a SE Asian language
(Palaung?), probably as a term originally denoting objects made from copper (imported from the region?) with a later
semantic specialisation to refer exclusively to mirrors. For ‘copper’ in other ST languages see:
http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/gnis?t=copper; 27.07.2014. For copper alloy used in manufacturing
mirrors see below. An alternative explanation of the word me loṅ has been proposed by ZEISLER (2011:134).
3
The origins of ros remain unknown. It could be related to CT dros pa “heated, grown warm, esp. of the ground by the heat
of the sun, of men, by warm clothing” (J:264b-5a), thus yielding *ldoṅ dros pa *“a heated, yellowish-red [earth]” (reduction
of the word internal consonant cluster: d- > Ø / -ṅσ_r-).
4
STEDT reconstructs *lɯŋ RED for Proto-Tani which could in fact be cognate to the lexeme analysed here; see
http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/6137; 27.07.2014.
5
NEEDHAM 1974:238.
 279

In the passage quoted below, we read of scabbards (lit. sheaths for swords) made from white copper.
As we learn from the descriptions of scabbards provided by LAROCCA, copper or copper alloy were
used in modern times to decorate front parts of sheaths (2006a: Fig.58, pp.154-5; Fig.59, p.155; Fig.67,
pp.163-4). Thus, we can infer that the scabbards mentioned in the OTC possessed an ornamentation
that was at least partly made of white copper.

[T] sku rten du khrab bseʼ sna bcu daṅ / ldoṅ prom gyi ral gyi (read: gyi’i) mdor cod / (263) gñis gsol to //
(PT 1287:262-3)
“[Dba’s dbyi tshab] offered as sku rten ten kinds of varnished lamellar armour and two sword sheaths
[made from] (lit. of) white copper.”

80 noṅs myig
DSM:403a: ñes dmigs.
RICHARDSON.1985:19: offence; LI/COBLIN:176: fault, crime (?).

[E] *noṅs kyi dmyigs “intention of an offence”

[M] (N) offence attempt (H)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPURP+N]
[R] ñam noṅs / thoṅ myi / thoṅ myig / noṅs yo
[A] The compound is glossed in DSM as ñes dmigs (see above) confirming the underlying structure
that has been reconstructed for noṅs myig. I understand noṅs (pa) as a noun derived from V2 of noṅ
“to commit a fault, to make a mistake, to commit one’s self” (J:307a), i.e. “offence”, lit. *“committed
(one)”. I assume that the meaning of the verb developed from the original *”to go, to pass” (for
details see s.v. ñam noṅs) via *“to trespass” to “to commit an offense”. By comparison with noṅs yo
(see s.v.) and considering the fact that, in the passage below, noṅs myig seems to have referred to a
potential offence toward a btsan po it seems legitimate to understand it as belonging to the honorific
register.

For more details on the morpheme dmyigs as the second member of compounds and its reduced
form -myig see s.v. thoṅ myig.

[T] (21) zla goṅ gi bu tsha rgyud gyis // btsan poe (22) źa sṅar // glo ba ma riṅs na / noṅs (23) myig gźan ci
byuṅ yaṅ ruṅ / srog (24) srid la myi dbab par // [bka’ gyod gyi (25) tshigs] [ci la] bab pa las // [bka’ gyod]
(26) [na gcig gis] smad ciṅ bskyuṅ bar (27) gnaṅ ṅo // (Źol N 21-7)
“Should the line of the descendants of Zla goṅ not become disloyal towards the btsan po, whatever
other offence attempts may have appeared, [one] allows that, in order not to threaten (lit. cast
upon) [their] life or sway, the accusation, while being reduced, shall be turned down each year (lit.
with one year, na gcig gis) upon words of accusation appeared on whatever [issue].”

81 noṅs yo
[V] noṅs źo (Or.15000/212:v3; assimilation)
noṅ źo (PT 1082:3; ITJ 856(B) r4; Or.15000/183:3; Or.8212/1403:r5; Or.8212/1403:r6;
Or.15000/391:r4; assimilation, elision)
BYD:284a: sems khrel byed pa.
 280

BDN:333n3: ñe źo daṅ don gcig ste skyon nam bar chad du ’jug (s.v. nor źo).
TLTD.3:25: anxious or ill?; p.149b: illness (s.v. noṅ źo); TAUBE.1980:157b: Krankheit (s.v. noṅ źo).

[E] *noṅs (pa) daṅ yo ba “offence and crookedness”

[M] (N) mishap (H)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] ñam noṅs / ñe yo ba / noṅs myig
[A] From the passages quoted below it appears that noṅs yo was used mainly with the verb mchis.
Furthermore, we learn that the compound could co-occur with complements denoting people as
well as animals (cattle).

The original form of the compound is proposed to have been noṅs yo - a form actually attested in
some of the documents cited below in the Text section. The phonological processes that resulted in
other variants are assumed to have proceeded as follows:
noṅs yo > noṅs źo: y- > ź- / -sσ_ (partial progressive assimilation);
noṅs źo > noṅ źo: -s > Ø / _σź- (elision of a fricative before another fricative)1.

Interestingly, just as in case of noṅs myig which is glossed in some Tibetan lexicographic sources
with ñes dmigs, we find an analogous pair: noṅs yo and ñe źo “damage, mishap, accident” (J:190a); thus
the reconstructed forms are:
*noṅs dmyigs ~ CT ñes dmigs : noṅs yo ~ *ñes yo2
I understand -yo in noṅs yo and *ñes yo as cognate to CT yo ba “1oblique, sloping, slanting, awry,
crooked; obliquity, slope, slant; twisted, distorted, perverted, erroneous; going crooked ways,
deceitful, crafty, crookedness, deceitful dealings” (J:514b). In ITJ 740, that concerns legal issues, we
find still another compound in a similar context:
noṅs skyon mchis pa (259) daṅ / ’og dum bgyis pa lastsogs pa (ITJ 740:258-9)
“those having noṅs skyon and those doing ’og dum, among others”
In case of noṅs skyon and noṅs yo, not only the context is similar but also the morphologic form of the
compounds; skyon, “1fault, defect; damage, harm, disadvantage, misfortune; 2bodily defect, fault;
3
spiritual defect, sin, vicious quality” (J:32a), belongs to one semantic field with yo, and, in fact, could
even be its derivative.

By analogy with noṅs skyon and by comparing noṅs yo with yon po in ñes pa yon po (see s.v. ñe yo ba) I
propose to interpret the compound under discussion as a synonymic compound consisting of two
nouns: noṅs (pa) “offence” and yo ba “obliquity”. The compound is assumed to have denoted various
kinds of incidents that could become a source of concern or anxiety. As explained s.v. ñe yo ba, noṅs
yo seems to have been an honorific equivalent of *ñes yo, CT ñe źo.

1
The variant no yo attested in the inscription from Endere:c3 is in all probability a scribal error for *ñes yo ~ ñe źo for only
the latter compound is attested as a subject of the verb myed; for details see s.v. ñe yo ba. Alternatively, the reading might
have been influenced by the damage of the inscription itself.
2
The morpheme -yo is attested in ñe yo ba, see s.v.
 281

[T] phrin yig naṅ nas noṅ źo ma (4) mchis źes thos / glo ba dga’ / (PT 1082:3-4)
“[I] heard from the letter that no mishap appeared1. [I] am happy [about that].”
noṅ źo mchis sam ma mchis (ITJ 856.B:r4)
“Did a mishap appeared or not?”
[---] ’pan to re khrom zigs dag la yaṅ noṅ źo mchis (Or.8212/1403:r5; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:16, text
49)
“No mishap appeared also to ’Pan to re khrom (read: khri?) zigs.”
[bu?] dag la yaṅ noṅ źo ma mchis (Or.8212/1403:r6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:16, text 49)
“No mishap appeared also to children (?).”
khrom na yaṅ cuṅ rtsan daṅ snaṅ bźer daṅ lha bzaṅ las (3) stsogs pa la noṅ źo ni ma mchis (Or.15000/183:r2-
3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:81, text 247)
“Also in khrom, there was no mishap to Cuṅ rtsan, Snaṅ bźer and Lha bzaṅ, among others.”
[---] la noṅs źo daṅ bro ’tsha[±4 m]chis (Or.15000/212:v3; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:91, text 276)
“did not come to swear by mishap against (?la) [...]”2
[noṅ] źo ma mchis par smond chiṅ mchis (Tu 1:6; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:55, text 4)
“I do pray that no mishap appears [to you].
grub [ba] myi phyugs la noṅs yo ma mchis pa so na to (c1) ro klu ’dam bro lastsogs phas yon du (c2) bal kyi
glaṅ po n[i] phul [ste] sla yul du (c3) myi rta la no yo (read: ñes yo) myede (Endere b2-c3; trslr. after OTDO)
“[...] mishap that did not appear to men or cattle; so na to ro klu ’dam bro, among others, gave an ox
from (lit. of) Bal as a gift. In the land of Sla (?) there is no mishap to people and horses.”3

82 nol thabs
BTC:1534b-5a: (rñiṅ) phan tshun dmag ’thab rgyag pa (s.v. nol thabs bgyi); DSM:405a: g.yul ’gyed kyi sa (s.v. nol thabs kyi sa);
p.405a-b: dmag thabs byed pa (s.v. nol thabs bgyis pa); BYD:285a-b: phan tshun dmag ’thab rgyag pa daṅ gros mol byed pa
la’aṅ (s.v. nol thabs bgyi).
BSODDBAṄ.1992:74n23: dmag rgyag pa (s.v. nol thabs bgyis).
DTH:154n9: nol, visiblemets pour snol; URAY.1972b:29: battle; COBLIN.1991b:529b: military hostilities, battle; HILL.2010c:247:
great battle; DOTSON.2013a:313: great battle.4

[E] *nold pa daṅ thabs “a fight and a combat”

[M] (N) battle
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] dgra thabs
[A] The meaning “battle” for nol thabs as attested in lexicographic sources (see above) is
additionally confirmed by its Chinese equivalent in Shangshu: zhan 戰 “war, fighting, battle” (MDBG;
cf. COBLIN 1991b:529b).

1
Lit. “[...] that there was no mishap”.
2
For more details on the phrasing see s.v. gum chad.
3
Four further occurrences of the compound in question are attested:
gyod bza’ my[i] la yaṅ noṅ źo m[-] (Or.15000/391:r4; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:165, text 506);
[-] ba’am noṅs yo [man] [-] (Or.15000/511:r6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:218, text 630);
bye’u kyiṅ du bdagi rṅa mo daṅ nas rta gchig mchis pa noṅs yo daṅ / rgyal [--- su] gzigs mchi[s --] (Or.15000/498:v3-4; trslr. after
TAKEUCHI 1998.2:213, text 615);
can la noṅ źo (Tib 128:6; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:66).
The passages are badly damaged and thus left without translation here.
4
Compare also: nol thabs bgyiste “traita” (DTH:32), “fought” (HILL 2008:74; DOTSON 2009:86; HILL 2011:14).
 282

nol is documented independently as a verb and a deverbative in the following OT passages:

btsan po gcen sroṅ rtsan daṅ / gcuṅ btsan sroṅ gñis nold nas (PT 1288:8)
“Both, the btsan po, elder brother Sroṅ rtsan and the younger brother Btsan sroṅ, fought [with
each other].”

sṅon rgya drug daṅ chab srid la ma mjald te nold pa dag gi dus na lha sras dbu rmog brtsan po daṅ / blon
po dpa’ ’dzaṅs (38r3) ldan źiṅ dgra thabs mkhas pa’i skyims kyis dgra la phog (ITJ 751:38r2-3)
“Formerly, not having got into contact with Chinese and Turks in the field of (lit. upon) chab srid,
at the time of fights, the divine son possessed of a mighty helmet together with brave and wise
councillor(s) fought (lit. hit) the enemy with skyims (halo, nimbus, i.e. glory?)1 of those skilled in
military tactics.”

nold pa (= V2 < nol), *“a fight”, that occurs in the second passage, is assumed to underlie the first
member of the compound under discussion (*nold thabs > nol thabs; elision of the word-internal -d
before another dental consonant: -d > Ø / -l_σth-). Apart from that, we find nol ba explained by
SUMATIRATNA as “ǰokičaγu; ǰokičal; buǰar; soličaγu” (1:1195.4)2.

I understand thabs as an old deverbative derived from the verb ’thab “to combat, to fight, in a battle;
to quarrel, to dispute, to brawl” (J:243b).3 It could have been derived from the original V2 *“what is
fought” or V4 *“what is to be fought”; in both cases the actual meaning can be rendered as *“a
fight”. By analogy with the first constituent of the compound (nol- < *nold pa), v2 seems to be a more
plausible solution. The interpretation that connects the morpheme thabs to the verb ’thab can be
additionally supported by the following paralleling phrases:
OT nol thabs ’gyed (PT 1287:394) ~ CT ’thab mo ’gyed “to fight, combat” (J:97b, s.v. ’gyed pa);
OT nol thabs bgyid (PT 1288:37) ~ CT ’thab mo byed “to quarrel, fight” (J:243b, s.v. ’thab pa).
Besides, we find a modern compound dmag thabs in the gloss on drag por sbyoṅ ba “2dmag thabs la
mkhas par byed pa” (BTC:1316b), “2va. to engage in military exercises” (Gs:549c). One could assume
the following semantic development for thabs *”combat” > *”military practise” > “practise”4 >
“method”.

[T] rgyal po ’bu waṅ / śiṅ rta sum brgya rkyen gyi dmag ñi gri (read: khri) gcig stoṅ daṅ / ṅa phod stagi
tshad du dpa’ ba // (70) sum brgya daṅ chas (read: bcas) te // yul ’bog yar nol thabs gyi sar gtsigs stsal nas
(PT 986:69-70; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:307b-8a)

1
THOMAS amends skyims to skyems (TLTD.2:95n4) translating the latter term as “ardour” (ibid., p.101).
2
The verb is cognate to CT snol “1to unite, join, put together, fit together; 2to wrestle, scuffle, fight” (J:320b); for dialectal
data see CDTD.V:754.
3
To my knowledge, THOMAS was the first scholar who proposed to relate thabs to ’thabs (sic!) (TLTD.3:140a).
4
Cf. thabs śes “Praxis und Theorie” (Jä:652a), “means, method, way, strategy” (Gs:489c) as well as JÄSCHKE’s additional
comment on thabs “Speciell in der Religionswissenschaft bezeichnet thabs die myst[ische] Praxis, Kunst“ (Jä:652a).
 283

“The king ’Bu waṅ, together with twenty one thousand soldiers supported (lit. of support) by three
hundred chariots and with three hundred bold ones (ṅa phod), who are as brave as tigers (lit. brave
to the measure of a tiger), granted an edict in the land ’Bog yar, the place of the battle1.”
ji’u daṅ nol thabs (PT 986:137; trslr. after COBLIN 1991a:310a)
“the battle with Ji’u”
ʼuṅ gi ʼog (393) du mywa dkar po ʼbaṅs su mṅaʼ ba las / glo ba riṅs pa ʼi tshe / dmag phon ʼbro ram śags //
(394) bkaʼ stsal nas / brag rtser nol thabs bkye ba ʼi tshe // ʼjaṅ maṅ po bkum nas // spyan chen (395) po ñiṅ
rim daṅ / sna la gthogs pa daṅ / dmaṅs yan chad sum brgya’ rtsa bcu gñis bzuṅ nas / (396) ʼjaṅ rje gol gyis
kyaṅ pyag ʼtshal te / ʼbaṅs rnal mar bkug nas / dpyaʼ phab ste sṅa mkho bźin du (397) bkod do // (PT
1287:392-7)
“Then, at the time when the White Mywa, upon having been taken in possession as subjects, had
become disloyal, army commander ’Bro ram śags was given orders. Thereafter (nas), when a battle
was committed at Brag rtse, [one] killed many ’Jaṅ[-people]. After [one] had seized three hundred
and twelve [prisoners of war] (grand intendants of internal order, those participating in leadership,
down to commoners), [one] gathered also as actual subjects the lord and servants of ’Jaṅ, who had
paid homage. Having imposed taxes, [one] made arrangements according to what was proper in
earlier times.”
(36) lugi lo laʼ bab ste / btsan po sprags gyi śa ra na bźugs śiṅ / blon che stoṅ rtsan ʼa źa yul na mchiste (37)
da rgyal maṅ po rjes / mtsho nag stoṅ rur / rgya seʼu den paṅ daṅ / nol thabs bgyiste / da rgyal gyaṅ gum źiṅ
(38) brgyad khri stoṅ la rdugs phar lo gcig / (PT 1288:36-8)
“It fell on the year of sheep: while the btsan po was residing in Śa ra of Sprags, grand councillor
[Mgar] stoṅ rtsan [yul zuṅ] stayed in the land of ’A źa. da rgyal Maṅ po rje fought a battle with the
Chinese Se’u den paṅ at Mtsho nag stoṅ ru. While da rgyal [himself] died, eighty thousand [Chinese
soldiers] were knocked down2 to one thousand. Thus one year.”

83 mna’ mtho
HAARH.1969:405: solemn oath; HILL.2006:96: high oath; BELLEZZA.2008:516: solemn oath; HILL.2010c:247: oath cairn;
DOTSON.2011b:237n5: oath; ZEISLER.2011:108: solemn vow; DOTSON.2012:163: oath cairn (for mna’ tho); n.9: the cairn of stones
that plays a central role in the taking of an oath; DOTSON.2013a:269: oath.

[E] *mna’i tho “the (right) time of a vow”

[M] (N) the right time for a vow; mna’ mtho gcod, lit. “to set the time for a vow”, to swear sb.
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NPURP+N]
[A] The compound under consideration occurs in an hyperbaton3 in the following passages:
mna’ bchad mtho bchad / (PT 1134:92)
“[One] decided the mna’ mtho.”

1
Compare hereto thabs sa in ITN 417:r1 which is translated by THOMAS as “battle-ground” (TLTD.2:157) and which could in
fact be reconstructed as *nol thabs kyi sa.
2
rdugs is attested in Kyirong as an ncAD verb with the meaning “to strike against sth., to collide with so.” (CDTD.V:668). Its
historical relationship to CT thug has already been noticed by JÄSCHKE (285b, s.v. rdug pa).
3
Hyperbaton understood as “the separation of words naturally belonging together” (Smyth, H.W., Greek Grammar, 1920,
Cambridge, Harvard University Press, p.679; apus DOTSON 2013a:162n89) has been identified in OT narratives, although not
called by the term, already by ZEISLER (2004:417-8) who interpreted the clause chu dgum sri dgum as “to overcome (lit. kill)
the water demons” (< *chu sri dgum); see also HILL 2006:91n11 and ZEISLER 2011:114-5 on the phrase yab ʼbaṅs pha dguʼ daṅ /
yum ʼbaṅs tshan gsum (PT 1287:8) which is assumed to include a split compound pha tshan and, according to ZEISLER (ibid.),
also ma tshan. More on hyperbaton as a stylistic means frequently used in OT texts can be found in DOTSON 2013a:217ff.,
who, as far as I am aware, was the first to use this term in discussing Tibetan figures of speech.
 284

de bźin bgyi bar / mnaʼ bchad mthoʼ (48) bchad / dam bgyis tshig bgyis nas // cho myi bya ʼi bu mo khrid
de soṅ ṅo // (PT 1287:47-8)
“Having decided the mna’ mtho [and] having given [his] word (dam tshig) to act in this way, [he]
went away leading a daughter from (lit. of) the man-bird family.”
The PT 1287 fragment contains another hyperbaton, namely, in the clause dam bgyis tshig bgyis <
*dam tshig bgyis. It seems that this type of poetic figure presumed in Tibetan that members of a
compound, that was divided, belonged to the same part of speech; in the present examples, they
were all nouns. I cannot cite any example of an hyperbaton in which, e.g., an attributive compound
would be parted. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that the second member of mna’ mtho
was a noun too. Although mtho ba is glossed also as “highness, height” (J:241b), *”highness of an
oath” does not seem to be the correct rendering for the passage in question. An alternative
reconstruction has to be proposed: *mna’i tho, lit. “oath-time”, i.e., “time for taking an oath”; cf. Balti
*brṅa tho “time for cultivation, lit. for the harvest” (CDTD:2263); Nurla *cha tho “time to go”
(CDTD:2463); Balti *btab tho “time for sowing” (CDTD:3235); zin tho “byed thub pa yod tshad”
(BYD:484b).

In accordance with this hypothesis, one could reconstruct the meaning of tho as *“peak; appropriate
time for doing sth.” for which compare *tho “(point of) time” (CDTD:3612). tho *“peak” was used not
only with referrence to time but also to space, cf. rkaṅ tho “a kick” (CDTD:210); mchu tho “beak of
birds” (CDTD:2704); co to “a tuft of hair on the head” (Cs:43b; ~ co tho, CDTD:22951); thor to “a plaited
tuft of hair, toupet” (J:239a); mtshul to “snout” (CDTD:6922); gzer tho “sunset” (CDTD:7517; < *’od gzer
gyi tho), as well as in OT toponyms like Gyaṅ to.

The proposed reconstruction *mna’i tho is additionally supported by the following glosses: chad tho
“mna’ skyel du ’jug pa” (DSM:169b); sñan tho gcod “file, [put on] record” (IW); and especially mna’ tho
(sic!) bcad pa “phan tshun bar la yid ches pa’i phyir du mna’ bźag pa” (BTC:1556a). The verbal
phrases sñan tho gcod and *mna’ tho gcod can be juxtaposed with the following OT clauses:
dguṅ gi tho bchado (PT 1285:v72)
“[One] settled the peak of the night.”2

nam gi tho bchado dguṅ gi rlad bchado (PT 1285:v81)

“[One] settled the peak of the night. [One] settled the top of the night.”
The contexts in which these sentences occur clearly point to a temporal interpretation of tho. *tho
gcod appears to have been an idiomatic expression with the literal meaning *“to cut off the peak (of

1
The word seems to be a folk etymology. It might originally have been a loanword, for which compare Skt. cūḍa “the hair
on the top of the head, single lock or tuft left on the crown of the head after tonsure” (MW:400c-1a). The second syllable
(*du ~ *thu?) might have been associated with the native term tho yielding *cu tho which subsequently underwent vowel
assimilation (*cu tho > *co tho) and deaspiration (*co tho > co to). See BIELMEIER 2004a:173ff. on its semantic change across
Tibetan dialects.
2
Unfortunately the end of the preceding line is badly damaged not allowing for the proper rendering of the whole
sentence.
 285

sth.)” that was lexicalised to *“to decide the right time for sth.” or *“to settle sth.”.1 Hence, the
reconstructed *mna’ tho gcod could have primarily meant *“to decide the right time for vowing” and
through generalisation started to be used for *“to swear”.2

The original meaning of the phrase can still be discerned in the passage from PT 1287 quoted in the
Text section. If we analyse the sentences grammatically, we receive the following structure: AERG OABS
blo la btags te mna’ mtho bchad, lit. “A, having tied O to [his] plans, decided the right time for
vowing”.3 From this it appears that the agent of the verb btags initiates also mna’ mtho bchad,4 i.e. the
person that is already involved in the plans settles mna’ mtho. Consequently, the proper
understanding of the context would suggest the derived meaning of mna’ mtho bchad to have been
“[A] swore [O]” as against mna’ ’bor “[A] swears”, i.e. “[A] makes an oath”.5 The passage from PT 1134,

1
Compare hereto BTK’s definition of the phrase mna’ bchad mtho bchad: “mna’ bskyal mtho btsugs źes pa’o” (p.99n6) in
which mtho bchad is paraphrased with mtho btsugs.
2
The attested form -mtho in mna’ mtho could have come into being as a result of folk etymologisation in which the second
syllable -tho has been replaced by the more commonly used mtho “high” - a change triggered additionally by the m- prefix
of the first syllable of the compound, mna’-.
3
I understand the phrase blo la btags as “to acquiant sb. with [one’s] plans”, lit. “tied on mind, thoughts”; compare hereto
thugs la ’dogs “to interest one’s self in or for, to take care of; to have near at heart” (J:280a).
4
On account of the fact that no agent is named after the converb te I assume that the same person is responsible for both
actions.
5
The phrase dbu sñuṅ bro mna’ gcod pa’i tshe (PT 1287:161) is assumed to be distorted merging most probably two distinct
expressions. First of all, dbu sñuṅ is known from other OT sources as occurring in the following phrases:
dbu sñuṅ gsol (PT 1287:252);
dbu sñuṅ gnaṅ (PT 1287:261, 263, 273, 277-8, 278; Lho 6; Źol N 6; Źwa E 35, W 48);
dbu sñuṅ la gtogs (PT 1287:286, 286-7);
dbu sñuṅ daṅ bro (’)bor (Bsam 19-20; Skar 27, 55).
We can juxtapose these with phrases containing bro:
bro la gtogs (PT 1040:2; PT 1287:178);
bro stsal (PT 1071, repeatedly; PT 1072, repeatedly; PT 1078bis:28; PT 1089:r67; PT 1287:174, 177, 252, 263-4, 288, 296; PT
1297.2:18; ITJ 750:306);
bro len (PT 1287:160);
bro ’dor/(’)bor (PT 1287:275, 296, 298; ITJ 753: v12, v32, v36, v40; Lho 7);
and the word mna’:
mna’ blaṅs (PT 1283:377, 392);
mna’ byas (PT 1283:398);
mna’ ’dor/bor (PT 1283:493, 495; PT 1287:153; ST Treaty W 65, 72);
mna’ zos (PT 1134:94; PT 1283:495; ITJ 734:1r25);
mna’ bsal (ITJ 738:2v7; all the examples are cited after OTDO).
We observe that in none of the phrases does the verb gcod nor any of its forms occur. Furthermore, never all three words,
dbu sñuṅ, bro, and mna’ are used simutaneously in one expression. We encounter only dbu sñuṅ daṅ bro although with the
verb ’bor. From this we can infer that the original passage, being hardly intelligible to its contemporaries, was rearranged.
We can only speculate that the phrase *mna’ tho gcod constituted a part of it. Perhaps the phrase gcod pa’i tshe resulted from
the re-formulation of the original in which *-tho, still connoting “a (right) moment in time”, was not understood any more
as a part of the idiomatic expression *mna’ tho gcod. Alternatively, the phrase *mna’ tho gcod might have faded into oblivion
but the temporal connotations of tho were “transferred” to tshe and -tho, deemed superfluous, was crossed out leaving
three synonyms, dbu sñuṅ, bro, and mna’.
It is feasible that the manuscript from which our text of the OTC was copied already contained the changed forms of the
compound in the ll.154-7 where mna’ mtho bchad occurs, but retained the original *mna’ tho in l.161, that was subsequently
paraphrased by the copist of the present text as dbu sñuṅ bro mna’ gcod pa’i tshe. This conclusion can be additionally
supported by another argument. Namely, in l.160 we read bro len that indicates a normal register whereas the next line has
dbu sñuṅ bro mna’; dbu sñuṅ belongs to the honorific register - all this although the acting persons remain the same and so
there does not seem to be any reason for introducing honorific speech here. Alternatively, if the phrase was *mna’ mtho
gcod, the element -mtho, construed as “elevated”, might have prompted the copist/composer to interpret the new
compound *”elevated oath” as referring to a very special kind of oath; see hereto the Lexicographic section and the
rendering “solemn oath” proposed by some contemporary scholars. Apart from that, the fragment is redundant since
already in l.160 we read that Myaṅ, Dba’s, and Mnon were taking an oath (lenV1) and went (mchisV2) to Pyiṅ ba (bro len chiṅ
mkhar pyiṅ bar mchis nas; the converb nas marks a completed action). Then, however in l.161 they are again (?) going
(mchiV1) to Pyiṅ ba and making an oath (gcodV1; mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ bar mchi ste // dbu sñuṅ bro mnaʼ gcod pa ʼi tshe). Apart from
 286

on the other hand, demonstrates the syntactic difference between mna mtho bchad and mna’ zos; only
in the second case is mna’ a direct object of the verb whereas in the former example bchad governs -
mtho.

[T] ʼuṅ nas / myaṅ dbaʼs gñis ziṅ po rje las ʼkhus te // btsan po spu rgyal (154) la glo ba ñe bar byas nas /
mnaʼ mthoʼ yaṅ cher bchad do // ʼuṅ gi ʼog du [dbaʼs dbyi tshab kyis]A // [[źaṅ (155) po mnon bzaṅ to re sron
/ blo la btags te // mnaʼ mtho bchad pa las] // bzaṅ to re śi nas] // [bu paṅ (156) sum ʼdron po // ziṅ po rje ʼi
naṅ kor byed pa]O blo la btagste [mnaʼ mthoʼ]O bchad do // [myaṅ smon to res]A / (157) tshes poṅ nag seṅ blo
la btags te / mnaʼ mtho bchad do // (PT 1287:153-7)
“Thereafter, both, Myaṅ and Dba’s, having turned away from Ziṅ po rje, acted loyally for the btsan po
Spu rgyal [and] hence set greatly also the time for a vow. Then, after Dba’s dbyi tshab, upon having
acquianted źaṅ po Mnon bzaṅ to re sron with [their] plans, swore [him], Bzaṅ to re died.
Consequently (nas), having acquianted the son [of Bzaṅ to re] Paṅ sum ’dron po, who was the ?inner
attendant? of Ziṅ po rje, with [their] plans, [he] swore [him]. Myaṅ smon to re, having acquianted
Tshes poṅ nag seṅ with [their] plans, swore [him].”1

being illogical, the discourse of this passage runs against the rules of Tibetan grammar expressing first the completed
action of going (mchis nas) and then relating about what was happening before.
To sum up this detailed survey, I assume that the actual version transmitted to us in the manuscript of PT 1287 is a result
of intentional ‘corrections’ made by the copist, which, however, violated the original discourse construction. It might also
be the case that the passage beginning with ñin źiṅ and ending with dpyad do (ll. 161-3) is a paraphase of another topos
(mis)placed here for reasons known only to the composer/copist of the text.
1
Besides, mna mtho is attested as a part of the compound śa rag mna mtho in:
ña ce yor rmaṅ sram che daṅ dṅul / bya che’ lchogs / (93) mo wa che spyaṅ ldom / daṅ bźi’ / śa rag / mna mtho bchad nas / sram
che’ / daṅ dṅul gis / (94) śag rag / mna’ / zos / (PT 1134:92-4)
“After [one] swore with the brotherhood-vow the four, great fish Yor rmaṅ, great otter Daṅ dṅul, great bird Lchogs mo,
and great fox Spyaṅ ldom, the great otter Daṅ dṅul reneged on the brotherhood-vow.”
The literal translation of the first clause would be: “After [one] set the time of the brotherhood-vow for the four [...].” I
understand śa rag mna mtho as a compound with the underlying structure [[śa rag] gi mna]’i mtho, lit. “the right time of a
vow of brotherhood”; cf. śag rag mna’ in l.94.
According to RKTS, mna’ mtho is attested twice in the canonical literature, cf.:
byaṅ chub sems dpas de ltar sñiṅ la mna’ mtho bcad nas / chuṅ ma rgyags byin ma’i druṅ du soṅ ste de dag rgyas par smras so //
(’Dul ba gzhi, H 1, ’dul ba, ṅa 277r4)
“The bodhisattva swore thus in [his] heart. Thereafter, having gone to the wife Rgyags byin ma, explained these in detail.”
The same sentence is repeated in ’Dul ba gźi, H 1, ’dul ba, kha 369r6-7, with two deviations. It reads byaṅ chub sems dpa’
instead of ˚dpas and sbyin (in: rgyags sbyin ma) instead of byin. Here, we witness another semantic shift in mna’ mtho bcad
from the reconstructed *”A swore O” to “A swore”.
The following clauses attest to a developing morphological distortion of the compound that was triggered by folk
etymologisation in later literature:
mna’ tho ‘ug pa thaṅ du ’dun ma tshogs (Dpa’ bo gtsug lag, Chos ’byuṅ mkhas pa’i dga’ ston 432-3, fols. 140a-b; apus DOTSON
2012:162)
“At the right time for a vow a council gathered at the ’Ug pa thaṅ.”
lha ’dre kun gyis gnam ’thor mdun ma byas (Lde’u jo sras, Chos ’byuṅ chen mo bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan 145; apus DOTSON
2012:163n9)
“All gods and demons made an oath-council.”
lha ’dre kun gyis mna’ dor ’dun ma byas (Mkhas pa lde’u, Rgya bod kyi chos ’byuṅ rgyas pa 373; apus DOTSON 2012:163n9)
“All gods and demons made an oath-council.”
In the second passage, the original mna’ tho has been replaced by gnam ’thor (possibly via *mna’ ’thor) in which the
obviously not anymore recognised compound was reinterpreted as going back to the verbal phrase *mna’ ’thor by analogy
with the broadly attested mna’ ’dor (cf. J:311b). The reconstructed *mna’ ’thor is assumed to have given rise also to mna’ dor
in which the improper -’thor (’thor is an INTR verb and as such could not form a meaningful phrase with mna’ as a subject)
was hypercorrected to -(’)dor. The process of folk etymologisation of the compound could be sketched as follows:
OT mna’ mtho (~ mtho)
mna’ tho *mna’ ’dor (~ mna’O ’dor)
mna’ ’thor (~ ’thor)
gnam ’thor (?)
It is worth emphasising that the passage from Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston supports the reconstruction of the compound as
proposed in the present work, i.e., *mna’ tho.
 287

84 snam phrag
[V] snam prag (PT 1287:92; deaspiration)
snam brag (PT 1052:v7; voicing)
CT snam brag
D “pocket formed by front of traditional dress” (LEU:152, s.v. snam brag).
DSM:426b: am phrag gam rum; BYD:295b: snam phrag te am phrag.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:81n161: rum; BDN:37n14: a phrag gam am phrag ste rum yin pa ʼdra.
J:318b: bosom; D:769b: = am phrag in vulg. language: breast pocket (s.v. snam phrag); = snam phrag or am phrag the bosom,
also the breast pocket (s.v. snam brag); R.5:160b: пазуха; карман на груди; bosom, breast pocket (s.v. snam phrag).
DTH:130: bras; THOMAS.1957:131: breast-fold; p.153: the fold in the breast of the robe; DOTSON.2013a:272: the fold of [the]
breast pocket.

[E] *snam bu’i phrag “an intermediate space of a woolen garment”

[M] (N) breast pocket
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] I propose to identify the second member of the compound with CT phrag “1intermediate space,
interstice, interval; a hollow, ravine, defile” (J:353b), in which case the first member is assumed to
represent a word of meaning similar to “clothes”.

snam bu, glossed in classical language with “woolen cloth” (J:318b; cf. also dialectal data in
CDTD:4762), is also attested in the following OT passage:
snam bu la yi ge ’di bthagste / slad na su la gtad (ITN 1215:2-3)
“This letter, fixed to a woolen cloth, is to be delivered later to a person.”
Thus, the etymological meaning of the tentatively reconstructed *snam bu’i phrag would be *”an
intermediate space of a woolen cloth”. It might have primarily denoted a fold of garment in the
breast formed by putting one end of fabric over another one already wrapped around the body,
girdling both at the waist, and so creating a kind of breast pocket or bosom; compare hereto the
gloss from LEU cited in the Lexicographic section.1

snam bu is assumed to be a derivative of snam - a contracted form of *sna ma/mo for which compare
Balti *sna pho “Marco Polo sheep” (CDTD:4735). Its further variants and derivatives include: gna’
“wild sheep” (CDTD:4655); gna’ ba “rnab Sg., Ld. *ná-po, fem. ná-mo*, an antelope” (J:309b), “blue
sheep (a type of wild mountain sheep)” (Gs:622b), Nubri nāː “kind of antelope”, Shigatse nāː
“mountain sheep”, Themchen rna “wild sheep”, Ndzorge hna “argali (wild sheep)” (CDTD:4658); gna’
bo “male of mountain sheep” (CDTD:460); rna g.yag “sm. gna’ g.yag” (Gs:629b) ~ gna’ g.yag “sm. gna’ ba”

1
Theoretically, the first element of the compound could be reconstructed as snam gos “woolen clothes” (Gs:636a) or snam
chas “woolen (woven) goods, cloth” (Gs:636a), but since neither of them is documented in OT sources I have opted for
*snam bu.
 288

(Gs:622c). Of special interest for our survey is the dialectally attested consonant alternation in onset
s- ~ g- ~ r-1 but also the clipped form rnab (< *rna ba ~ gna’ ba) cited by JÄSCHKE s.v. gna’ ba.

*snam seems to have undergone a metonymic shift from the original *“mountain sheep” or even
“female of mountain sheep” (< *sna mo by analogy with *sna pho) to *“wool gained from (female of)
mountain sheep”.2 The etymological meaning of snam bu would be *“an item woven from wool that
was gained from (female of) mountain sheep”.3

[T] snam brag (v8) ni g.yasu stsald / (PT 1052:v7-8)

“[One] consigned [it] to the right breast pocket.”
de ʼi ʼog du mgar maṅ (88) źam sum snaṅ gis byas so // maṅ źam sum snaṅ daṅ / khu khri sña dgruʼ zuṅ gñis
// ral gyi daṅ brdaʼ (89) prad ches bgyis te // gnaʼ btsan po ʼbro mñen gyi riṅ la // mthon myi ʼbriṅ po rgyal
brtsan (90) nus blon che bgyis pa na yaṅ // glo ba riṅs par // mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ ral gyi daṅ / (91)
brdaʼ prad de tshor ba skad du bgyis nas // bzuṅ ste bkyon phab pa na yaṅ // gśed ma maṅ źam sum // (92)
snaṅ gis bgyis te // bkum nas // mgo bchad pa thog ches blaṅs te // snam prag du bcug nas // (93) gom pa
lṅa drug tsam bor ba daṅ ʼgyel ba skad bya ʼo // (PT 1287:89-93)
“Thereafter, Mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ performed [the duty of grand councillor]. [One] said that Maṅ
źam sum snaṅ and Khu khri sña dgru zuṅ ?verified evidence with a sword?4; in ancient times, during
the life of btsan po ’Bro mñen, Mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ, ?having verified with a sword evidence?
that Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu, although performing the duty of grand councillor, became
disloyal, put [his] observations into words. Thereafter, when, having seized [him], [one] brought an
accusation [against him], Maṅ źam sum snaṅ, having acted as executioner, killed [him]. [He], having
taken ?immediately? the head, that [he] had cut off, put [it] into [his] breast pocket. Then, [Mthon
myi] made five or six steps and fell down. Thus it is related.”5

1
The consonantal shift in onset to s- could have been influenced by the association of woolen cloth and garments made
from it with the honorific verb snom (V2 bsnams, V3 bsnam, V4 snoms) “to take; to seize, to take up; to hold; to put on, a
sacred garment” (J:320a), unless the latter term was derived from *snam.
2
It seems possible that the semantic development of snam went even further in some dialects, since FRANCKE glossed it
with “the ordinary woolen cloth of Tibet” (1914:54).
3
On pashmina - a fine type of cashmere wool - as made from wool of Marco Polo sheep see SHARMA 2002:253.
4
For the proposed translation of brda’ prad compare brda sprod “3as vb. = ra sprod pa to verify evidence or terms” (D:723a).
The phrase ral gyi daṅ brda’ prad “to verify evidence with a sword” (lit. “to meet tokens/signs with a sword”) could be an
idiom to express the relentlessness in pursueing disloyal subjects.
5
This episode as presented in the cited passage is obviously a fake. First of all, four persons are mentioned: Mgar maṅ źam
sum snaṅ, Khu khri sña dgru zuṅ, ’Bro mñen lde ru (grandfather of Slon btsan), and Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu.
Khu khri sña dgru zuṅ is mentioned in the OTA as being accused (bkyon bab) in the winter of the year 678 (ITJ 750:72). Thus,
if Mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ was a contemporary of Khu khri sña dgru zuṅ then none of them could be a contemporary
of ’Bro mñen lde ru. Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu could have been a councillor during the life of the btsan po ’Bro
mñen lde ru since he is mentioned also in ll.67-8 of the present text as the fifth grand councillor preceding Śud pu rgyal to
re ṅa myi - a guṅ blon under Stag bu sña gzigs (PT 1144:v2; see also the translation of the whole document in DOTSON
2013a:403-4). The latter was a son of ’Bro mñen lde ru; cf. PT 1286:59-60. The matter is even more complicated by the fact
that, according to PT 1287:93-4, the grand councillor who followed in this office Mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ was Khyuṅ po
spuṅ sad zu tse - a contemporary of Slon btsan and Khri sroṅ btsan alias Sroṅ btsan sgam po. Besides, the story of killing
Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu is related in PT 1287 twice: in ll.68-70 where he is accused of planning a great trickery
and, for the second time, in the passage quoted above. Interestingly, in the first passage Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal btsan nu
is a grand councillor following Gnubs smon to re sbuṅ brtsan (l.68) and preceding Sna nam [’briṅ?] tog rje (ll.70-1) in this
office, whereas in the second occurrence he replaced Mgar maṅ źam sum snaṅ (ll.87-8) and was followed by Khyuṅ po
spuṅ sad zu tse (l.93). It seems reasonable to assume that the events, although possibly real, were mistakenly attributed in
later times to other persons and this resulted in the much confusing story. This observation can be additionally supported
by grammatical facts. In l.90 na yaṅ “although” has obviously a concessive function for it contrasts the fact that Mthon
myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu was a grand councillor but, nevertheless, became disloyal to the btsan po. The same compound
particle is used for the second time in l.91 connecting sentences “[one] brought an accusation [against him]” with “Maṅ
źam [...] was the executioner” with two different agents and no concessive function recognisable. The second grammatical
problem of the passage concerns the agents of the last two clauses: the agent of bcug is Maṅ źam sum snaṅ but with the
 289

kye byaṅ ri ni phaṅ puṅ na // “Oh! In piles [on] plains and mountains,
dṅos gi ni phuṅ rkorko // [one] digs and digs the heap of things.
gser gi ni sbam daṅ mjal (3v28) [If one] encountered a collection of gold,
dga’ yis ni twag (read: tog?1) kyis blaṅs // [one] took [it] joyfully with a twag.
snam phrag tu sdar gis stsal (ITJ 738:3v27-8) [One] consigned [it] with ?trembling? to the
breast pocket.”

85 snon god
DSM:429a: snon ’phri’am chad lhag; BYD:297a: lhag chad.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:78n97: chad lhag gi rtsis byas pa (s.v. snon god brtsis).
DTH:48: augmentation de solde; TLTD.3:151b: wages of employment; p.122: pay for the employment; p.270: expense of
reinforcements; DOTSON.2009:117: deficit and surplus; DOTSON.2013a:207n42: surplus and deficit.

[E] *snon daṅ god “increase and loss”

[M] (N) balance (econ.)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; antonymous; generic: abstract; STRC[N+N]
[R] bsnan bskyed
[A] god is attested is lexicographic sources as “1loss, damage” (J:72b). The reading snon for CT snon
k(h)a “increase, growth, augmentation” (J:320a) is found in numerous OT documents; cf. OTDO.2
Therefore, I assume that the literal meaning of the compound was *“increase and loss”.3 However,
due to the fact that snon and god were antonyms, I propose the compounded meaning to have been
the abstract notion *“balance” understood as a difference between increase and loss in an account.
This reading corresponds much better with the context of the OTA where snon god of border guards
(mun mag, see s.v.), i.e. of human beings, is mentioned as being calculated (brtsis) after a warfare. An
increase in one’s own human resources during wartime is much less plausible.

[T] dgun pho braṅ brag mar gyi dbu tshal na bźugste rgyaʼi (254) po ña li tsoṅ kan pyag ʼtsald / blon chen po
cuṅ bzaṅ gyis / dgun ʼdun skyi śo ma rar bsduste / mun magi snon (255) god brtsis / dmag dru gu yul du
draṅs pha slar ʼkhord par lo gchig / (ITJ 750:253-5)
“In the winter, the court stayed in Dbu tshal of Brag mar; the Chinese messenger Li tsoṅ kan paid
homage. Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having gathered the winter council at Śo ma ra
[of] Skyi, drew (lit. calculated) the balance of border guards. Those who had led the army to the land
of Dru gu returned. Thus one year.”

verbs bor ba daṅ ’gyel ba there seems to occur a subject switch and the executed Mthon myi ’briṅ po rgyal brtsan nu appears
to be the agent here although he himself is not mentioned. I assume that in the original story at least three persons were
involved: grand councillor, person revealing his disloyalty and executioner. However, it is likewise possible that the story
is another example of incorporation of an independent literary topos known from other sources into a historiographical
narration.
1
THOMAS (1957:153) speculates that twag could stand for tog. Worth mentioning is the form of the ergative particle kyis
after twag which is either an error for gis or one should reckon with *twags (~ togs ~ thogs?) or still another lexeme instead.
2
Cf. also snon btab in PT 1287:346 and CT snon kha ’debs “nemesülümüi” (SR.1:1238.5) or modern snon kha rgyab (Gs:639b).
These can be juxtaposed with the phrases attested in Or.15000/265, namely snon god (ma) thebs and snon god thob śig. The
comparison with the former expressions leaves no doubt that thebs and thob should be understood as V2 < ’thebs and V4
< ’debs, respectively.
3
Compare hereto Tokharian A compound kāryap pärko “loss-profit” (AALTO 1964:75).
 290

snon god ma thebs pa tsam źig (Or.15000/265:v5)

“merely balance that was not achieved1”
mthoṅ khyab kyi rkya pherd chiṅ rṅo thog pa źig na // sde cha mthoṅ khyab du snon god [thob] śig par / tshal
byi dmag pon daṅ / (v7) spyan la gthad par chi gnaṅ (Or.15000/265:v6-7)
“If rkya (horsemen?) of Mthoṅ khyab, that are fit and able, are ?annihilated?, will [you] allow [us] to
deliver [new horsemen?] to the intendant and the army commander [of] Tshal byi so that the
balance is levelled2 to Mthoṅ khyab [of] the part of the district?”

86 bsnan bskyed
[V] brnan bskyed (Źwa W 58)
RICHARDSON.1985:59: in augmentation; LI/COBLIN:420: to add onto, to increase.

[E] *snon źiṅ skyed “to increase while adding”

[M] (V) 1to extend; 2to add
[F] V2 < *snon skyed
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[R] snon god
[A] The verbal compound *snon skyed (< *snon źiṅ skyed) occurs only in one OT document, namely in
the Źwa’i lha khaṅ inscription. Its etymological meaning seems to have been *“to increase (skyed)
sth. by (lit. while) adding (snon) sth. else to it”. Thus, the phrase gtsigs bsnan bskyed could be
translated as “to extend an edict (by adding an additional part to it)” whereas zur phyuṅ brnan bskyed
can be rendered as “to add an appendix” (see s.v. zur phyuṅ). We observe that in the latter phrase,
which forms a part of the derived construction [gtsigs kyaṅ]*S [zur phyuṅ]*O brnan bskyed de, lit. “edict
was added an appendix”,3 the first member of the compound, brnan, is written with the prefix -r-
instead of the otherwise commonly attested -s-. Whether this alternation is grammatically
motivated (e.g., by the usage in the very derived construction), or resulted from a misspelling or a
damage to the text has to be left unanswered here.4

[T] 1 lha [r]i[s s]u [b]sṅos pa (32) [la]s cir gyur kyaṅ / bla ’og gźan gyis dbaṅ myi bya bar gnaṅ (33) [ba] las
stsogs te / gtsigs sṅa ma’i steṅ du / gtsigs phyi ma (34) [b]snan bskyed de gnaṅ ba rnams kyaṅ / de bźin du /
nam źar (35) [b]rtsan bar gnaṅ ste / ṅa’i źa sṅa nas kyaṅ dbu sñuṅ gnaṅ // (Źwa E 31-5)
“Whatever happened (cir gyur kyaṅ), not having, among other things, allowed to wield power by
other superior and inferior officials over what has been dedicated to the monastic estate, I, having

1
For the proposed rendering of thebs compare the dialectal data: Balti ncAD “to be anough in size, to reach”, Kargil,
Tshangra, Khalatse, Nurla, Leh ncA “to be enough in size”, Yolmo ncA, ncED (sic!) “to hit a goal”, Dingri ncA “to reach, to
be finished” (CDTD.V:554, s.v. thebs).
2
I tentatively interpret [thob] śig, lit. “shall be drawn and annihilated”, as a compound verb formed from two V4 stems
of ’debs and ’jig, respectively. The proposed reading is problematic in as far as [thob] śig is followed by a nominal particle in
TERM, par - a construction, to my knowledge, not encountered with V4 stems. However, as observed above, it is justified to
connect thob to V4 of ’debs.
The phrase snon god thob śig proves that the compound should be understood as referring to one notion, “balance”, and
not to be interpreted as a coordinate compound “increase and loss”. Otherwise one would have to reckon with the
construction similar to *snon thob la god śig. The translation of the fragment in question remains provisional.
3
On the converb yaṅ ~ kyaṅ as a marker of the extended transitivity in derived constructions see s.v. ñam noṅs.
4
It is also possible that the original bsnan has been replaced by brnan by mistake since the latter morpheme occurs in the
same inscription (E 37) as a distinct verb with the meaning “to attend, to look on attentively” (J:320b).
 291

granted definitively for ever in that way the successive edicts (which I, having extended, granted) in
addition to the earlier one(s), grant also the oath.”
(38) gtsigs bsnan bskyed de gnaṅ ba yaṅ yun tu brtan źiṅ mṅon (39) bar bya ba’i phyir / mdo’ rdo riṅs la bris
te mtha’ phyag rgyas (40) btab nas / gtsug lag khaṅ daṅ / gtsigs kyi mkhar bu’i (41) druṅ du bźag pa yin gyis
/ rje blon phyi rabs mṅa’ mdzad pa (42) rnams kyis kyaṅ / nam nam źa źar gtsigs rnam gñis kyi yi ge las (43)
’byuṅ ba daṅ / rdo riṅs rnam gñis la bris pa las myi dbri myi (44) bcos myi bsgyur bar gyis śig // gtsigs sṅa
ma’i steṅ (45) du phyis gtsigs bsnan bskyed de / gnaṅ ba yaṅ / źib tu ni (46) gtsigs gyi yi ge la bris te / phyag
sbal du (47) bźag / dpe gcig gtsigs sṅa ma daṅ phyogs (48) su gtsigs kyi mkhar bu ’dir bźag / dpe (49) gcig ’og
dper ’chaṅ du bcug go // (Źwa E 38-49)
“In order that also the edict, that [the btsan po], having extended, granted, is made firm and visible
forever, having written [its] text down on the stone pillar, [one] stamped [it] at the end with a seal.
Therefore (nas), on account of the fact that [the text] is put near the temple and the edict-casket, not
even (kyaṅ) future generations [of] lords and councillors, that shall wield power, must ever let to
change, alter, or diminish [the contents of the edict] as compared with what appears from the letter
of two parts of the edict and what is written on both sides (lit. parts) of the stone pillar! In addition
to the earlier edict, later, having written down in detail also the edict (which [the btsan po], having
extended, granted) in an edict-letter, [one] deposited [it] in the archive. [One] laid down one copy in
this edict-casket alongside the earlier edict(s). [One] ordered to preserve one copy as a secondary
copy.”
2
ṅa’i / bkas // myaṅ gi gtsigs kyaṅ zur (58) phyuṅ brnan bskyed de gnaṅ ṅo // (Źwa W 57-8)
“An edict for (lit. of) Myaṅ, having been added an appendix, is granted.”

87 pur myi
[V] phur myi (Or.15000/150:r7, r16; Or.15000/183:v5; ITN 2285:r2; folk etymology)
BYD:328b: phur mi’am ʼphur mi (s.v. phur myi).
BDN:50n14: sṅon go gnas daṅ thob thaṅ dmigs bsal can med pa’i ʼbaṅs phal ba tsam źig yin ruṅ. blo daṅ rig pa’am ʼjon thaṅ
daṅ ldan pas go gnas glo bur du ʼphar ba’i mi la zer ram sñam.
THOMAS.1933:384: dagger-armed soothsayers; DTH:147: l’homme; n.1: pur n’est pas traduit; TLTD.2:223: swordsmen;
TLTD.3:155b: dagger-man; DEJONG.1989:40: a corpse [...] among men (reads pur#myiσnaṅ - JB); DOTSON.2013a:287: superior.

[E] *pu ru ṣa daṅ myi “puruṣa and a man”

[M] (N) 1a man; 2a leader
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; bilingual synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] thoṅ myi / mu su / mun mag / myi rlag
[A] We find seemingly analogical compounds like, for instance, mda’ myi attested in OT sources. The
latter consists of an element denoting a kind of weapon (mda’) and myi “man, human being”. Thus,
the analysis of p(h)ur myi as derived from phur pa “1peg, pin, nail; 2iron instrument in the form of a
short dagger” (J:344a-b) would seem justified. Such an understanding of the compound has been
proposed by THOMAS (TLTD.3, see also the Lexicographic section above) who translated it
accordingly as “a dagger-man”. However, one could raise doubts against this interpretation
concerning the issue whether the reconstructed first element, *phur pa, was ever used to denote a
kind of weapon? Moreover, as can be inferred from the examples cited in the [T] section, p(h)ur myi
seems to have denoted a rank or a social position rather than a military profession. To wit, it is
mentioned together with ra saṅ rje in Or.15000/35:r5 and with naṅ rje po in Or.15000/150:r7 (see
 292

below). Also the context in which it appears in PT 1287:294 within a solemn vow sworn to the btsan
po would contradict the understanding of p(h)ur myi as *“a dagger-man”. These doubts call for
another solution to the etymology of the compound.

The text of the vow as quoted in PT 1287:288-96 mentions beside pur myi only the following persons
that should be respected: the btsan po Spu rgyal khri sroṅ brtsan (together with his father and sons),
his descendants, and subjects that should be treated equally in case one has become their master
(dpon). This distinction gained by pur myi could be interpreted as a hint at a higher social position
that the people referred to by the term enjoyed.

Another occurrence of the compound in question in PT 1287 comes from a partly preserved metrical
passage that can be juxtaposed with four other similarly constructed stanzas from the same text:
I II
[rje] ʼi ni skal pog pa (408) yul gyi skal pog pa / bran gyi ni skal pog pa //
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ źig / khyuṅ luṅ ni rdul mkhar źig // gu ge ni rkaṅ pran źig /
pur myi ni skal ba ru mu su ni gźan na re / (410) ʼkhol du ni ma tho ʼam //
rgya (530) [rje ni] [---] gu ge ni bdris śiṅ sdaṅ //
III IV
zas kyi ni skal pog pa / pyugs kyi ni skal pog pa /
ña daṅ ni gro mchis te / śa daṅ ni rkyaṅ mchis ste //
ʼtshal du ni ma tho ʼam ʼtsho ru ni ma tho ʼam /
(411) ña gro ni bchaʼ źiṅ khaʼ // śa rkyaṅ (412) ni btsaʼ źiṅ rgod //
We observe a parallelism in the structure of the stanzas. Namely, their first verses mention a share
(*skal ba) of a lord, land, serf, food, and cattle (rje, yul, bran, zas, pyugs, respectively) whereas the
following verses contain a term that is its hyponym: a lord of Chinese (rgya rje), Khyuṅ luṅ, a rkaṅ-
serf (rkaṅ pran), fish and wheat (ña daṅ gro), stag and ass (śa daṅ rkyaṅ). The break appears in the
third line where the last three passages use verbs that describe actions undertaken towards objects
that were mentioned in the first verse (servant, food, cattle): to use as a subject (’khol), to eat (’tshal),
and to feed (’tsho). The last line in the three last fragments begins with the term repeated from the
second line (gu ge, ña gro, śa rkyaṅ). On these grounds, one can reconstruct the first two syllables of
the line 530 as *rje ni. Contrary to the passages II-IV, the stanza containing the compound pur myi
seems to be formed from two parallel couplets: the first and the third line contain the word *skal ba
that is further determined by rje and pur myi, respectively. According to the above analysis, the
second verse should contain a hyponym of the term mentioned in the first line; here, in both cases it
is rgya rje. It follows that pur myi was a more general term denoting a person of a higher social
position analogous in one way or another to rje from l.529.

We learn from other OT documents that pur myi could be described as rgod “fierce” (Or.15000/154:2)
and could acquire the rank of a stag “tiger” - a distinction given to the bravest warriors in the
Tibetan Empire (see s.v. stag ’phraṅ). That the compound was a term used in military context is
 293

confirmed by Or.15000/183:v5 where pur myi is mentioned as being a member of a military group
stationed on a summit (rtse).

Although the information we could gather from the OT sources concerning p(h)ur myi is rather
scarce, we can state that the compound denoted men of a special position in the society, that should
be revered even by aristocracy, that served in the army and could be awarded the rank of a “tiger”.
Besides, the term seems to have been a synonym or a close semantic equivalent of the term rje
“lord”.

On the basis of the preceding contextual analysis I propose to reconstruct p(h)ur myi as a compound
of a hybrid origin. To wit, p(h)ur- is assumed to have resulted from the clipping of Skt. puruṣa to
which its Tibetan equivalent, myi, was added.1 According to the dictionary of LOKESH CHANDRA, puruṣa
has been translated by the following Tibetan terms: skyes pa, skyes bu, skyes bu gtso bo, rgyud rgyud po
(?), pho, myi (LCh.2007:384c), to which we should add the transliteration pu ru ṣa “man; soul; = skyes
bu” (J:324a). A very interesting comment on the usage of the Sanskrit term, in the light of our
analysis of the OT sources, is given in DAS: pu ru śa (sic!) “[Skt.] puruṣa an officer in Tibet = blon po a
minister, official” (D:783b).

Thus, the etymological meaning of pur myi was *“a man” referring to an outstanding person able to
overtake the leadership2, which later developed to denote a leader in general (cf. Pol. mąż as in mąż
stanu “statesman”).

The variant reading phur- can be explained either as resulting from the tendency of the Tibetan
language (or orthography) to avoid unaspirated plosives in the onset or, more probably, as a folk
etymology by analogy with phur pa/bu.3 The loan-hypothesis is made more probable by the fact that
the word occurs in the OT translation of the Rāmāyaṇa, cf. quotation below and DE JONG:1989:40, 131.
Besides, similar hybrid formations consisting of Sanskrit and Tibetan elements are encountered in
later literature; compare, e.g., ban- < ban d(h)e (OT also ban ’de), in: ban skya “priest and layman”
(D:864b); ban rgan “an old priest” (J:365b); ban chuṅ “pupil, disciple in a monastery” (J:365b); ban
spraṅ “a mendicant friar” (J:365b); ban bon “Buddhist and Bon monks” (STEIN.RA 1972:147); ban gzan

1
This kind of word formation has already been noticed in the literature; GRZEGA speaks of ‘loan-blends’ (2003:28) whereas
ALBER/ARNDT-LAPPE call it ‘loanwords truncation’ (2012:316). For functions and historical development of bilingual
compounds see a detailed survey in BOEDER 1991.
2
This meaning seems still to be attested in the NP with the attribute rgod “fierce”.
3
Whether phur in phur kha glossed with “chos lugs kyi dmod mo’i rigs śig gam mi kha” in DSM:483a can also be traced back
to Skt. puruṣa (cf. phur kha ~ mi kha where phur seems to be a synonym of mi) remains to be clarified.
DOTSON speculates whether p(h)ur could not be derived from ’bur in the meaning “to rise, become prominent” or ’phur “to
fly” (2013a:342n29). To this hypothesis one could raise an objection pointing to the fact that neither of the intransitive
verbs seems to be used with human beings as subjects, at least according to the examples cited in JÄSCHKE (394a-b and 356b,
respectively). The form p(h)ur, not attested in connection with the verb ’bur and attested only as a V2 of ’phur, poses
another problem to this interpretation. One would have to account for its perfective meaning, thus translating literally the
compound as “a man who has flied (up)” which already sounds strange.
 294

“the shawl or serge-cloth wrapper used by Tibetan laman or ban de” (D:865a); ban log “col., a priest
that has turned apostate” (J:365b).1

[T] 1 dur ya pur myi rgod kyi gle gugs sug las [---] (Or.15000/154:2)
“gle gugs sug las of a fierce man [from] Dur ya”
2
pur myi ma noṅs pa la // ʼphraʼ ma daṅ ʼphrag dog mchi re / dpon du bcug naʼ / (295) ʼbaṅs so chog la sñiṅ
sñoms par myi ʼtshal re // (PT 1287:294-5)
“[We] shall not say any calumnies nor grudges against leaders who have not erred. If [one] appoints
[us] as masters, [we] shall wish to level [our] hearts with [those of our] servants.”
[rje] ʼi ni skal pog pa “The share of a lord alloted [to me],
rgya rje ni bsam laṅ źig / Bsam laṅ, the lord of Chinese,
pur myi ni skal ba ru as a share [of] a leader
rgya (530) [rje ni---] (PT 1287:529-30) [...] [the lord of] Chinese.”
ri mtho dbab ’dril śod kyi rdos myi bsab /
gñi ’dra’s (334) mtshan kyi zla ba gsal yaṅ ’od myi dro /
rje skyin ’baṅs kyis bsab pa lugs las ’gal /
pur myi naṅ gis rgyal (335) byas ’o myi sñoms /
de pyir bdag ni rgyal po myi ’tshal lo (ITJ 737A:333-5, Rāmāyaṇa; trslr. after DE JONG 1989:131)
“[One] cannot replace high mountains, that fall down (? dbab), with stones from the basin.
Although the nocturnal moon shines like the sun, [its] light is not warm.
The repayment of the lord’s loan by subjects violates the customs.
Those from among the leaders who rule as kings, do not equal [true kings].
For these reasons, I do not want to be a king.”
’di na yaṅ / ra saṅ rje daṅ pur ba (read: pur myi)2 lastsogs pa (Or.15000/35:r5; trslr. partly after
TLTD.2:195)
“also here, ra saṅ rje and leaders among others”
naṅ rje po3 lha bzaṅ daṅ / phur myi srid gchig ste (Or.15000/150:r7)
“The domains [of] naṅ rje po Lha bzaṅ and the leaders being one.”
[---] ba daṅ phur myi’i srid du mdzad chiṅ (Or.15000/150:r16)
“[One] made [it] to the domain of [...] ba and the leaders.”
bye ma ’dord kyi rtse na bod gñis li gchig / yaṅ rtsaṅ4 gi sde phur myi rke duṅ (Or.15000/183:v5)
“On the summit of Bye ma ’dord: two Tibetans and one Khotanese; the leader Rke duṅ [from] the
district of Yaṅ rtsaṅ.”
rgya sluṅs yan chad daṅ dru gu ’jon man (r2) chad kyi phur myi stag rnams la’ / lha’ (v1) mthoṅ gi gsol ba’
sgya ’u na ’di thugs pag (v2) cig nas chig du mjed par gsol źiṅ mchi (ITN 2285)

1
A sample of compounds with the first member pad- derived from the loanword pad ma (< Skt. padma) is provided in
VOLLMANN 2006:84.
One could also speculate whether CT pur rgyal “an ancient term for Tibet” (G:645a) and pur rgyal bod “’di la bśad srol
mi ’dra ba sna tshogs yod kyaṅ. bod kyi btsan po gri gum gyi sras khris blon po lo ṅam btul nas bod kyi srid dbaṅ bzuṅ rjes
mtshan la pu de guṅ rgyal du thogs pa daṅ. khoṅ gi mṅa’ ’og tu yod pa’i sa cha rnams la spur rgyal bod ces ’bod pa yin nam
brtag.” (DUṄDKAR:1285a) were not coined by analogy with pur- in pur myi after the original (?) spu- in OT spu rgyal had lost
its connotations. Nevertheless, one must admit that the reverse process would seem more probable, i.e. pur rgyal > spu rgyal
(folk etymology), since pur is obviously a lectio difficilior.
2
Both TLTD.2:195 and TAKEUCHI (1998.2:29, text 89) read pur ba although the second syllable is barely visible. I propose to
read *pur myi instead.
3
TAKEUCHI (1998.2:70, text 212) reads nag (sic!) rje po which is an obvious mistake for naṅ rje po.
4
TAKEUCHI (1998.2:81, text 247) reads rtse instead of rtsaṅ.
 295

“To those leaders of the tiger[-rank that are stationed] up to Chinese stagers and down to Turkic
riders1: A request of Lha mthoṅ is being submitted so that this Sgya ’u na (?) acquires successively a
report2.”

88 spo bleg
DSM:460a: go gnas la ’pho ’gyur btaṅ ba (s.v. spo blag).
DTH:66: considering transference (for spo bleg mdzade - JB); DOTSON.2009:259: promotions and transfers (s.v. spo blegs).

[E] *spo ba’i leg “a flat piece for changing [one’s position]”
[M] (N) promotion-slate
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[VNV1/PURP+N]
[A] The first member of the compound can be connected to the verb spo ba “to alter, to change”
(J:331b) attested in these meanings already in OT documents (see, e.g., ITJ 750:56, 161, 299). Much
more problematic is the origin of the second element -bleg. We read in Or.8212.187 that spo bleg was
made (mdzad) and the clause containing the latter phrase is followed by a list of promotions and
appointments:
blon che snaṅ bźer ke ke ruʼi yige stsalde > blon cher bcug
źaṅ rgyal zigs chen pho g.yuʼi yige stsalde > mgar ʼdzi rmun gyi thaṅ du chog śesu bstod
> blon khri bzaṅ/rgyal bzaṅ blon cer bcug
stoṅ rtsan g.yuʼi yige stsal te > so mtha bźi dmag pon du bkaʼ stsald
Thus, we learn that three persons were bestowed letters of recognition and afterwards either
appointed grand councillors, praised, or ordered to be army commanders - advancements meant as
awards complementing the letters.

I tentatively propose to reconstruct the compound under consideration as *spo leg (b- in spo bleg =
linking element) and relate *leg to CT glegs (ma), “table, board, plate” (J:81a; DAS adds “any flat
piece”, 260a)3 and to the verb ldeg (v2 bldegs, v3 bldeg) attested in Balti as “ncA to be balanced, to be
stable, to be level” (CDTD.V:685)4. The only occurrence of leg-, besides proper names, I was able to
trace in OT sources comes from the compound theg leg as attested in T III Ili Köl in the clause:
[...] theg leg sñom las [k]y[i] phyogs su myi btaṅ ste // dge ba’i phyogs [---] (l.B3; trslr. after TAUBE
1980:130, text 97)
“[One], not having sent theg leg in the direction of idleness, [--- in] the direction of virtue.”
Similar as in case of *spo leg, also here we have a deverbative as the first member, theg “1to lift, raise,
hold up, support; 2to raise, set up; 3to be able to carry; to bear, to undergo without detriment”

1
I take ’jon to be cognate to CT źon “to mount” (J:479a). This would correspond well with sluṅs (pa?) *“a stager; a
messenger covering distances in stages” (cf. Eng. stage driver); rgya sluṅs < *rgya’i sluṅs pa “a Chinese stager”.
2
The translation of the part sgya ’u na ’di thugs pag cig nas chig du mjed par is merely tentative.
3
Compare bka’ glegs “= phyag bris or bka’ śog a letter; an autograph” (D:61a); sgo glegs “the pannel of a door” (J:81a); snum
glegs “W. *num-lág*, a wooden tablet, blackened, greased, and strewed with ashes, used for writitng upon with a wood-
pencil, thus serving for a slate” (J:319a); śog glegs “śog bu glegs bu leb gcig” (GC:888a); gsuṅ glegs “= bka’ śog diploma, written
authority” (D:1307a).
4
Worth mentioning here is the exactly opposite meaning documented in lexicographic sources on CT, cf. “to quake,
shake, tremble” (J:291b).
 296

(J:235b). Thus, theg leg could be translated literally as *“a slate of raising/bearing” that possibly
denoted a kind of written tablet containing a confession of sins. Although the text from which the
compound stems is preserved only fragmentarily, TAUBE (1980:129) speculates that it could indeed
have formed a part of a confession of sins.1

In accordance with the above observations, the etymological meaning of *spo leg is assumed to have
been *“a flat piece for changing [one’s position]” referring in all probability to a device used in
writing down promotions and changes in positions of high officials.2

[T] bod yul du mol cen / (58) mol cen mdzade /// źaṅ lon chen pho spo bleg mdzade // blon che (59) snaṅ
bźer ke ke ruʼi yige stsalde / blon cher bcug / źaṅ rgyal zigs chen pho g.yuʼi yi[g]e (60) stsalde / mgar ʼdzi /
rmun gyi thaṅ du chog śesu bstod // blon khri bzaṅ blon cer bcug // (61) stoṅ rtsan g.yuʼi yige / stsal te / so
mtha bźi dmag pon du bkaʼ stsald // par lo gcig // (Or.8212.187:57-61)
“In the land of Tibet, [one], having prepared a great consultation, having made a promotion-slate
[for] great aristocrats, [and] having given grand councillor [Dba’s] snaṅ bźer [zla brtsan] the ke ke ru-
letter, nominated [him] as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the turquoise letter on the great3
Źaṅ [mchims rgyal] rgyal zigs [śu theng], [one] praised [him] for being ?fulfilled? (lit. knowing the
sufficiency) in the prerogatives (thaṅ) of mgar ’dzi rmun. [One] appointed councillor [Mgos] khri bzaṅ
[yab lag] as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the turquoise letter on [Źaṅ] stoṅ rtsan, [one]
ordered [him to function] as an army commander of the four frontiers. Thus one year.”
bod yul (64) du mol cen mol cen mdzade źaṅ lon chen po spo bleg mdzade blon che snaṅ bźer (65) ke ke ru ʼi
yege stsal de blon cher bcug źaṅ rgyas (read: rgyal) zigs chen po ʼi yege (66) stsal de mgar ʼji rmun thaṅ du
chog śesu bsdod (read: bstod) blon rgyal bjaṅ (read: bzaṅ) blon cher bcug (67) sdoṅ (read: stoṅ) rtsan g.yuʼi
yege stsalde so mtha bźi dmag bon (read: pon) dus (read: du) bkaʼ stsald par lo (68) gcig (Or.8212.187:63-8)
“In the land of Tibet, having prepared a great consultation, having prepared a promotion-slate [for]
great aristocrats, [and] having given grand councillor [Dba’s] snaṅ bźer [zla brtsan] the ke ke ru-
letter, [one] nominated [him] as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the letter of great [turquoise]4
on the great Źaṅ [mchims rgyal] rgyal zigs [śu theng], [one] praised [him] for being ?fulfilled? (lit.
knowing the sufficiency) in the prerogatives (thaṅ) of mgar ’dzi rmun. [One] appointed councillor
Rgyal bzaṅ as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the turquoise letter on [Źaṅ] stoṅ rtsan, [one]
ordered [him to function] as an army commander of the four frontiers. Thus one year.”

1
theg leg is actually attested five more times in ITJ 734:61, 88, 165, 223, 229. There, however, it is a proper name of a g.yaṅ
bon - possibly a folk etymology.
2
There is still another group of lexemes that seems to be connected semantically and morphologically (as far as their
onset and the vowel value are concerned) to *leg, glegs, and ldeg as quoted above. Those include: gleb pa “the act of making
flat, level” (Cs:24b; cf. also CDTD.V:191); glebs pa “made flat or level” (Cs:24b), “to trample; to tread down; to press down by
the feet” (D:261a); ldeb pa “ein Blatt, Bogen (Papier)” (Sch:290a); leb mo “flat” (J:551b). Compare also the following pair of
compounds: leb thags “a flat woven thing, a fillet, ribband, lace” (Cs:270b) ~ glegs thags “tie, or size, of book” (TLTD.3:121a;
in CT sources glossed as glegs thag “a thong, &c., fastened round a book”, D:260a). Worth mentioning in this context are
also the dialectally attested verbs le Shigatse “to be flattened, to be knocked down (e.g. by a car)” (CDTD.V:1233) and sle “to
press” (CDTD.V:1317). The alternation -g ~ -b is not a common one and more examples are needed before we can affirm
that the two groups of lexemes belong to the same word family.
3
I translate the clause in accordance with its actual syntactic structure, although chen po as an attribute attached to a
proper name is highly unusual.
4
The amendment is based on the clause źaṅ rgyal zigs chen pho g.yu’i yi ge stsalde (Or.8212.187:59-60) from the first passage.
 297

89 spos lam
LALOU.1952:350: chemin parfumé; n.7: En classique, spos lam gsol “offrir un chemin parfumé” est une périphrase pour dire
“tuer”.

[E] *spod slam pa “roasted spices”

[M] (N) roasted spices
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+VAV2]
[A] We learn from PT 1042 (see the Text section) that spos lam was offered during funeral rituals
and that it was counted in yams. LALOU’s rendering “chemin parfumé”, not being quite intelligible to
the author, would have a referent that is clearly not a countable noun. For this reason I dismiss this
interpretation.1

Instead, the underlying structure of the compound is proposed to have been *spod slam pa “roasted
spices”; cf. CT spod “spice” (J:332a) and slam pa “1to roast slightly, to parch, to make brown by
exposing to heat, e.g. meal; 2to roast, to fry” (J:586a). The morphological changes are assumed to
have proceeded along the following pattern:
*spod slam pa > *spod slam (compounding) > *spos slam (consonant assimilation) > spos lam (elision)
It is plausible that the changes from *spod slam to spos lam were triggered, on the one hand, by the
association of spod with spos and the resulting assimilation of the final -d to the following s-, and, on
the other hand, by the tendency to reduce the number of word-internal consonants from three -dσsl-
to two -sσl-.2

[T] sku gśen gcig gis / (20) stsaṅ po gsol te / yams gcig / sku gśen gñis kyis dkar mo mjol te yams gcig / mjol
(21) bon po phal gyis / chags blaṅs te chen tags la mchi // chen tags mjol nas snaṅ ma daṅ / (22) spos lam
gsol te yams gcig // de nas bśum ṅud kyis kyaṅ gdabo // (PT 1042:19-22)
“One sku gśen offered stsaṅ po: one yams; two sku gśen weighed out dkar mo: one yams. A common mjol
bon po, having received chags, went for chen tags. After [he] had weighed out chen tags, [he] offered
snaṅ ma and roasted spices: one yams. Thereafter, [one] bursted in tears.”
chibs / (25) slad logs na mchis paʼi rnams // bzaṅ yugs bgyis te spos lam gsol // (PT 1042:24-5)
“Those who had horse mounts behind the lines (lit. on the back sides), having functioned as bzaṅ
yugs, offered roasted spices.”

1
I was not able to trace spos lam in any lexicographic source on CT. Also LALOU’s comment concerning the phrase spos lam
gsol could not be confirmed by the author.
2
It is worth considering in this context whether the word spos “1incense; less frq. perfume in general” (J:332b) did not
come into being as a result of a backformation from *spod slam. Whereas spod (*”what makes sth./sb. being able; what
strengthens”) could be tentatively connected to phod “1to be able; 2to come up to, to be nearly equal in worth” (J:346b), spos
seems to lack any relation to other Tibetan lexemes. The hypothesis could be further supported by the fact that in many
dialects spos denotes an incense stick (cf. CDTD:4936), i.e., an object that has to be burnt in order to produce scent, just like
spices.
For the proposed semantic development of spos (< *spod slam) compare the etymology of Eng. incense “Middle English
(originally as encense): from Old French encens (noun), encenser (verb), from ecclesiastical Latin incensum ‘something burnt,
incense’, neuter past participle of incendere ‘set fire to’, from in- ‘in’ + the base of candere ‘to glow’”
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/incense?q=incense; 09.08.2014).
Alternatively, one could reconstruct the compound under discussion as *spos slam “roasted incense”, cf. CT spos bdug pa
“to burn (incense)” (J:332b). The verb slam, however, seems to be used mainly with foodstuffs; the only exception being,
according to CDTD.V:1315, the Kargil dialect where it is attested with the meaning “to dry (e.g. one’s hands, wood on the
fire)”.
 298

90 pha los
DSM:475a: mi khral ’phar ma; BYD:325a: pha logs sam phar logs daṅ las mi la’aṅ.
BSODDBAṄ.1992:74n33: rgyun ldan min pha’i las mi ’phar ma.
DTH:33: révolté; p.45: dissident; p.62: disaffection; p.67n1: seems to be pha logs “opposition”, a sense which phar logs can
have; TLTD.3:22: = phar logs opposite side; p.154b: enemy’s side; TUCCI.1956:86n1: census; CHANGK.1959:135: dissatisfaction,
mutiny, riot, revolt (?); STEINRA.1963:328: un recensement; URAY.1972b:28-9n64: Besides “census” and “recensement”
proposed by TUCCI and STEIN, resp. we may also consider “survey”, moreover on the basis of an analysis according to the
components a more specialized meaning should also be born in mind: “certification, verification of the father” (los = bden
pa “true”; los yin = ṅes pa yin “to be certain, true, sure, firm” > “registration or review of the heads of the families”;
UEBACH.2003:21: a kind of census, probably the convocation of an assembly of heads of families; UEBACH/ZEISLER.2008:315:
1
pha+lo+s = “male adult (lit. father, head of family)” + “year, report” + collective suffix –s; 2pha+los = “male adult” + potentialis
form of the verb las “work”; Its attestations are so far only found in the OTA. In the period covered by the Annals, the pha
los took place in intervals of 32 to 38 years. This roughly corresponds to the estimated 30 years per generation. [...] the pha
los also served as a basis for further administrative measurements regulary recorded by Annals. Concerning countries and
people like Źaṅ źuṅ and the ’A źa, the pha los was the first step for incorporating them into the Tibetan empire. The word
evidently became obsolete after the collapse of the Tibetan empire; the pha los aimed at registering the population; p.315-6:
1
pha + lo + -s, “male addult” + “year” + -s, a noun-noun compound with collective –s suffix = “[registration of] the male
adults’ age-group”; 2pha + los, a compound of noun + potentialis form of the verb las, -, -, los “to be able to work” (or: “to be
able for service”, “able-bodied”) = “[registration of] the male adults able to work (or: for service)”; 3pha + lo + -s, “male
adult” + “report / saying” + -s, a noun + noun compound with collective –s suffix, “[registration of] the collected reports of
male adults / heads of families”; p.317: “[registration of] the male able-bodied adults”; DOTSON.2009:53-4: census, lit.
“[registration of] the male able-bodied adults”.

[E] *phal ’os pa “suitable common people”

[M] (N) 1suitable commoners; populace; 2gathering; 3census
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] lho bal
[A] Many words have already been written on the function of pha los and their significance for the
administrative system of the Tibetan Empire (for the most important comments see the
Lexicographic section). For this reason I restrict myself here only to a linguistic analysis of the term
leaving its historical context and implications aside.

The main flaw of the previous studies on pha los consists in taking the compound literally and
analysing it as being composed of two syllables: pha- and -los. As a matter of fact, pha is a kinship
term meaning exclusively “father” and has to be distinguished from pho “man, male” (J:345a) that
refers to adult males.1 On account of this, all the morphological analyses proposed by UEBACH and
ZEISLER (2008), as well as those following them have to be rejected.

As opposed to previous authors, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound
in question as *phal ’os pa > *phal ’os (compounding) > pha los (consonant migration) with the
etymological meaning *“suitable common people”.2 For the nominal understanding of phal compare,

1
JÄSCHKE glosses pha as “2a male, not castrated, animal” (J:338a) too, though the examples listed by him leave no doubt that
pha in this meaning is an assimilated form of pho and is used only in connection with animals, cf.: pha glaṅ “bull”; pha rta
“stallion”; pha phag “boar”; pha g.yag “yak-bull”; pha ra “he-goat, buck”. We observe, namely, that the second constituents
of the compounds have all the vowel a to which the original vowel *o of *pho assimilated: -o > -a / _σCa(C). As opposed to
these, one finds pho rog “raven” (J:346a) and pho lug “ram” (B:359b).
2
In the context of the Old Tibetan Annals, “suitable” could theoretically refer to the ability of adult males to do military
service although its exact connotation remains unclear and a more general ability to work could have also be meant. The
term could have referred to individuals of similar social function as modern labourers as described in the following
fragment “[...] each dependent household supplied one labourer who had to work for Yudrug tsang for 30-50 days per
annum.” (THARGYAL 2007:67). Alternatively, it could be juxtaposed with ’baṅs phal “commoners” (BELLEZZA 2008:244).
 299

e.g., the CT meaning “the common people” (J:341b, see also the examples therein) as well as its
derivatives: phal pa “ein gemeiner Mann” (Sch:343a) and phal can “broad, wide” (J:342a; the
formative -can can be added only to nouns, cf. BEYER 1992:121-2). The OT meaning of ’os pa is
confirmed by the following sample passages:
rgyal brtsan gyi rgyud kyaṅ rabs chad na / ñe ’tshams las // kha chems kyis gaṅ / gsol ba’i naṅ nas / spus
daṅ (17) sbyard te // gaṅ ’os pa gcig stsald bar gnaṅ ṅo // (Rkoṅ 16-7)
“It is granted that if also the lineage of Rgyal brtsan has become extinct, from among those from
[his] close relatives who had been benefited through [his] will (kha chems), the suitable one (lit.
the one who is suitable) being characterised by (lit. corresponding with) [good] qualities shall be
appointed.”

ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzin / ṅa’i chab srid ’don (5) ciṅ / źo śa chen po ’bul ’bul ba / gtsigs sṅa ma (6) gnaṅ ba’i
tshe’aṅ zla dpe daṅ / źo śa’i rkyen bźin (7) bka’ drin ’os pa tsam du gnaṅ ba las / ban de ñid (8) kyis / bka’
drin myi nod par gsol nas // (Źwa E 4-8)
“Upon granting ban de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin, who was offering great źo śa while fostering my chab srid, just
suitable favour according to [his] exemplar and the support [in form] of źo śa also at the time of
granting the earlier edict, ban de himself requested not to receive any favour.”

We shall now present clauses in which pha los occurs in the Annals in their chronological order:
673/4 pha los bkug
711/2 pha los maṅ pho bkug
719/20 źaṅ źuṅ daṅ mard kyi pha los bkug
734/5 ’a źa’i pha los bgyis
743/4 (S) pha los gyi byaṅ bu bor
1
743/4 (S) bod yul gyi pha los gyi mgo mdzad
743/4 (W) rgod g.yuṅ gyi pha los cen po bkug
743/4 (W) pha los bgyis
We observe that after the great reform of the administrative system of the Tibetan Empire, which
was carried out at the turn of the twenties and thirties of the 8th century, there seems to have
occurred a semantic shift in pha los. In the year 711/2, we read of many pha los (pha los maṅ pho, ITJ
750:182) which means that the word was a countable noun at that time.2 In the first three passages,
pha los were always convoked (bkug). However, after the reform, pha los is either “made” (bgyis) or
convened (bkug) but in the latter case it is further qualified by the adjective chen po “great” (in lieu
of the earlier maṅ po). Additionally, in the year 743/4, we read of *pha los gyi rtsis mgo “the initial

For a similar compound compare the scarcely attested dpe ’os “sm. dpe bzaṅ” (Gs:651c; dpe bzaṅ “model, example, ideal,
standard”, Gs:651b), “good model, ideal, standard” (IW).
1
The beginning of the entry for the year 743/4 is missing from the manuscript. The assumption that the events described
afterwards refer to the summer period is affirmed by the information from ITJ 750:293-4 which concerns the same year.
2
Cf. hereto also the clause myi maṅ po bkug (ITJ 750:124) “[One] convoked many people.”.
 300

account of pha los”.1 Hence, the semantic development of pha los could be tentatively reconstructed
as follows: *“suitable common people” > *“a collective of suitable common people; populace2” >
*”gathering [of populace]” > *”census [of populace]”.

[T] 1 dgun pho braṅ śaṅs gyi rab ka tsal du gśegs śiṅ / ʼdun ma duṅs (59) gyi stag tsal du bsduste / mun
magi rkaṅ ton bgyis / pha los bkug par lo gcig / (ITJ 750:58-9)
“In the winter, while the court went to Rab ka tsal of Śaṅs, having convened the council at Stag tsal
of Duṅs, [one] prepared rkaṅ-conscription for (lit. of) border guards [and] convoked suitable
commoners. Thus one year.”
skyi rnamsu ʼbon da rgyal btsan zuṅ daṅ / blon blon3 chen pho khri (182) gzigs gyis bsduste / pha los maṅ pho
bkug / (ITJ 750:181-2)
“At Rnams [of] Skyi, ’bon da rgyal Btsan zuṅ and grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs [źaṅ ñen], having
convened [the council], convoked many suitable commoners.”
dgun btsan po brag mar na bźugs / dgun ʼdun tshaṅ baṅ snar źaṅ btsan to re daṅ / blon khri sum (213) rjes
bsduste / źaṅ źuṅ daṅ mard kyi pha los bkug / (ITJ 750:212-3)
“In the winter, the btsan po stayed in Brag mar. Źaṅ btsan to re [lhas byin] and councillor [Dba’s] khri
sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having convened the winter council at Tshaṅ baṅ sna, convoked suitable
commoners of Źaṅ źuṅ and Mard.”
bod yul gyi pha los gyi mgo (read: rtsis mgo) mdzad / dgun po braṅ brag mar na bźugste / dgun ʼdun blon ce
cuṅ bzaṅ gyis rnam(2)su bsduste / pha los bgyis par lo cig / (Or.8212.187:1-2)
“[One] prepared the initial account of the populace of Tibet. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag
mar. Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having convened the winter council at Rnam, made
the census.”
2
(293) lugi lo la / btsan poe po braṅ dbyard ra mtshar na bźugste / blon chen po chuṅ bzaṅ gyis / dbyar ʼdun
(294) breṅ du bsduste / pha los gyi byaṅ bu bor / dgun pho braṅ brag mar na bźugs / skyi rnamsu rgod g.yuṅ
gyi pha los (295) cen po bkug / (ITJ 750:293-5)
“In the year of the sheep, the btsan po’s court stayed in the summer at Ra mtshar; grand councillor
[’Bro] chuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having convened the summer council at Breṅ, issued (lit. casted) tablets
for (lit. of) a gathering. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag mar. [One] convoked a great
gathering of bondservants at Rnams [of] Skyi.”
3
dgun pho braṅ brag mar gyi ʼom bu tsal na bźugs / ʼdun ma zlor ʼdus / ʼa źaʼi (270) pha los bgyis / (ITJ
750:269-70)
“In the winter, the court stayed in ’Om bu tsal of Brag mar. The council gathered at Zlo. [One]
prepared a census of ’A źa-people.”
bod yul gyi pha los gyi mgo (read: rtsis mgo) mdzad / dgun po braṅ brag mar na bźugste / dgun ʼdun blon ce
cuṅ bzaṅ gyis rnam(2)su bsduste / pha los bgyis par lo cig / (Or.8212.187:1-2)
“[One] prepared the initial account of the populace of Tibet. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag
mar. Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having convened the winter council at Rnam, made
the census.”

1
On the reading *pha los gyi rtsis mgo bgyis instead of the attested pha los gyi mgo mdzad see s.v. rtsis mgo.
2
For a similar semantic development compare the history of the Latin word proletarius which gave rise to the term
proletariat denoting a social class.
3
I assume that the repetition of blon is just a scribal error.
 301

91 pho ma
DSM:486b: khyu pa’am khyu g.yag.
DUṄDKAR:1353a: khyu pa’am khyu g.yag.
D:827b: = ma niṅ pho hermaphrodite of the male class.
DTH:143: mâles et femelles; p.163: troupeau; STEINRA.1972:257: the migrant; URAY.1972a:13: according to the testimony of
the enumeration g.yu daṅ nas daṅ po ma daṅ ras “turquoise and barley and po ma and cotton” it may stand for some plant.
But most frequently the word occurs as a place name or part of such names. [...] pho ma in the songs of the Chronicle is the
name of the South-Central Tibetan region; DOTSON.2013a:140: bull [yak].

[S] *pho ma niṅ “to not be an (adult) male”

[E] *pho ma niṅ pa “not being an (adult) male (yet)”
[M] (A) (sexually) immature
SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNTPRED-incorporating; STRC[N+[NEG+VAV1]]
[A] I propose to reconstruct pho ma as *pho ma niṅ pa; compare the gloss from DAS cited in the
Lexicographic section above. The same author glosses another similar formation, namely mo ma niṅ,
as “a female hermaphrodite” (D:974b). niṅ- seems to be an old copula verb related to Lepcha nyí “to
be” (MG:105b-6b) and still attested in Dzongkha as īŋ “is” (CDTD.V:1154). Its further Tibetan
cognates could include the topicalisation particle ni and another OT copula nig for which compare
the enigmatic couplet:
bya ro ro na mduṅ gi rtse raṅ nig / yos ro ro na lham gyi goṅ ra nig / (PT 1287:57)
“In every bird a lance-tip stays on its own. In every hare a tip (lit. the upper part) of a shoe stays
on its own.”

ZEISLER, as far as I am aware, was the first scholar who proposed to connect the topicalisation
particle ni to the PTB verb *nig “to exist, be present” for which she also cites some further examples
from TB languages (2011:186).1 From the OT passage cited above it seems that nig was an existential
copula as opposed to niṅ that seems to have been a copula of identity.2 In accordance with the latter
assumption, niṅ would thus be a better candidate as the source of the grammaticalisation that
resulted in the topicalisation particle ni.3 Besides, ni is attested as a pronoun in Dingri “that over
there; there” (CDTD:4564), Dzongkha “this” (file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/12-01-NI.html; 10.08.2014). These facts
corroborate the hypothesis put forward by ZEISLER according to which the grammaticalisation from
a copula verb to a topic marker proceeded via nominalised constructions of the type “what (is) X,
that (is) Y.” (2011:186).4

1
In addition, MARTIN discusses ni as a copula in Źaṅ źuṅ (2010:15f.).
2
For more details on nig and its potential further cognates see s.v. chags lham.
3
JÄSCHKE mentions niṅ as a colloquial variant of ni (cf. s.v. ni, 304b).
4
One could also consider another possibility, namely that both, the copula verb and the topicalisation particle, developed
from a demonstrative pronoun. For a more general overview of the grammaticalisation process COPULA > FOCUS and its
variants see HEINE/KUTEVA 2002:95f.
Whether there existed a historical link between -niṅ in time expressions, like e.g. dgu niṅ, bcu niṅ, da niṅ, na niṅ,
gźes/gźi/źe niṅ, and the analysed copula niṅ remains to be clarified.
 302

The reconstructed meaning of *pho ma niṅ pa would thus be *“not being an (adult) male (yet)” (< XABS
phoPRED ma niṅ “X is not a male”)1. The deverbative origin of pho ma would account for the fact that in
our clauses it takes the position of a determiner and not an attribute (pho ma’i ’broṅ; pho ma’i sdiṅ po
che).

I assume that the term denoted animals in their youth, i.e. young, fully-grown male animals that are
already independent in their subsistence from their parents but have not reached sexual maturity
yet. Perhaps it was this characteristic of being unable (yet) to have offspring that has given rise to
the semantic shift towards “hermaphrodite” (< *“what is not [fully] a male”) as glossed in DAS. That
the latter meaning is secondary can be additionally inferred from the fact that in the passages
quoted below pho ma determines ’broṅ “a wild yak” - wild animals are not being castrated.

[T] na niṅ ni gźe niṅ sṅa // “A year ago, two years ago, formerly,
pho ma ʼi ni ʼbroṅ bkum ba / an immature wild yak that [one] killed -
lho śiṅ ni (241) smyug mo rgyal // the tree of the south, bamboo, was victorious
[against it].
lcags kyis ni ma dral na // If [one] did not tear [it] open with an iron [tool],
smyug gis ni re myi pugs // the bamboo would not pierce anything.
rgod kyis ni (242) ma bsgron na / If [one] did not cover [it] with [feathers of] a bird
of prey,
ʼbroṅ la ni re myi ʼjen // (PT 1287:240-2) [it] would never reach the wild yak.”
kye byaṅ ʼbrog ni ya bi na // “Oh! Above, on the northern pastures,
pho ma ʼi ni ʼbroṅ gchig pa // a lone immature wild yak;
byaṅ ʼbrog ni ʼbroṅ dgum na // when a wild yak is killed on the northern
pastures,
pu nas (413) ni khus ʼdebs paʼ // [those] who give shouts from the upper part of a
valley,
ldoṅ thoṅ ni ʼpan gyis thob // Ldoṅ and Thoṅ, for being ?useful?, obtain [it].
mda’ nas ni g.yab ʼdor ba [Those] who provoke [the animal] from the lower
part of the valley
skyi ʼi ni śa daṅ spug // [were] Śa and Spug of Skyi.
dbus (414) nas ni dpor (read: dbor?) ʼphen ba // [Those] who shoot at the belly [of the game] from
the middle part [of the valley]
yar kyi ni lho daṅ rṅegs // were Lho and Rṅegs of Yar.
pu nas ni khus btab chiṅ // After (nas) [one] gave shouts from the upper part
of the valley and
mdaʼ nas ni g.yab bor nas // [the other] provoked [the animal] from the lower
part of the valley,
(415) de ʼi ni bar bar du / in the middle between them,
pho ma ʼi ni bkum (read: ’broṅ bkum) źiṅ // while having killed the immature wild yak,
thur thur ni pyiṅ ba ʼi bcud // ?the fringes [were] the heart (lit. essence)? of Pyiṅ
ba.
ru rgyus ni ldoṅ toṅ stsald / [The btsan po] gave horns and sinews to Ldoṅ and
Toṅ;

1
For the linking ‘maNEG + COPULA OF IDENTITY’ compare CT ma yin.
 303

śa lko ni lhe rṅegs (416) stsald //
lbo śog ni śa spug stsald // (PT 1287:412-6)
bya pu ni luṅ cuṅs nas /
glaṅ źig ni rji (read: rdzi) laṅs kyaṅ //
pho ma ʼi ni sdiṅ po che /
rji (read: rdzi) laṅs ni snar myi mnam /
(467) rji (read: rdzi) laṅs ni snar mnam yaṅ /
khus btab ni sdiṅ myi g.yoʼ //
mon ka ʼi ni stag chig paʼ /
bya ldiṅs ni myig myi lta /
bsrogs kyaṅ ni spu (468) myi laṅs // (PT 1287:466-8) Although [they] frightened [the tiger], the hair [of
[he] gave flesh and hide to Lho and Rṅegs;
[he] gave the gullet and extremities to Śa and
Spu.”
“From the upper part of the Bya valley, from a
small vale,
although the smell [of] an ox rose,
an immature hulk
does not inhale the risen smell with (lit. in) [its]
nose.
Even if [it] inhales the risen smell with (lit. in)
[its] nose,
[when one] gave a shout, the hulk does not move.
The lone tiger of Mon ka
does not perceive birds that soared.
its fur was not able] to stand on end.”

92 phyiṅ rild
[V] phyiṅ ril (PT 1288:24; ITJ 750:107, 211)
pyiṅ rild (ITJ 750:209, 216)
pyiṅ ril (ITJ 750:213-4)
YeŚes:350b: se le he; ’e ’el cil hu (s.v. phyiṅ dril); SR.2:121.3-6: mñam mam. ltag pa sprad de bcos; qamtu-yi qabsuran (s.v.
phyiṅ dril); phyiṅ dril (CM isegei quyilaγulqu metü ǰasaqu)1 du źes tsha graṅ lta bu bsres par bcos sam yaṅ na naṅ bar tsha ba
nub graṅ ba ltag sprod bya’o. phyiṅ dril ni. dper na phyiṅ ba btsags pa’i tshe thams cad lhan du dril nas chags pa ltar dper
na chu ser daṅ khrag lhan cig tu bcos pa’o; GC:533b: byiṅs gcig tu dril ba (s.v. phyiṅ dril); spyir byiṅs dril te bzos pa’am bcos
pa (s.v. phyiṅ dril bcos pa); BTC:1747a-b: phyiṅ ba bcags zin pa’am. snam bu chags bcags zin pa ma skam goṅ la phyiṅ dril
byed pa źig (s.v. phyiṅ dril); DSM:768a: źiṅ gi bogs ma’am źiṅ khral gyi miṅ ste (s.v. źiṅ gi phyiṅ ril).
B:368: combined, mixed (s.v. phyiṅ dril); R.6:84b: смесь; mixture (s.v. phyiṅ dril); Gs:694a: rolled up felt (s.v. phyiṅ dril).
DTH:30: délimitation; n.5: tour entier, bornage, délimitation; p.45: champs; TLTD.2:327: felt circumference; TLTD.3:156b:
felt fence?; CHANGK.1959:137: register; RÓNA-TAS.1978:360: in the dictionary of Sumatiratna (p.121) we find the expression
phyiṅ dril translated into Mongolian as qamtu-yi qabsuran “which is pressed together”; the dictionary of Ye śes rdo rje: phyiṅ
dril “se-le-he, ʼe-ʼel-čil-hu”, i.e. sele- and egelǰil-; the term phyiṅ dril is here an old Tibetan medical expression. The abscess has
to be cured by pressing it repeatedly and this activity is called phyiṅ dril because it has to be done like the pressing of the
felt; phyiṅ dril is translated in Sumatiratna (p.121) by isegei quyilaγulqu “felt-rolling”; p.361: dril- in connection with felt
unites in itself the denotion of three activities: “pressing”, “rolling” and “wrapping”; in the Old Tibetan taxation system it
has been the object of taxation, a unit similar to the sheaf of corn (sog ril); p.362: the felt clothing and utensils of the Royal
Court has been gathered from the population in the form of the “felt tax” and the latter was denoted in the Old Tibetan
texts by the term phyiṅ ril; DOTSON.2009:51-2: felt roll [tax]; HILL.2011:34: register of agricultural fields.

[E] *phyiṅ pa rild pa “a bundle piled up together”

[M] (N) sheaf (of corn)
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+VAV2]
[A] Contextual analysis. Below, a chronological table of relevant administrative events that precede
and follow the occurrences of phyiṅ ril in the OTA is presented:

1
CM qamtu “together, along with, jointly, simultaneously” (Less:925a); -yi ACC; qabsur- “to hit or strike together; to put
together; to add, append; to close; to unite, combine” (Less:898b); -n gerund suffix; isegei “felt” (Less:416a); quyilaγu “2v.t.
and i. to turn, whirl (of wind); to roll up; 3v.i. to gather at one place; to assemble” (Less:983a); -l deverbal noun suffix; -qu
infinitive suffix; metü “as, like, similar” (Less:538a); ǰasaqu “corriger, réparer, raccommoder, refaire, améliorer, changer de
mal en bien, redresser, embellir, avoin soin, mettre en ordre, arranger, préparer; 2gouverner; ordonner, statuer; 3régler;
4
traiter une maladie, rétablir, remettre (la santé)” (Kow.3:2268b-9a).
 304

ll. 21-30
652/3 653/4 654/5 655/6
glo bo daṅ rtsaṅ rhya bkug gnag liṅs btab rgod g.yuṅ dbye bka’ grims gyi yi ge bris
źiṅ gyi phyiṅ ril bgyis rtsis mgo bgyi
źiṅ gyi tshoṅ chen sbyard
ll. 90-101
685/6 686/7 687/8 688/9
źiṅ gyi phyiṅ rild btab W rtsaṅ chen gyi phyiṅ rild btab
W
rtsaṅ chen gyi log pho daṅ pho
btsud W
ll. 104-15
690/1 691/2 692/3 693/4
rtsis mgo bgyis S phyiṅ rild daṅ rabs cad gyi mṅan drug du bskos S lṅa brgya bskos S
rtsis bgyis S
khram dmar po btab W źugs loṅ dmar poe rkaṅ ton khram dmar po btab W rtsaṅ cen poe ’brog bskos W
bgyis W
g.yo ru’i źiṅ gyi phyiṅ ril btab sum pa’i śo tshigs bzuṅ W
W
ll. 203-18
717/8 718/9 719/20 720/1
mṅan gyi khyim rtsis bgyis W dags poe khram dmar pho ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ gyi phyiṅ ril rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ gliṅs
btab S gyi rtsis daṅ sog ma’i rtsis gyi pyiṅ rild gyi rtsis bgyis
bgyis S S
ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ gliṅs gyi źaṅ źuṅ daṅ mard kyi pha los
pyiṅ rildaṅ sog rild bgyis W bkug W
rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ gyi pyiṅ
ril btab W

First, we notice that the calculation of phyiṅ ril was made during the summer season following the
winter in which a phyiṅ ril was undertaken:
718/9 (W): ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ gliṅs gyi pyiṅ rildaṅ sog rild bgyis > 719/20 (S): ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ gyi
phyiṅ ril gyi rtsis daṅ sog ma’i rtsis bgyis
719/20 (W): rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ gyi pyiṅ ril btab > 720/1 (S): rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ gliṅs gyi pyiṅ rild gyi
rtsis bgyis
From this we can infer that the account of phyiṅ ril made in the summer 691/2 concerned the phyiṅ
ril of the fields of the Left Horn which is reported in the winter of the year 690/1. Furthermore, we
observe that, as regards the lexical stratum, the phrases phyiṅ ril bgyis and phyiṅ ril btab are
synonymic, cf. the latter juxtaposition of the entries from the years 718 to 720.

Only in two cases is the compound in question not preceded by the determinative źiṅ gyi: in the
winter 687/8 it is qualified only by rtsaṅ chen gyi, and in the summer 691/2 a calculation of phyiṅ ril
and rabs cad is made. Concerning the latter case, we have already stated that the account of phyiṅ ril
referred to in the summer 691/2 was an administrative means resulting from making a phyiṅ ril of
the fields in the previous year (g.yo ru’i źiṅ phyiṅ ril btab). Hence, we can state that this calculation
was indeed related to phyiṅ ril of the fields of the Left Horn. The determiner g.yo ru’i źiṅ gyi could
have been omitted from the entry in the year 691/2 due to the fact that phyiṅ ril is coordinated there
with rabs cad.

Now, we can formulate the first objection to the interpretation proposed by RÓNA-TAS according to
whom phyiṅ ril denoted “felt roll” (cf. the Lexicographic section). To wit, phyiṅ ril as referred to in
 305

the OT sources was in some way connected to fields and thus soil cultivation. Felt, on the other
hand, is made from wool1. RÓNA-TAS makes the following comment concerning the place where it is
made: “The place of the felt-making was some one hundred yards away from the ail of the family on
a part of the pasture wich (sic!) was less exposed to the wind” (RÓNA-TAS 1963:200). Thus, if phyiṅ ril
and sog ril could be prepared together, as can be inferred from the entries for the years 718/9 and
719/20, then either both of them or neither refered to harvest. Another counter-argument concerns
the frequency of the distribution of phyiṅ ril and sog ril. Should the latter term denote sheaf of corn
as proposed by RÓNA-TAS (1978:361) then it could hardly be explained why it is mentioned only 2
times in the OTA (sog rild in l.209 + sog ma in l.211) as opposed to 9 occurrences of phyiṅ ril. One would
expect that gathering of corn constituted a more important form of taxation than felt making.2

phyiṅ-. From what has been said so far it follows that a new interpretation of phyiṅ ril is needed
which does not identify phyiṅ- with the meaning “felt” (J:350a). Accordingly, I propose to connect
phyiṅ- (< *phyiṅ pa) with the verb ’phyiṅs “(tha mi dad pa) ’dziṅ źiṅ ’byar ba” (BTC:1788b), “vi. to
become matted together (e.g., fur, hair, wool)” (Gs:706b)3 and put forward an hypothesis that both
words are cognate to CT ’chiṅ ba “Ito bind; to fetter; to bind or tie up, to cord, a bundle or package;
II
any binding material 1ribbon; 2fetter, shackle; 3string, tie; 4cramp, spasm” (J:169b)4 and dialectally
reconstructed *bkyiṅs “to bind, to tie (belt)” (CDTD.V:14)5. ’phyiṅs seems to be a resultative from
*’phyiṅ which is not preserved as a verb anymore. I assume that the OT phyiṅ- was derived from the
patient-oriented V3 of the TR verb *’phyiṅ V2 phyiṅs V3 phyiṅ V4 (’)phyiṅs “to bind”; its etymological
meaning being *”what is bound up”, i.e. *“a bundle”.

The term phyiṅ pa seems to have denoted in OT documents various things that were bound together;
compare the following passage from PT 1071:
gchigis g.yag (r405) draṅste / phyiṅ pas draṅs kyaṅ ruṅ thag pas draṅs kyaṅ ruṅ / (r406) gźus draṅs kyaṅ
ruṅ / chis draṅs kyaṅ ruṅ (r404-6; cf. a parallel fragment in PT 1072:136-7)
“One, having led a yak, whether [he] led [it] by a cord (phyiṅ pa)6, a rope, a gźu (?)7, or any other
means (chi) [...]”

1
For detailed descriptions of felt making among Central Asiatic societies see LAUFER 1930 and RÓNA-TAS 1963.
2
For the sake of completeness we shall look closer at the distribution of the term across the text. To wit, it occurs in years
653/4, 686-8, 690-2, and 718-21. We observe its irregular occurrence which may surprise if we understand the term as
referring to one of the most important forms of taxation. The only logical explanation would be the selective character of
the document that does not relate all the events but only the most outstanding ones in the relevant period.
3
Compare also the phrases skya ’phyiṅ ba “(rñiṅ) skud pa’i skya ’dziṅs pa” (BTC:138a) and skra ’phyiṅs pa “skra ’dziṅs nas
phyiṅ pa chags pa” (BTC:173b).
4
For the alternation ch- ~ phy- compare, e.g., ’chig ~ ’phyig (see below); ’chug ~ ’phyug; chags ~ phyags (see s.v. chags lham).
5
Besides, CDTD includes ’khyig “to bind” (J:59b) and ’chig “od. ’chigs pa binden, festbinden” (Sch:169b) as further cognates
of ’chiṅ (CDTD.V:392) to which ’phyig “binden, festbinden” (Sch:359a) could be added.
6
RICHARDSON reads phyiṅs identifying it tentatively with chiṅs and translates the phrase as “whether it is hobbled”
(1998c:158).
7
gźu could refer in this context to a kind of a bull staff - an object used to lead a bull. The word appears to be related to the
verb ’ju “Ito seize, grasp, take hold of” (J:177a) and could be traced in ka gźu “capital of a pillar” (J:2a; cf. gźu “3the plank of
wood between the pillar and beam”, Gs:943c). It is possible though that the original lexeme has been replaced here by
another word, i.e. gźu, that was better known to the scribe.
 306

The meaning “felt” for phyiṅ ba is independently attested in:

pha bu (OTDO: khu) ’dzaṅs pas (16) bor na ni / char pa ’bab nas phyiṅ ba myed pa daṅ ’dra’o // (ITJ
730:15-6)
“When a father is left by a wise son, [he] is like a one who does not possess a felt when the rain
comes.”
Apart from the lexicographic sources cited at the beginning of the lemma, we find phyiṅ- mentioned
together with ’dril in the following incomplete OT passages:
[dgye (/dbye)] ched po yaṅ pyiṅ ltar ’dril gyi cha (PT 1068:44)
“things of great divisions that roll like a pyiṅ”

nad ka cho dgu skran ka lde brgyad la se’u phyiṅ goṅ soṅ / se’u phyiṅ goṅ ’dril [---] (PT 1285:v100)
“Se’u phyiṅ goṅ went for nine categories (cho) of disease [and] eight classes of swelling. Se’u
phyiṅ goṅ rolled down [...].”
Both clauses remain, however, to a large extent incomprehensible. The phrase se’u phyiṅ goṅ, “a little
spot with a heap of sheaf” (?), reminds one of rgyal thag brgyad or se gru bźi - primarily technical
terms that, after having become obscure, started to be used as proper names (see s.vv.).

Another similar expression containing phyiṅ occurs in a passage cited by BELLEZZA from a ritual text
Rta gtad bźugs so:
gśin thaṅ skya mo phyiṅ ltar dril (BELLEZZA 2008:630)
“[One] heaped together a pale gśin-plain like a phyiṅ.”1
These examples as well as the variant forms -ril vs. -rild attested in phyin ril(d) clearly point to a
verbal character of the second member of the compound. By analogy with ’dral ~ ral, I assume that
ril(d) was originally the V2 stem of TR ’dril “to wrap up; to heap together, to pile up” (J:283b)
documented in modern dialects as a cEA verb with the meaning “to roll, to roll up” (CDTD.V:654).

Conclusions. In the context of the OTA and the soil cultivation addressed to earlier, phyiṅ pa could
have denoted sheaf of corn rolled up together (-ril) for the sake of transportation.2 Its original
meaning *”bundle” underwent semantic specialisation in technical context of making felt (*phyiṅ pa
’dril) to denote mainly “felt”. Classically still attested phyiṅ dril seems to have primarily denoted a
bale of rolled or pressed together items, whether corn, felt or anything else.3 Its old, more general
meaning is still preserved, at least in lexicographic sources, for one finds the phrase glossed as
“byiṅs gcig tu dril ba” (GC:533b) or “смесь; mixture” (R.6:84b).4

1
One could speculate whether the sentence in origin did not speak of “crop (*rkya mo) from gśin-plain” that was “heaped
together in sheaves”. On the alternation rkya ~ skya in OT see s.v. skya sa. For a different understanding of the passage in
question see BELLEZZA 2008:457 and n.327.
2
For the proposed meaning and etymology of phyiṅ pa compare, e.g., Pol. snop “sheaf” < PS *snopъ < PIE *snēp- / *snōp- /
*snəp- “to bind” (BORYŚ 2005:565b).
3
According to SCHMIDT (350a), the process of making felt is actually referred to in CT by the phrase phyiṅ pa ’ded pa “Filz
machen od. walken”.
4
Compare hereto also the usage of phyiṅ dril in medical context referred to in the gloss from SUMATIRATNA’s dictionary (see
the Lexicographic section).
 307

[T] da rgyal maṅ po rjes źiṅ gyi phyiṅ ril bgyis / (PT 1288:24)
“da rgyal Maṅ po rje prepared sheaves of corn from (lit. of) fields.”
dbyar ʼdun śoṅ snar ʼdus / dgun bra ma thaṅ du ʼduste / śaṅs man chad du (96) źiṅ gyi phyiṅ rild btab phar lo
gcig / (ITJ 750:95-6)
“The summer council gathered at Śoṅ sna. Having gathered in the winter at Bra ma thaṅ, [one] cast
sheaves of corn from (lit. of) fields below Śaṅs. Thus one year.”
dgun (98) rtsaṅ chen gyi phyiṅ rild btab / (ITJ 750:97-8)
“In the winter, [one] cast sheaves of corn from (lit. of) Rtsaṅ chen.”
dbon da rgyal daṅ blon che khri (106) ʼbriṅ gyis / rtsaṅ gyi gliṅ kar tshal du bsduste / rtsaṅ chen phaʼi khram
dmar po btab pha daṅ / mgar ʼbriṅ rtsan / rtsaṅ (107) rton daṅ / pa tsab rgyal tsan thom po gñis gyis / g.yo
ruʼi źiṅ gyi phyiṅ ril btab phar lo gchig / (ITJ 750:105-7)
“dbon da rgyal and grand councillor [Mgar] khri ’briṅ [btsan brod], having gathered [the council] at
Gliṅ kar tshal of Rtsaṅ, prepared red tallies of Great Rtsaṅ’s inhabitants. Both, Mgar ’briṅ rtsan rtsaṅ
rton and Pa tsab rgyal tsan thom po, cast sheaves of corn from (lit. of) fields of the Left Horn. Thus
one year.”
(108) yos buʼi lo la bab ste / btsan po ñen kar na bźugs śiṅ / dbyar ʼdun sreʼu gźug du ʼdus pa las / (109) lha
gśegs nas / khra snar ʼphoste / phyiṅ rild daṅ / rabs cad gyi rtsis bgyis / (ITJ 750:108-9)
“It fell on the year of the hare: while the btsan po was staying in Ñen kar, the summer council
gathered at Sre’u gźug. Thereupon, having moved from Lha gśegs to Khra sna, [one] made an
account of sheaves of corn and extinct families.”
dgun btsan phoe pho braṅ brag mar na bźugs / ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ (209) gliṅs gyi pyiṅ rildaṅ / sog rild bgyis /
(ITJ 750:208-9)
“In the winter, the btsan po’s court stayed in Brag mar. [One] prepared sheaves of corn and straw
from (lit. of) the lord’s fields and hunting grounds of three Horns.”
dbyar ʼdun draʼi zar phur źaṅ btsan to re daṅ / blon khri sum rjes bsdu(211)ste / ru gsum gyi rje źiṅ gyi phyiṅ
ril gyi rtsis daṅ / sog maʼi rtsis daṅ / ru yoṅ phyi gseṅ gum ste / bruṅ pa seṅ go mon bu bchug (212) paʼi rtsis
bgyis / (ITJ 750:210-2)
“Źaṅ btsan to re [lhas byin] and councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having summoned the
summer council at Zar phu of Dra, made accounts of sheaves of corn and straw from (lit. of) lord’s
fields [and hunting grounds] of three Horns and of the appointment of bruṅ pa Seṅ go mon bu after
the death of Ru yoṅ phyi seṅ.”
rṅegs maṅ źam stag tsab gyis / rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ gyi pyiṅ (214) ril btab / (ITJ 750:213-4)
“Rṅegs maṅ źam stag tsab cast sheaves of corn from (lit. of) lord’s fields [and hunting grounds] of
the Great Rtsaṅ.”
dbyar ʼdun duṅs (216) gyi mkhaʼ bur źaṅ btsan to re daṅ / blon khri sum rjes bsduste / rtsaṅ chen gyi rje źiṅ
gliṅs gyi pyiṅ rild gyi rtsis bgyis / (ITJ 750:215-6)
“Źaṅ btsan to re [lhas byin] and councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having summoned the
summer council at Mkha’ bu of Duṅs, made an account of sheaves of corn from (lit. of) the lord’s
fields and hunting grounds of the Great Rtsaṅ.”

93 ʼphrog rlom
[V] phrog rlog (ITJ 734:1r29; assimilation; scribal error)
HAARH.1969:405: it should be taken away [from men] that it may decay (reads: ’phrog phom); DIETZ.1984:351: dem Raub
anhängen; p.505: sich des Raubes [am Körper] brüsten; HAHN/DIETZ.2008:172: Raub; VAN SCHAIK: [the corpse of the tsenpo is
to be pierced, and] taken away [to the people] (http://earlytibet.com/2008/10/27/between-death-and-the-tomb;
 308

11.08.2014); ZEISLER.2011:107: swag and swaggering; p.165: the intended meaning of the compound ḥphrogrlom seems to be
that the warriors are allowed to show off their booties or, even worse, that they are allowed to go on a raid;
DOTSON.2013a:269: pillage and ruin.

[S] *’phrog par rlom “to boast about deprival”

[E] *’phrom par rlom pa “a boasting about deprival”
[M] (N) boldness; *’phrog rlom byed “to boast about deprival; to show boldness”
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[VNV1+VV1]
[A] Following ZEISLER (2011:163ff.) I read the last syllable of the verse from PT 1287 cited below as
rlom. The compound occurs in one of the most enigmatic passages of the document that is still
waiting for a thorough examination. In order to present a more complete picture of the semantics of
’phrog rlom in OT passages, I should quote some examples of the compound as found in later
literature. ’phrog rlom is attested, namely, in a few canonical texts1:
śes ldan dag lha’i źal nas tshoṅ rdal du phrog rlom gyis śig ces bka’ stsal to // de rnams kyis bsams pa /
rgyal po’i dbon po btsas pas / des na bdag cag tshoṅ rdal du phrog rlom byed du bcug go sñam (5) nas / de
rnams kyis phrog rlom bya bar brtsams pa na / sgra mthon po daṅ sgra chen po byuṅ nas / rgyal po’i
smras pa / de ci yin / blon po rnams kyis rgyas par smras so (’Dul ba gźi, H 1, ’dul ba, ṅa 194v4-5)
“The ruler ordered to the sages: ‘Do a phrog rlom at the shopping precinct!’ [And] they thougth:
‘Because a grandson of the king is begotten, for this reason, [he] lets us do a phrog rlom at the
shopping precinct.’ Therefore, when they were about to do a phrog rlom, there appeared a loud
and resonant a sound. The king spoke: ‘What is that?’ The ministers explained in detail.”

ko’u śimbhi’i lha ra ba’i kha nas groṅ khyer mdzes pa lta ba las lhuṅ ste / khyi dag gis zos so // źes ku co’i
sgra cher gyur pa daṅ / de ni (6) kha cig ni ṅu / kha cig ni dga’ / kha cig ni tha mal par ’dug / kha cig ni
’phrog rlom byed par gyur to (’Dul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi, H 6, ’dul ba, da 7v5-6)
“The ruler of Ko’u śimbhi, having fallen down upon watching a beautiful city from a wall, was
eaten by dogs. Such a loud sound appeared and, as regards that, some were weeping; some were
rejoicing; some were behaving (lit. are) vulgarly; some were doing ’phrog rlom.”

de’i dus na ’khor mo ’jig gi rgyal po tshaṅs byin źes bya ba źig byed de / [de ’byor pa daṅ / rgyas pa daṅ /
bde ba / (2) lo legs pa / mi la sogs pa skye bo maṅ po daṅ ldan pa / ’thab pa daṅ / rtsod pa daṅ / ’khrug pa
daṅ / mi ’dum pa rnams rab tu źi ba / ’phrog rlom daṅ / nad daṅ bral ba / ’bras daṅ (3) bu ram śiṅ daṅ /
phyugs daṅ / ma her ldan pa] [chos kyi rgyal po]APP chos bźin du rgyal po byed do (’Dul ba phran tshegs kyi
gźi, H 6, ’dul ba, da 141v1-3)
“At that time there was a king of ’Khor mo ’jig called Tshaṅs byin. He, who was rich, eminent, and
happy, who had many people, those having bumper harvest, among others, who perfectly
pacified figths, quarrels, disorder, and discord, who was free from ’phrog rlom and illness, who
possessed rice, sugarcane, cattle, and buffalos - the Dharma-king - was serving as a king
according to the Dharma.”

1
All quotations are cited after ACIP.
 309

[na chuṅ gźon nu gźan gyis bsruṅs pa rnams]A // nan gyis ’phrog rlom chab ’tshal ma ruṅ bgyis (Saṅs
rgyas phal po che źes bya ba śin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo, H 94, phal chen, cha 65v4)
“The other youths, who were protecting a young woman, did forcefully ’phrog rlom ?losing
undeservedly?.”

mi rgod ma ruṅs pa ltar dge ba byed pa las ’phrog rlom byed pa daṅ (’Phags pa tiṅ ṅe ’dzin mchog dam pa,
H 139, mdo sde, tha 287r6)
“Like a ferocious savage, [they] do ’phrog rlom against those who practice virtue.”

bdag cag gis tshe sṅa ma la sdig pa mi dge ba’i las ci źig byas / (6) ’on te pha ma daṅ / dgra bcom pa bsad
dam / ’on te dam pa’i chos la skur pa btab bam / ’on te mthun pa’i dge ’dun gyi dbyen bgyis sam / ’on te
rdon (read: rṅon) pa daṅ / ña pa byas (7) sam / ’on te sraṅ daṅ / pre (read: bre) bcos te pha rol la phrog
rlom byas sam / ’on te dge ’dun gyi nor la spyod spyod dam / ci byas na ’di ’dra ba’i sdug bsṅal myoṅ bar
gyur cig gu (Thabs mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo, H 361, mdo sde, a 156v5-7)
“What sorts of misdeeds, non-virtuous actions, have we done earlier? Did [we] kill [our] parents
or arhants? Or did [we] speak impiously of the noble Dharma? Or did [we] create a disagreement
in (lit. of) the sangha that was in harmony? Or did [we] become hunters or fishermen? Or, having
forged sraṅ and bre, did we ’phrog rlom to the other party? Or were [we] using the possessions of
the sangha? What had [we] done that [we] shall have experienced this kind of misfortune?”

brgya byin lha’i dbaṅ po / sṅon ’das pa’i dus bskal pa graṅs med / tshad med (5) pa’i pha rol na / rgyal po
sdig pa can chos ma yin par byed pa / kun la ’phrog rlom byed pa źig byuṅ ṅo (Thabs mkhas pa chen po
saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo, H 361, mdo sde, a 296r4-5)
“Oh Indra, the lord of gods! Earlier, in the past time, before innumerable, immeasurable eons, the
king Sdig pa can, who was destroying the [good] law and doing ’phrog rlom towards all, was born.”

tshoṅ pa sgyu zol bre sraṅ sgyur źiṅ slu byed daṅ // ma byin len daṅ ’phrog rlom byed daṅ [’jab bu daṅ //
mthus] (2) ’phrog khrel daṅ bral ba ci dgos yi dags skye (Kamalaśīla, Lho za mo tshaṅs dbyaṅs la sdug
bsṅal gyi bye brag bstan pa, D 4193, spriṅ yig, ṅe 134v1-2)
“A devious merchant who deceives while changing bre and sraṅ, steals, does ’phrog rlom, robs by
means of clandestineness (’jab bu) and violence, [and] is bereft of shame will be born as a hungry
spirit.”1

khyod ma mgu bas ’phrog rlom byas / yi dags gnas su khyod kyis btaṅ (Śrīghoṣa, Gces pa bsdus pa’i phrin
yig bod rje ’baṅs la brdzaṅs pa, D 4355, sna tshogs, co 234v3)
“[If] you, on account of being displeased, did a ’phrog rlom, you sent [yourself] to the place [of]
hungry spirits.”2

1
For slightly differing translations compare DIETZ 1984:351 and HAHN/DIETZ 2008:172.
2
Cf. also DIETZ 1984:505.
 310

The most important passage for the current discussion, however, comes from Udānavarga - a text for
which we not only possess the Sanskrit original but also a commentary written by Prajñāvarman.
Below, I quote the relevant stanzas:

spyi brtol byed ciṅ ’phrog rlom can / mi gtsaṅ las ldan khwa lta bu /
śin tu ñon moṅs ’tsho ba can / ṅo tsha med pa’i ’tsho ba sla // 21

ahrīkena sujīvaṃ syāt kākaśūreṇa dhvāṅkṣiṇā |

praskandinā pragalbhena saṃkliṣṭaṃ tv iha jīvate || XXVII.32
The Tibetan verse spyi brtol byed ciṅ ’phrog rlom can corresponds to Sanskrit praskandinā pragalbhena.3
The following lexemes can be found glossed as Tibetan equivalents of the Sanskrit terms:
praskandin4: rab gnon gyi stobs (Mvy:8212, s.v. praskandi-balam) / bra (sic!) gnon (AKBh.1:260) / rab
gnon (LCh.2007:425c)
pragalbha5: bstan pa / nus pa / dpa’ / spobs daṅ ldan / spyi rtol (brtol) / spyi brtol che / ’tsher ba med
(LCh.2007:394b)
Equivalents of spyi brtol, on the other hand, are given as “pragalbhaḥ; dhṛṣṭaḥ; dhārṣṭyam”
(Negi.8:3406a-b).6 For this reason and contrary to LÉVI (op. cit.), I propose to identify spyi brtol byed
with pragalbha and ’phrog rlom can with praskandin. Additionally, we find ’phrog rlom can explained in
the commentary on Udānavarga in the following words:
’phrog rlom can źes bya ba ni / [’phrog (2) rlom byed pas]A [[’jug pa’i tshul]S (Skt. pravṛttiśīlam = ’jug pa’i
tshul khrims) [’di la]PRED yod pa ste] / des na bla ma’i skye bo (Skt. gurujana) la yaṅ ’phrog pa źes bya ba’i
don to (Prajñāvarman, Ched du brjod pa’i tshoms kyi rnam par ’grel pa, D 4100, mṅon pa, thu 94v1-2)
“As concerns ’phrog rlom can: the one who does ’phrog rlom, being usually a show-off (lit. having a
custom of appearing, coming into prominence), robes hence (des na) even from a venerable
person.”
The author of the commentary seems to have understood the compound ’phrog rlom literally as “to
boast about robbing”.

In the canonical texts, (’)phrog rlom occurs in the following collocations: phrog rlom bgyid ~ (’)phrog
rlom byed “to do (’)phrog rlom”, ’phrog rlom daṅ ’bral ba “to be free from ’phrog rlom”, and ’phrog rlom
can “one provided with ’phrog rlom”. From these we can unanimously infer that ’phrog rlom was used
as a noun. As concerns the content of the compound, we learn that ’phrog rlom was regarded as a
misbehaviour characteristic of savage people (’Phags pa tiṅ ṅe ’dzin mchog dam pa) and unworthy

1
Dharmatrāta, Ched du brjod pa’i tshoms, H 330, mdo sde, la 359r4-5. Cf. also BECKH 1911:92. Lha sa edition reads rdol instead
of the above brtol.
2
After BERNHARD 1965:334.
3
Compare also notes on the respective stanza in LÉVI 1912:290.
4
Skt. praskandin “leaping into; attacking, daring, bold” (MW:699a), “(= Pali pakkhandin, bold, braggart, a bravo), (a) violent or
insolent and belligerent (person)” (Edg:389a).
5
Skt. pragalbha “bold, confident, resolute, brave, strong, able; proud, arrogant, impudent; skilful; illustrious, eminent;
mature (as age)” (MW:656a).
6
I was not able to trace ’phrog rlom in any available lexicographic sources.
 311

rulers (Thabs mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo) from which an ideal king should be
free (’Dul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi). It is also counted among non-virtuous actions in connection with
forging money or measures and stealing (Thabs mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo; Lho
za mo tshaṅs dbyaṅs la sdug bsṅal gyi bye brag bstan pa). Of special interest for our analysis is the
fragment from ’Dul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi in which doing ’phrog rlom is apparently mentioned as one
of possible reactions to ruler’s death, aside from weeping, rejoicing and behaving vulgarly.

A few compounds are attested in later lexicographic works that morphologically resemble ’phrog
rlom; cf.: kheṅs rlom “arrogant, conceited” (Gs:125a); mkhas rlom “pretending to be learned” (Gs:155c);
’cha’ rlon za ’rlom “greedy, avaricous” (Gs:383b; cf. ’cha’ rlom pa “one very fond of munching; a greedy
person”, D:442b), “za rgyu la rṅam pa” (BTC:861a); rñed rlom “ostentatious, conceited (because of
one’s wealth)” (Gs:432c); dpa’ rlom “heroism, courage, bravery, valor” (Gs:647c). ’cha’ rlom za rlom,
rñed rlom and ’phrog rlom share more than just their second member; their first elements (’cha’-, za-,
rñed-, ’phrog-) are derived from transitive verbs. From this perspective, the analysis of the compound
under consideration as a coordinate compound does not seem plausible (see previous analyses of
other scholars). Even more so, since we already know that it was a noun. The meanings of the
compounds listed above are highly lexicalised, e.g., lit. *“boasting about gnawing/eating” >
“greedy”, lit. *“boasting about obtaing” > “ostentatious”, etc.

JÄSCHKE glosses ’phrog pa as “1to rob, take away; to deprive of; 2to make one lose a thing; to deprive a
person of his power or place, to overthrow, kings, dignitaries etc.; 3to remove, to do away with,
expel” (361b). Thus, one could assume that in case of ’phrog rlom, the etymological meaning
*”boasting about deprival (of king’s power)” developed towards *”boldness, daring; impudence”, i.e.
’phrog rlom byed *“to show boldness” < *“to boast about deprival”; ’phrog rlom daṅ ’bral ba “to be free
from boldness”; ’phrog rlom can “bold”. This hypothesis is additionally confirmed by its Sanskrit
equivalent praskandin (see above). According to JÄSCHKE (538b), the argument structure of rlom in the
sense of “to be proud of, to glory in, to boast of” requires a complement in TERM, cf. bder rlom “to
boast of one’s fortune” and gcig par/gcig tu rlom “to be proud of the identity” (ibid.). Thus, the
reconstructed underlying structure of the compound is proposed as *’phrog par rlom.

The verbal phrase ’phrog rlom byed can acquire a further argument that is marked by the case
particle la and refers to human beings, cf. pha rol la phrog rlom byas (Thabs mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas
drin lan bsab pa’i mdo), kun la ’phrog rlom byed (ibid.). We notice the same structure in our passage
from PT 1287: myi la ’phrog rlom. In accordance with what has already been stated concerning the
distorted character of the stanza (see s.v. rje dbyal), I propose to reconstruct the verse in question as
*myi la ni ’phrog rlom byed “to show boldness towards [other] people”, lit. “to boast about deprival
towards [other] people”. Given the meanings listed for ’phrog in JÄSCHKE, one could speculate that
the term came into being as a confirmation to the change of power: the deceased ruler is deprived of
his power in favour of the heir to the throne; cf. French le roi est mort, vive le roi! In ’Dul ba gźi (see
 312

above), sages who are ordered to boast for deprival think that they should do so because a grandson
of the ruler is born.

Nevertheless, although I tried to explain the linguistic structure of the compound, it remains still to
be clarified how exactly this description should be related to funeral rituals and what kind of
behaviour or perhaps rite is meant in the OTC.

[T] ma na re gźan myi ʼdod / nam nam źa źar / btsan po rje dbyal źig noṅs na / thor to ʼphren (46) mo ni
bciṅs / ṅo la mtshal gyis byugs / lus la ni bźags / btsan po ʼi spur la ni ʼtshog / myi la ʼphrog (47) [rl]om
*byed* / zas la ni za ʼthuṅ / de ltar bya ʼam myi bya źes mchi nas / (PT 1287:45-7)
“The mother said: ‘I do not want anything else but that forever and ever when a btsan po, husband
and wife, dies, [one], having *cut off” ’phren mo tuft, smeared [his] face with blood [and] made
incisions on [his] body, assembles around btsan po’s body, boasts about deprival, [and] feasts (lit. eats
and drinks) on victuals. Will it be acted like that or not?’ Thus [she] spoke.”1
myi pha log po / (1r29) ’i chuṅ ma la byi ba byas sam // phrog rlog byas sam // rgyon po byas sam // myi la
ṅan du (read: dgu)2 byas (ITJ 734:1r28-9)
“[One] ravished wives of other men3, or boasted about deprival, did rgyon po, or many evil deeds to
people.”4

94 bu spur
BYD:351a: grog ma.
DTH:127: cadavre; HAARH.1969:405: the corpses (spur); HILL.2006:96: corpse (bu spur = spur - JB); ZEISLER.2011:177: < *’bu sbur
“insects” or “worms and beetles/ants”; DOTSON.2013a:270: sprouts.

[S] *bus śiṅ ’phur “to fly while having been blown away”
[E] *bus śiṅ ’phur ba “flying while having been blown away”
[M] (A) blown away and flying
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV2+VV1]
[A] As opposed to other scholars who previously analysed the passages in question, I understand bu
spur of the phrase sa ’on bu spur as an attribute to sa ’on. Compare also the similar structure of (yul)
pyi ’brog gdeṅs which consists of a nominal compound (yul) pyi ’brog- and an attribute -gdeṅs (< *gdaṅs
pa; see s.v. yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs). Instead of accepting the compound bu spur at its face value, I propose
to reconstruct its underlying structure as *bus ’phur < *bus śiṅ ’phur “to fly while having been blown
away”.5 The following sound changes are assumed to have taken place: *bus ’phur > *bus phur (elision
of the word internal ’a chuṅ) > *bus pur (deaspiration of the onset consonant of the second syllable:
1
For a detailed discussion of the passage and its reconstruction see the Text section s.v. rje dbyal.
2
ṅan du is a scribal error that should be amended to *ṅan dgu which is attested in the same document in the phrase ṅan
dgu byed in l.1r24 and in a corrupted form as ṅan dgur byas in l.1r6.
3
Following THOMAS (1957:96, note on the l.6: “pha log(s) pa: ‘Others’, = pha rol pa), I read *myi pha logs po “other man”, for
which compare also myi pha logs po (PT 1283:289), pha logs po (PT 1283:291), la la pha logs (PT 1283:496), and pha logs (PT
1283:501).
4
THOMAS translates the passage as follows: “if he had ravished another’s wife, or robbed up and down, or committed theft
and done injury to people” (1957:77).
The form -rlog is assumed to have resulted from the assimilation of the rime of the second syllable to the rime of the first
syllable, i.e. -og. The variant spelling without of the initial ’a- can be observed also in the above examples from the
canonical literature.
5
A clause of similar content that concerns the TR verb bus is quoted in JÄSCHKE from Mdzaṅs blun: rluṅ gis sbur ma bus pa ltar
“like chaff blown off by the wind” (393a).
 313

ph- > p- / -sσ_) > bu spur (consonant migration triggered possibly by the frequent occurrence of the
word spur “dead body, corpse”, J:331, in the same chapter of the OTC).

Therefore, the intended message of the stanzas below would be: just like a country needs a lord who
protects its frontiers, so also seeds, carried by the wind, need rain, otherwise they wither.

[T] yul yab (52) kyi rje myi bźugs na /
pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs pyol pyol gyi cha ʼo /
dog yab kyi char ma mchisna /
sa ʼon bu spur (53) khog khog (PT 1287:51-3)
(59) yul yab kyi rje ru gśegs so /
yul pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs myi pyol gyi cha ʼo /
dog yab kyi chab mchis (60) kyis /
sa ʼon bu spur myi khog gi cha ʼo / (PT 1287:59-60)
“If the lord over (lit. of) living space does not
reside,
[one] will be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of the country].
If the rain did not come from the sky,
seeds, blown away and flying, were withering.”
“[He] came as the lord over (lit. of) living space.
[One] will not be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of] the country.
For the rain from the sky came,
seeds, blown away and flying, will not wither.”

95 bu srid
DSM:536a: bu rgyud spel ba.
BDN:57n3: bu yod pa źes pa’i don; DUṄDKAR:1412a-b: bu mo srid mo zer ba’i don te. mtsho sṅon po’i phal skad du bud med
spyi’i miṅ la bu srid mar ’bod srol yod; STK:182n4: bu rgyud de bu srid mi mdzad pa ni bu rgyud mi spel ba’i don yin (s.v. bu
srid myi mdzad).
DTH:199: avoir commerce sexuel (s.v. bu srid mdzad pa); DOTSON.2013a:291: bearing a son.

[S] *bu srid “for a child to be there”

[E] *bu srid pa “existing of a child”
[M] (N) posterity; bu srid mdzad “to procreate”
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTS-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[A] From the context of PT 1287, it seems obvious that btsan mo Sad mar kar was sent to Lig myi
rhya, the ruler of Źaṅ źuṅ, in order to “take over” his dominion peacefully. This should happen
through taking hold (zuṅ) of Lig myi rhya’s so nam and bu srid, which the princess had previously
refused to do.

A passage of comparable contents is found in the story of Dbyig pa can as transmitted in Mdzaṅs blun
źes bya ba’i mdo:
dbyig pa can khyod stan la myi rtog par ’dug pa ’aṅ ñes kyis / dbyig pa can khyod byos la bu yod par gyis
śig ces (PT 943:23a)
“Dbyig pa can, because you, who had sat down on the seat without having checked [it], commited
an offence, you, Dbyig pa can, should become [her] husband1 and give [her] a child!”
The clause relevant for the present discussion is bu yod par gyis that corresponds structurally quite
well with our bu srid (myi) mdzad. The former could be translated literally as “Act so that [she] has a

1
In my translation of this phrase, I follow the later canonical version of the sūtra which reads khyod khyor byos “You
should act as [her] husband]!”, cf. HAHN 1996:231 and H 347, mdo sde, sa 437v4-5 (cited after ACIP).
 314

child!”. The major difference between the two statements is that in case of Mdzaṅs blun the
addressee of an imperative statement is a male whereas in PT 1287 the princess Sad mar kar is the
agent of the verb (myi) mdzad.

I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of bu srid as a verbal phrase *bu srid “for a child to
be there” for which compare srid “seyn, daseyn, möglich seyn; möglich” (Sch:603b), “1to be, to exist
(?)” (J:582s), “1to be; 2to grow, to be possible” (D:1289b). The compound has subsequently acquired a
more abstract meaning to denote progeny or even posterity for we read that Sad kar mar should
take hold of Lig myi rhya’s bu srid (l.402). This statement makes sense only if we presume that future
generations in general are meant here.1

[T] sṅa na śud ke za rtsal thiṅ śags mchis ste // btsan mo daṅ ni myi (400) bnalV3 bar // lig myi rhya la śud
ke za rtsal tiṅ śags gnaṅ ste // btsan mo yaṅ lig myi rhya ʼi so nam daṅ bu srid myi mdzad chiṅ log / (401) śig
na bźugs par // ʼdir dral gyi sñan du gdaʼ ste // btsan mo de ltar log pa bgyis na // chab srid kyi dkrugs mar
ʼgyur [bas?] (402) de lte bu ma bgyid par // lig myi rhya ʼi so nam daṅ bu srid zuṅ śig ches // (PT 1287:399-
402)
“Previously, there was Rtsal thiṅ śags, a lady [from] Śud ke[-clan]. Rtsal thiṅ śags, a lady [from] Śud
ke[-clan], was given to Lig myi rhya so that [he] did not [have to] sleep with the btsan mo. The btsan
mo, while not procreating nor receiving progeny with (lit. of) Lig myi rhya, returned. On that, [she]
reported (lit. said to the ear of) to [her] brother that [she] was staying in Śig. [The btsan po] said to
the btsan mo, who returned, in this way: ‘On account of the fact (bas) that [this] will bring quarrel to
(lit. of) the chab srid, not acting in this way, take hold of Lig myi rhya’s progeny and posterity!’”2

96 bla skyes
YeŚes:383a: ’ol tso’i de ge ci; BYMD:83r2: olǰa degeǰi bariqu (s.v. bla skyes ’bul); SR:2:265.2-3: gla skyes te śo gam gyi gnas nas
byuṅ ba’i rdzas sam daṅ gru gla’am gru btsas sogs kyi nor; GC:581a: ’bul ba phyag rten la’aṅ; BTC:1910b: 1gru btsas; 2dpya
khral; 3lag rtags; DSM:570b-1a: 1śo gam daṅ gru gla sogs; 2dpya khral daṅ lag rtags; BYD:364a: śo gam rdzas sam gru btsas.
DUṄDKAR:1524a: gla skyes te śo gam daṅ gru gla sogs kyi miṅ ṅam dpya khral daṅ lag rtags la’aṅ ’jug go.
B:417a: present, offering; R.6:249b: подарок; gift, present; Gs:742c: 1present, gift, tribute; 2tax; 3boat, ship fare.
UEBACH.1985:31: Geschenke; n.120: [Pflicht]geschenk an den König von Tibet; RICHARDSON.1985:71: offering of presents;
RICHARDSON.1992:105: an offering; LI/COBLIN:433: gift, present; COBLIN.1991c:100: gift, present; UEBACH/ZEISLER.2008:314: taxes.

[E] *bla’i skyes “a present for superiors”

[M] (N) baksheesh
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NBEN+N]
[R] bla ’og
[A] All OT passages containing the compound under discussion are taken from larger text units
that concern complaints about an obligation that subjects should give bla skyes to their immediate
superiors. From this we can infer that the term denoted a kind of donation which, if not directly
demanded, was at least expected by the authorities and was perceived as troublesome by those
obliged to pay it. The compound contains thus certain amount of ambivalence; on the one hand, bla
skyes seems to have been unconstrained, given voluntarily, but, on the other hand, the subjects felt
1
The compound under consideration should be considered distinct from phrases like sras rgyud [kyi] chab srid (Khri 19); lha
sras kyi chab srid (Rkoṅ 8), or sras dbon chab srid (Źwa W 59).
2
THOMAS reads bu sriṅ in ITJ 730:13 as bu srid (1957:107) but interpretes it correctly as “sons and daughters” (ibid., p.109).
 315

obliged to pay it. This should explain the chosen rendering of the compound as “baksheesh” which
is defined as “(in parts of Asia) a small sum of money given as alms, a tip, or a bribe”
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/baksheesh?q=baksheesh; 18.08.2014).

The “repressive” character of bla skyes is still present in the modern form of the compound, i.e. gla
skyes “gla cha daṅ. gzigs bzos” (BTC:418a), which came into being apparently as a result of folk
etymologisation; bla-, not used any more with referrence to authorities (cf. the OT phrases bla nas,
blar bźes, etc.) but constrained mainly to the sphere of religion (as in, for instance, bla ma) has been
replaced by a word better associated with payments and hires, i.e. gla. The morphological change
was followed by the semantic shift towards “toll, charge” as attested by the modern dictionaries for
bla skyes (see, e.g., SUMATIRANA and GOLDSTEIN as cited in the Lexicographic section).

[T] lo thaṅ bla skyes ye ma byuṅ bar (r6) rtse rje dagis rtag du ra mar gnon ciṅ phrogs pa stams las bchad ciṅ
mcis na / slan chad ’baṅs kyi (r7) ldum ra ’phrog ciṅ ’tsher myi gnaṅ bar // non thur gyi phyag rgya ci gnaṅ
(PT 1085:r5-7)
“In order that the yearly tribute, which [consists of] baksheesh, has indeed (ye ma) arisen, would you
grant [us] a seal [ensuring] (lit. of) the ?decrease of the oppressions? (non thur)1 so that the rtse rjes
are later not allowed to take away and damage the gardens of subjects when [they] constantly extort
goat butter and cut off loss from the whole?”
rta daṅ lugi lo la śa cu’i gtsug lag khaṅ nas / [[[sku yon nar ma daṅ bla skyesu mdzad pa’i rgyur kha bstan pa /
daṅ] / [śa (7) cu phyogs na dge ’dun yul zar ’tshal ba’i ’tshal ma daṅ / gsol chaṅ du god pa daṅ] / [sde rjes
skyin bar kha bstan pa]] la stsogste (8) god do ’tshal gyi sdom]TOP / [gro nas khal stoṅ ñis brgya’ drug cu rtsa
gchig daṅ / bre gaṅ]O phul do (PT 1111:6-8)
“In the horse and sheep years, from the temple of Śa cu, [as for] the summary (sdom) of whatever
loss [there may be concerning] the inspection of the arrangements made as continuous offerings
and baksheesh, the loss of offering beer and provisions that were wished as food [in] the abode of
the monastic community in the region of Śa cu, [and] the inspection of loans [made] by the lord of
the district, among others, [one] gave thousand two hundred sixty one (1261) khal and a full bre of
wheat and barley.”
rta daṅ lugi lo la śa cu gtsug (18) lag khaṅ che phra nas / sku yon nar ma daṅ bla skyesu mdzad pa’i rgyur kha
bstan pa daṅ / (PT 1111:17-8)
“In the years of the horse and sheep, the reasons were inspected [for which (lit. of) those] were
given as continuous offerings and baksheesh from major and minor temples of Śa cu.”
(18) // rkoṅ kar po’i bran daṅ // źiṅ ’brog / slan chad myi dbri źiṅ // rje blas daṅ // dpya’ khral bla skyes
myi dbab pa daṅ / (19) stsaṅ dphya’ nas daṅ // ’bras gaṅ ’bul yaṅ ruṅ // ’bul ba’i sa tshigs // da ltar gyi las
myi bsriṅ bar // lha sras // (20) yab kyi bka’s // gnaṅ ba bźin du // lha sras lde sroṅ gi sku riṅ la // rje //
blon mol te (21) / bka’s // gnaṅ ṅo // (Rkoṅ 18-21)
“During the life of the Divine Son [Khri] lde sroṅ [brtsan], having consulted lords and councillors,
[the btsan po] granted with [his] order that, according to the [earlier edict] granted by the Divine
Son, [his] father, while the serfs of Rkoṅ kar po, as well as fields and summer pastures shall not be
diminished in later times, official duties and tributes [that consist of] baksheesh shall not be
imposed. Additionally (daṅ), whatever grain-taxes, [in] barley or rice, are to be paid, sa tshigs of the

1
The compound could be identical with nan t(h)ur glossed as either “1khrims kyi chad pa gcod pa’i don la ’jug ste; 2sdigs
tshig gi miṅ ste” (DSM:395b) or “nan tan” (BDSN, apus MIMAKI 1992:486).
 316

delivery shall not be moved to a more distant place than it is now (lit. “shall not be lengthen from
that of today”).”

97 bla ’og
YeŚes:382b: de re do ra, ’u red ho cod; SR:2:277.2-3: steṅ ’og; degedü douradu; GC:583a: stod smad dam steṅ ’og; BTC:1915a:
steṅ ’og; Negi.9:3909b: auttarādharyam; BYD:365b: steṅ ’og gam stod smad.
BDSN: steṅ ’og (apus MIMAKI 1992:487); LCAṄSKYA.2006:265: steṅ ’og.
Sch:380b: oben und unten; Desg:692a: = steṅ ’og, sur et sous.
DTH:200a: = steṅ ’og; TLTD.2:57: superiors (?); p.451: superior and inferior; TLTD.3:161a: up and down, high and low (s.v. bla
’og du); p.161b: up and down, high and low (s.v. bla’og nas); RICHARDSON.1985:171: high and low; LI/COBLIN:276: upper and
lower; p.277: above and below; URAY.1990:421: others above or below (for bla ’og gźan - JB); COBLIN.1991c:100: above and
below; TAKEUCHI.1995:265: the authorities of higher or lower [rank]; DOTSON.2007b:38: authority; 1above and below, high and
low; 2under the [jurisdiction of the] authority.

[E] *bla daṅ ’og “superior and inferior [ones]”

[M] (N) superior and inferior officials
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; co-hyponymic; STRC[N+N]
[R] bla skyes
[A] The phrase bla ’og gñis (PT 1283:367) leaves no doubt that the compound is coordinate and
copulative. Moreover, in Źwa inscription (W 7), bla ’og is listed as another group of referents
following yab sras, gcen gcuṅ, and yum sras - all denoting human beings and all being coordinate and
copulative compounds.1 In some cases, like PT 1088 or PT 1098, one could speculate whether the
compound did not undergo lexicalisation to denote authorities in general. However, for the lack of
clear evidence I refrain from differentiating between the primary meaning “superior and inferior
officials” and the hypothesised derived “authorities”.

I have not found so far any evidence in OT sources that bla ’og could also refer to spatial relations
like, for instance, *“above and below”.

[T] ba slad gyi bla ’og nas źal ce che phrag (read: phra) ji ’byuṅ ’am (PT 1088:6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1995:149)
“Does a lawsuit, great or small, appear from subsequent superior and inferior officials concerning
[this] cow [...]”
lo thaṅ skyel du mchi ba la rje blas gñer myi kums sam lo thaṅ gi (6) rnams chad pa źig du gyur na // bla ’og gi
chad ci byuṅ ba / eng tse dṅos mchid kyis ’tshal bar bgyis (PT 1098:5-6)
“If it happens that, upon going to convey yearly crops, [his] efforts towards [doing] official duty are
not fulfilled or that yearly crops become destroyed, then, whatever punishment from (lit. of)
superior and inferior officials appeared, [one] makes Eng tse in person responsible [for that].”2
bla ’og gñisu (367) / chi bya’aṅ bde bar ’oṅ ṅo // (PT 1283:366-7)
“Although death is brought on (lit. to) both, superior and inferior officials, [they] will be happy.”
bla ’ogi bu londu gyur pe’i rnams śos myi gcado źes ’byuṅ (ITJ 740:251)
“It is said (lit. appears) that those [cases] where it came to loans of superior and inferior officials
should not be decided by means of dice.”

1
For the usage of ’og- in the nomenclature of the OT offices compare, e.g., ’og dpon.
2
For different translations see COBLIN 1991c:87 and TAKEUCHI 1995:265.
 317

bla (254) ’ogi bu lon śos myi gcad par ’byuṅ gis / gyur śos myi gcad par yaṅ myi ’byuṅ (ITJ 740:253-4)
“Because it appears that loans of superior and inferior officials are not decided by means of dice, it
does not appear, though, that the interest shall not be decided by dice.”
bla ’ogi bu londu ’gyur pas / śos myi (298) gcad pe’i rigs // (ITJ 740:297-8)
“Because [those are the cases] where it came to loans of superior and inferior officials, [they] must
not be decided by means of dice.”
bdagis / bla ’og du gsol źes [...] (Vol.55, fol.20:5; trslr. after TLTD.2:56)
“I submitted [it] to superior and inferior officials.”
bla ’og nas / db[u] yugs [smad la dṅan can] (v1) bgyid de // (ITN 500:r2-v1)
“The superior and inferior officials are humiliating dbu yugs and abusing [their] power.”1
źaṅ druṅ po’i go byas te sku btsas / (7) yab sras gcen gcuṅ yum sras / bla ’og dgyes śiṅ ’thun bar (8) sbyard /
(Źwa W 6-8)
“Having taken over the position of the attending maternal uncle, [ban de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin] watched over
[btsan po Khri lde sroṅ brtsan]. [He] united fathers and [their] children, elder and younger brothers,
mothers and [their] children, superior and inferior officials, so that [they] were pleased and
reconciled.”
bla ’og kun gyi gzuṅs byas te / phyogs su ’khrug pa myed ciṅ (17) bde bar byed byed do // (Źwa W 16-7)
“[ban de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin], being a hold for all superior and inferior officials, was making peace and
happiness (lit. was making that, while there was no disorder, [one was] happy”) in [every] region.”
bla ’og phyogs (15) su bde ba daṅ / phan ba’i mdo chen po byed byed // (Źwa E 14-5)
“[ban de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin] was a mdo chen po of happiness and benefit towards superior and inferior
officials.”
lha [r]i[s s]u [b]sṅos pa (32) [la]s cir gyur kyaṅ // bla ’og gźan gyis dbaṅ myi bya bar gnaṅ (33) [ba] las stsogs
te / gtsigs sṅa ma’i steṅ du / gtsigs phyi ma (34) [b]snan bskyed de gnaṅ ba rnams kyaṅ / de bźin du / nam
źar (35) [b]rtsan bar gnaṅ ste / ṅa’i źa sṅa nas kyaṅ dbu sñuṅ gnaṅ // (Źwa E 31-5)
“Whatever happened (cir gyur kyaṅ), not having, among other things, allowed to wield power by
other superior and inferior officials over what has been dedicated to the monastic estate, I, having
granted definitively forever in that way the successive edicts (which I, having extended, granted) in
addition to the earlier one(s), grant also the oath.”2

98 dbaṅ thaṅ
[V] dbaṅ taṅ (PT 1042:13; ITJ 739:10r4; deaspiration)
dbaṅ daṅ (ITJ 739:4v6; voicing)
[D] Southern Mustang “charisma, charm”, Shigatse “right”, Nangchen “mightness” (CDTD:5821)
Mvy:5220: bhāgaḥ (s.v. mahābhāgaḥ); YeŚes:385b: skal ba bzaṅ po, tshog tsa le, pu riṅ thuo guo suo, pu yaṅ ge śig, hu pi tsa
ya’, deg cel ge, gaṅ saṅ, ’a ga gu choṅ; Ts:119v1: bhāga, bhāgyi; 119v2: daiba, rīdhi; Corff.1:323b (1414.2): sich entwickelt
haben (s.v. dbaṅ thaṅ rgyas); BYMD:84r1: čoγ yali, auγ-a küčün; SR.2:286.7: rīdhi, saubhāgya; erke küčü, buyan kesig, aγu
küčü, tegüs buyan, γang sang; GC:587a: skal bzaṅ can daṅ skal ba che ba daṅ bsod nams can lta bu; LCh:565a: bhāga, bhāgya;

1
I understand dṅan can as a noun with the literal meaning “one having dṅan” derived from dṅan (pa) “1mthu. 2ṅan
pa“ (BTC:670a). Thus, dṅan can bgyid could be rendered literally as *“to act as one of ominous power”.
2
Additionally, bla ’og is attested as a part of the compound rtse rje bla ’og, cf.:
nob ched po’i rtse [r]je [b]la ’og (ITN 499:v3)
“superior and inferior officials [of] the rtse tje of Great Nob”
For the interpretation of rtse rje bla ’og as a determinative compound of the underlying structure *rtse rje’i bla ’og compare,
for instance, the OT titles rtse rje ’og pon and gźis pon ’og pon. The latter examples suggest even the reconstruction of bla ’og
as *bla daṅ ’og dpon. However, for the lack of further evidence, *bla daṅ ’og is proposed as the underlying structure of the
compound in question.
 318

BTC:1931b: 1dbaṅ śugs sam nus stobs; 2nag rtsis pas brtag bya’i srog lus dbaṅ thaṅ gsum gyi ya gyal źig ste. śiṅ pho śiṅ mo
me pho me mo sogs bcu’o; Negi.9:3943a: bhāgyam; daivam; DSM:582b: dbaṅ cha’am mthu stobs (s.v. dbaṅ taṅ); BYD:369b:
dbaṅ thaṅ. dbaṅ śugs sam nus stobs (s.v. dbaṅ taṅ).
DUṄDKAR:1544a: dbaṅ cha’am mthu stobs kyi don te dbaṅ thaṅ zer (s.v. dbaṅ taṅ); LCAṄSKYA.2006:277: skal ba che ba’am dpal
che ba’am skal ba bzaṅ po’o (s.v. dbaṅ thaṅ che ba).
Sch:383b: Machtbestimmung; J:387a: 1might; 2time, chronology; 3destiny, fate, predestined fate; D:907b: 1might, = mṅa’ thaṅ;
2
Skt. bhāga, bhāgya, luck, destiny, fate, the destiny of any creature consequent on former actions; Schr:148b: destiny;
B:422b: might; fate, destiny, luck; R.6:270a: 1удачливый, счастливый; lucky, fortunate; 2счастье, фортуна; судьба, удел;
luck; fate; destiny; 3могущество, сила; might, power; Gs:750c: 1power; 2sm. khams, 4 (khams “4an element”, Gs:116c).
DTH:161: les pouvoirs; TLTD.2:154: privilege; TLTD.3:51: rights; p.161b: special right; EMMERICK.1967:143b: destiny, lot;
SNELLGROVE.1967:304: influence; STEINRA.1983:178: le destin ou la chance; URAY.1984:358: prosperity, wealth;
COBLIN.1991b:531a: right, prerogative; TAKEUCHI.1998.2:129: right, authority; DOTSON.2007b:6: the division of ranks;
DOTSON.2013a:297: the division of ranks.

[E] *dbaṅ gi thaṅ “the extent of power”

[M] (N) prerogative
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] mṅa’ thaṅ / mṅa’ dbaṅ / thaṅ khram
[A] *dbaṅ in OT sources. Exemplary clauses and sentences quoted below allow us to trace the
semantic development of *dbaṅ and its derivatives from their formal usage in legal texts to
administrative and religious documents influenced already by Buddhist thought. In its origins, dbaṅ
seems to have been a verb with two main meanings:
1
ncAD ”to exercise power, have power over sth.”:
btsan po’i źaṅ druṅ chab srid la dbaṅ ba gcig (PT 1071:r4)
“a źaṅ druṅ of btsan po who exercises power over chab srid”

bu la pha dbang (PT 1283:390)

“Father has power over [his] son.”

phyi naṅ (8) gñis la dbaṅ źiṅ chab srid ’dzin [pa] (ST Treaty N 7-8)
“one that exercises power over both, Interior and Exterior, and controls chab srid”

zla goṅ gi bu tsha’ (51) rgyud ’pheld gyi lag na bran źiṅ ’brog sog (52) tshal las stsogs te dbaṅ ṅo cog (Źol N
50-2)
“over whatever [one] exercises power [that] was gathered in the hands of the descendants of Zla
goṅ, [being it] serfs, fields, pastures, fallow lands, [or] forests”
2
ncA ”to be empowered, authorized; to have right to sth.”:
yus bdag daṅ / ’dam po phyed mar dbaṅo (PT 1071:r11)
“yus bdag and ’dam po are authorized [to take each] the half.”

ri dags khums na don dbaṅ ba’i thaṅ la (PT 1071:r436; PT 1072:176)

“concerning the value of gain that is authorized if a game animal died”1

1
For dbaṅ in modern Tibetan dialects compare, e.g.: Tabo ncAD “to own, to have in one’s power”, Nangchen ncDA “to have
power over, to possess”, but also Shigatse ncEA “to possess alone” (CDTD.V:853); cf. also Gs:750a: “va. to own; to rule, to
exercise power over”.
 319

From these the nominal meaning has been derived *“what is exercised” > “power”:
dbaṅ bcu la mṅa’ ma rñyed pha (PT 16:22v4)
“not acquiring the mastery over ten powers”
dbaṅ yod:
dbaṅ daṅ mthu yod pa (PT 16:24v4)
“having power and strength”

bdag la dbaṅ yod (PT 1283:408)

“I have power.”

myi ’o cog la dbaṅ ma mchis so (ITJ 733:31)

“We, men, do not have power.”
dbaṅ byed:
chos ’khor gyi las daṅ (43) dbaṅ byed (Skar 42-3)
“to execute deeds and power of the Wheel of the Dharma”

bla ’og gźan gyis dbaṅ myi bya bar gnaṅ (Źwa E 32)
“It is not allowed that other superior and inferior officials wield power [over it].”

sras dbon phyi ma mṅa’ mdzad pa rnams daṅ / chab srid kyi blon po phyi ma dbaṅ (30) byed pa (Źwa W
29-30)
“[my] sons and grandsons who will wield power afterwards and councillors of chab srid who will
exercise power later on”
dbaṅ thob:
tiṅ ṅe ’dzin thams cad daṅ dbaṅ thob pa (PT 16:32v1-2)
“those obtaining all tiṅ ṅe ’dzin and powers”

lha ’i źal bzas daṅ // bdud rtsi btuṅ ba’i dbaṅ thob (PT 239:r6.5)
“[He] acquired the power of the divine food [he] had eaten and of the nectar [he] had drunk.”
dbaṅ skur:
rigs gyi bu khyod la dbaṅ bskur bar ’gyur ro (PT 239:v16.3)
“Son of the noble family, you will be given the power.”
We find also one instance of dbaṅ forming a postposition “by, by means of”:
khar glan yaṅ rjo mo dbaṅ gis / ñes pa (142) myed do (PT 1287:141-2)
“Although [she] answered haughtily (lit. from above), there is no offence [done] by (dbaṅ gis) the
lady.”
The only derivative of dbaṅ, excluding compounds, found so far in OT sources is dbaṅ po “lord”:
dbus kyi khams chen po mdo gams (read: khams) gyi dbaṅ po (PT 16:34r3)
“lord over (lit. of) great regions of the central province, Mdo [and] Khams”
 320

dbaṅ and its cognates. Already HAARH has suggested (1969:447n2) that dbaṅ may be cognate to ’baṅs
“subjects” - in OT documents always used as a collective term. I would like to put forward an
hypothesis that both were derived from a verb *’baṅ; dbaṅ would be the V3 stem of the verb formed
with d- prefix, whereby ’baṅs would constitute a derivative by means of the collective suffix -s. The
reconstructed verb *’baṅ is assumed to have been a denominal formation from *baṅ “1foot, leg;
2
basis, foundation” for the semantic reconstruction of which compare, e.g.: baṅ “schnell, schleunig;
ein Wettlauf” (Sch:365a), “1foot-race” (J:364b), “1running; 3child birth” (Gs:715b)1, “leg” (THOMAS
1957:135)2; baṅ dgus Balti “crawl” (CDTD:5445; lit. “bent legs”)3; baṅ rgyug pa “to run a race” (J:364b-
5a; lit. *”to throw legs”); baṅ chen “swift messenger, courier” (J:365; lit. *“[one having] big feet”); baṅ
du “in schneller, schleuniger Weise” (Sch:365a; cf. Eng. on the hoof); baṅ na ñal “phru gu skyes pa’i ma
mal sa nas ma laṅs par ñal ba” (DSM:528a; lit. “to lie in a base[-position]”, cf. Pol. leżeć w połogu); baṅ
phyin “pho ña’am gtam skyel mkhan” (DSM:528a; lit. *“one going on foot”); baṅ ba “store-room,
store-house, corn magazine, also treasury” (J:365a; *”a room located below/on the ground level used
for storing food; cellar”); baṅ bul “baṅ rtsal med pa’am ’gor ba” (DSM:528b); baṅ mig “skar khuṅ”
(DSM:528b); baṅ za “baṅ mdzod” (DSM:528b); baṅ rim “Abtheilung od[er] Eintheilung eines Hauses
od[er] innern Raumes, Treppenverbindung” (Sch:365a), “the part of the mchod rten which has the
form of a staircase” (J:365a); baṅ so “grave, tomb; sepulchre, monument” (J:365a); ’bru baṅ “grain
storage room in a house (where the grain is taken out from the bottom through a hole)” (Gs:771c; <
*’bru baṅ ba/mdzod).

For the assumed development from baṅ *“1foot, leg; 2basis, foundation” to dbaṅ “to be authorized;
power” compare Dzongkha baṅ can “domineering person, bully” (< *baṅ chen?); baṅ che
“domineering”; baṅ btab “lay claim, claim ownership”; baṅ thob “gain power”; baṅ btsoṅ “bully, force,
tyrannize”; baṅ rim “layer, step” (file://localhost/G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/15-00-BA.html; 21.08.2014).4 The meaning of
’baṅs “subject” can be juxtaposed with Ger. Untertan. It can be inferred from the above OT examples
that dbaṅ was a non-controllable verb. Hence the primary meaning of *’baṅ could be reconstructed
as *“to have sth./so. under/at one’s feet” (> *”to dominate” > “to exercise power”).

1
For the meaning “child birth” in this context compare Pol. połóg “puerperium” ~ położyć (się) “lay down; lie down” (BORYŚ
2005:461a).
2
Cf.: rte’u chuṅ ni baṅ (3v97) źan bas // skyus (CT dkyus) gis ni sla myi sñogs (ITJ 738:3v96-7)
“Because a small colt has weak legs [it] cannot follow swifty.”
3
Two other variants attested in modern dialects have resulted most probably from folk etymologisation: ba laṅ dgus
“crawl” (CDTD:5422) and ba laṅ sgur bu “crawling (lit. bent like an ox)” (CDTD:5423).
4
As against Dzongkha dbaṅ “1blessing, empowerment; 2power, authority, control” (file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/15-08-DBA.html; 21.08.2014).
Additionally, some possible TB cognates can be quoted here: Kinnauri baṅ “foot, paw, leg, leg of bed” (BAILEY.GT
1911:317a); Lepcha băṅ, a-băṅ “the bottom of anything, the root, the base, the foundation; the beginning, the source, the
spring; the preparations, requisites, necessaries; the principal chief matter” (MG:251b-2a; According to MG, Tibetan baṅ
and dbaṅ have been borrowed into Lepcha as păṅ (or póṅ; 210a, 222b) and bóṅ (263a), respectively.); Byangsi baŋ “place”
(SUHNU 2001b:311b); baŋmo “vt., to erect a wall for a house” (SUHNU 2001b:311b); Darma bəŋ “place” (KRISHAN 2001b:377b);
Chaudangsi bəŋ “place” (KRISHAN 2001a:425b); bəŋ-phəl “wall” (KRISHAN 2001a:425b).
 321

dbaṅ thaṅ in context.1 We learn from PT 1042 that dbaṅ thaṅ, similarly to mṅa’ thaṅ “1extent of power;
2
authority”, was determined at the beginning of a funeral ritual. In PT 1287 the reign of Khri sroṅ
brtsan is eulogized, among others, for the foundation of Tibetan customs which took place during
this period. “dbaṅ thaṅ of both, great and small ones”, mentioned in the respective passage, was
obviously perceived as constituting one of the milestones in the establishment of the Tibetan
administrative system. Administrative documents discovered in Central Asiatic oases speak of dbaṅ
thaṅ of a scribe (yi ge pa) and of a person appointed as a mgo rṅon (exact meaning unknown).
Additionally, a derivative dbaṅ thaṅ can, lit. “sth./sb. possessing dbaṅ thaṅ”, is attested in the same
group of records, where it seems to denote a kind of field, perhaps by referring to its legal status?2

To sum up this scanty information, we can state that the meaning of dbaṅ thaṅ resembles to a great
extent the meaning of mṅa’ thaṅ in referring vaguely to the *“extent of power”. In case of dbaṅ thaṅ,
however, the contexts in which it occurs demonstrate that it referred rather to domains of lower
administrative rank connoting most probably prerogatives of minor importance. On the other hand,
the co-occurrence of mṅa’ thaṅ and dbaṅ thaṅ in one passage as well as the existence of a coordinate
compound mṅa’ dbaṅ (see s.v.) show beyond doubt that, in its origins, mṅa’ did not just constitute an
honorific equivalent of dbaṅ as it is classified in later lexicographic sources, but differed from the
latter in its connotations as well.

[T] de nas rgyal gyis / mṅaʼ thaṅ daṅ / dbaṅ taṅ bcad (PT 1042:13)
“Thereafter, the bon priest [responsible for preparing] eight-threaded nets3 determined the extent
of power and prerogatives.”
bod kyi gtsug lag bkaʼ grims ched po daṅ / blon po ʼi rim pa daṅ / che chuṅ (453) gñis kyi dbaṅ thaṅ daṅ / legs
pa zin pa ʼi bya dgaʼ daṅ / ñe yo ba ʼi chad pa daṅ / źiṅ ʼbrog gi thul ka daṅ dor ka daṅ / sluṅs kyi go bar
bsñams (454) pa daṅ / bre pul daṅ / sraṅ la stsogs pa // bod kyi chos kyi gźuṅ bzaṅ po kun // btsan po khri
sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ las byuṅ ṅo (PT 1287:452-4)
“The Tibetan principles - the great law, successions of councillors, prerogatives of both, great and
small ones, rewards for good ones that adhere [to us], punishments for culprits, standardisation of
thul ka and dor ka of fields and pastures, and of distances between (lit. of) sluṅs, (weight units) bre,
phul and sraṅ among others, all the good foundations of the Tibetan customs appeared from the
reign (lit. life) of the btsan po Khri sroṅ brtsan.”
dbaṅ daṅ chuṅ ste ’jim pa chur bcug pa bźin (4v7) ste ṅan no // (ITJ 739:4v6-7)
“Prerogatives being small, similar to the mud thrown into water - [the sign] is bad.”

1
A detailed semantic analysis of thaṅ is presented s.v. mṅa’ thaṅ.
2
Compare the respective passages:
[dbaṅ thaṅ can daṅ gtan źiṅ daṅ ra śul gcig kyaṅ] myi brtsan te [źiṅ] pa myi graṅs kyis bgo (4) bar chad (Or.15000/326:r3-4; trslr.
after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:139, text 427 and TLTD.2:139)
“Also [fields?] possessing dbaṅ thaṅ, gtan źiṅ and an irrigated field are unsteady; it was decided to divide field-labourers
according to the number of people.”
dbaṅ thaṅ can daṅ gtan źiṅ gi rnams (ITN 1073:r1)
“[fields?] possessing dbaṅ thaṅ and gtan źiṅ”
ra śul is glossed with “rnaṅ ma’i źiṅ” (DSM:872b). According to TAKEUCHI (1998.2:139), the first text concerns “the division of
the lord’s fields, the assignment of farmers to each division, and regulation and instructions to the officials in charge”.
3
On the reading *rgya bon instead of the attested rgyal see s.vv. khram skya and (rgyal) thag brgyad.
 322

dbaṅ taṅ ni phyir phyir bźin du (10r5) mtho bar ’oṅ gis / sman lha ni bzaṅ mo źig (10r6) gis bgo bas mthar
skyid par ciṅ bzaṅ bar (10r7) ’oṅ ṅo (ITJ 739:10r4-7)
“Because prerogatives become high ever after1, through the beautiful goddess of medicine who puts
on [clothes], at the end [one] becomes happy and good.”
yi ge pa’i dbaṅ thaṅ (Or.15000/294:2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:129, text 395)
“prerogatives of a scribe”
nob chuṅu’i mgo rṅon du bskos pa’i dbaṅ thaṅ (ITN 439:v2)
“prerogatives of the one appointed as mgo rṅon of Nob chuṅu”

99 dbuṅ mtha’
[V] dbus mtha’ (PT 1287:375; folk etymology)
DTH:153: centre et confins du pays; RICHARDSON.1973:15n10: centre and periphery; RICHARDSON.1985:75: the centre and
borders; LI/COBLIN:325: the center (of the realm) and the borders; DOTSON.2013a:312: the borders and the center.

[E] *dbuṅ daṅ mtha’ “the centre and the limits”

[M] (N) central and border regions
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; copulative; co-hyponymic; STRC[N+N]
[A] From PT 1089 we can infer that dbuṅ mtha’ was a coordinate compound referring to two (gñis)
units: dbuṅ and mtha’. For the reconstructed underlying structure compare the phrase dbus daṅ mtha’
“the medium and the extremes” (J:389a).2 The reading dbuṅ mtha’, being obviously the lectio difficilior
documented in two OT sources, attests to the original form dbuṅ- for which compare these
explanations: “the middle or centre of any thing” (Cs:73b), “töb dumda” (BYMD:84r2), “madhya;
dbus ni dkyil; dumda” (SR.2:298.3), “dbus kyi miṅ du snaṅ” (GC:591b).

With regard to the morphology of the members of the compound, we observe the following
parallelism:
dbu “head” (J:388a) “ ~ dbuṅ “the middle”
1
mtha’ “ end, ending” (J:239b) ~ mthaṅ “the lower part of the body” (Cs:142b), “1mdaṅs;
2
smad; 3śa’am naṅ khrol” (DSM:306b).
It appears that -ṅ, at least in these two cases, could have been a suffix forming (spatial?) nouns from
other nouns - an hypothesis that still has to be tested against further examples.

It is suggested that dbuṅ was primarily a common term denoting the middle part of anything as
against dbus that could have been originally reserved as the proper name of the central Tibetan
province. In the course of time, the second term superseded the first one and absorbed concurrently
its meaning.

[T] dmag pon chuṅu sgo gtsaṅ pa’i ’og na mchiste // ’di ltar dbuṅ mtha’ gñis kyi gral thabs gna’ nas chad de
// (PT 1089:r26)

1
I tentatively propose to understand phyir phyir bźin du as a derivative of phyir/phyi bźin “after” (J:349a, 351a) by means of
reduplication. However, the sentence remains obscure.
2
Compare hereto also the reversed phrase mtha’ daṅ dbus in an-anta-madhya-buddha-bhūmi-samatādhigataḥ “mtha’ daṅ
dbus med pa’i saṅs rgyas kyi sa mñam pa ñid bu thugs su chud pa” (Mvy:369) as well as dbus daṅ mtha’ in the canonical
literature via RKTS. The former phrase is attested in the canonical literature also as mtha’ daṅ dbuṅ (see RKTS).
 323

“The little army commander being below sgo gtsaṅ pa; in this way, the ranks of both, central and
border regions, were decided from the ancient times.”
saṅs rgyas kyi chos bla na myed pa brñeste (375) mdzad nas // dbus mthaʼ kun du gtsug lag khaṅ brtsigs te /
chos btsugs nas / thams śad kyaṅ sñiṅ (376) rje la źugs śiṅ dran bas skye śi las bsgral to / (PT 1287:374-6)
“Having obtained the unequalled law of Buddha, [he] practiced [it]. Thereafter, having built temples
at all central and border regions, [he] established the dharma. Then, through entering compassion
and staying conscious towards all [beings], [he] conquered birth and death.”
yab / khri sroṅ lde (13) brtsan gyi riṅ la // brag mar gyi bsam yas las stsogs (14) pa // dbuṅ mthar gtsug lag
khaṅ brtsigs ste // dkon (15) mchog gsum gyi rten btsugs pa daṅ // (Skar 12-5)
“During the lifetime of the father Khri sroṅ lde brtsan, having built temples, like Bsam yas of Brag
mar, among others, at central and border regions, [one] established the shrine for Three Jewels.”1

100 ’byuṅ ’jug

DTH:51: les sorties et entrées; CHANGK.1959:137: expenditure and revenue (?); URAY.1960:46n26: dismissal and appointment;
URAY.1962b:360n16: dismissal and appointment; UEBACH.2008:58n7: dismissal and appointment; DOTSON.2009:122: removal
and installation; HILL.2011:26: removal and installation.

[E] *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa “removing [and] appointing”

[M] (N) replacing
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; antonymous; generic: abstract; STRC[VNV1+VNV1]
[A] Although the meanings proposed for ’byuṅ ’jug in earlier studies seem to be correct, the
compound needs further elucidation, first of all, as concerns its constituent ’byuṅ-. This morpheme
is glossed as an INTR nc-verb with the meaning “1to come out, emerge; 2to rise; to arise, to originate,
to become” (J:397a-b). The usage of the compound as well as its previous translations point,
however, to a transitive orientation of the action - “to dimiss, remove” - just as in case of -’jug. In
order to shed some light on the underlying structure of ’byuṅ ’jug, I should quote a few passages
from ITJ 750:
ʼdun ma / mal throe ltamsu / blon chen (194) po khri gzigs gyis bsduste / bruṅ pa rdo ʼphan koṅ ni byuṅ /
tshes poṅ tre goṅ bchug (ITJ 750:193-4)
“Grand councillor [Dba’s] khri gzigs, having gathered the council at Ltams of Mal tro, dismissed
bruṅ pa Rdo ’phan koṅ ni [and] appointed Tshes poṅ tre goṅ.”

dgun ʼdun moṅ kar du blon khri sum rje rtsaṅ bźer (205) gyis / bsduste / chibs pon źaṅ khri mñes mñen lod
byuṅ / źaṅ ʼbriṅ rtsan khyi bu bchug / (ITJ 750:204-5)
“Councillor Khri sum rje rtsaṅ bźer, having gathered the winter council at Moṅ kar, dismissed
equerry Źaṅ khri mñes mñen lod [and] appointed [in his place] Źaṅ ’briṅ rtsan khyi bu.”

1
According to RKTS, dbuṅ mtha’ occurs five times in Bstan ’gyur, namely in BUDDHAGUHYA’s Rnam par snaṅ mdzad mṅon par
byaṅ chub pa’i rgyud chen po’i ’grel bśad bźugs (D 2663, rgyud, ñu 185r2), JÑĀNAŚRĪBHADRA’s ’Phags pa laṅ kar gśegs pa’i ’grel pa (D
4018, mdo ’grel, ni 173r2-3, 190v4, 196v5), and ŚRĪGHOṢA’s Gces pa bsdus pa’i phrin yig bod rje ’baṅs la brdzaṅs pa (D 4355, sna
tshogs, co 226v2). Its variant form dbus mtha’ is attested plenty of times throughout the canonical literature (see RKTS).
The compound is found also as dpuṅ mtha’. The latter corrupt form was accepted and translated by DIETZ as “[...] schließlich
der Heeresmacht” (1984:403) who apparently divided the compound into dpuṅ#mtha’ nothwistanding the fact that it
determines another word: dpuṅ (read: dbuṅ) mtha’i bod “Tibet[ans] of central and border regions”.
 324

dbyar ʼdun drib nag du blon khri sum rjes bsduste / mṅan laṅ (228) gro sña brtsan khoṅ lod daṅ / seṅ go
ʼbriṅ rtsan mon chuṅ gñis phyuṅ ste / chog ro sña źin koṅ daṅ / gnubs khri sum rje (229) stag rtsan gñis
bchug / (ITJ 750:227-9)
“Councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having gathered the summer council at Drib nag
[and] having dismissed both mṅans, Laṅ gro sña brtsan khoṅ lod and Seṅ go ʼbriṅ rtsan mon
chuṅ, appointed the two, Chog ro sña źin koṅ and Gnubs khri sum rje stag rtsan.”

koṅ coe blon chog ro źin koṅ phyuṅ ste / laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan bcug (258) pai rtsis bgyis / (ITJ 750:257-8)
“Having dismissed Chog ro zin koṅ, the councillor of Koṅ co, [one] appointed Laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan.
[One] made an account [of it].”

rtsaṅ chen gyi (261) bruṅ pa / źa sṅa thaṅ rtsan byuṅ nas / seṅ go mon bu bcug paʼi rtsis bgyis par lo
gchig / (ITJ 750:260-1)
“[One] dismissed Źa sṅa thaṅ rtsan, the bruṅ pa of Rtsaṅ chen, [and] thereafter appointed Seṅ go
mon bu. [One] made an account [of it]. Thus one year.”

bruṅ pa źaṅ tre goṅ phyuṅ ste / cog ro rma goṅ bcug pa daṅ / seṅ go ʼphan la skyes phyuṅ ste / myaṅ
(302) ʼdus khoṅ bcug paʼi rtsis bgyiste / jo mo khri btsun gyi mdad btaṅ bar lo gchig / (ITJ 750:301-2)
“Having dismissed bruṅ pa Źaṅ tre goṅ, [one] appointed Cog ro rma goṅ and, having dismissed
Seṅ go ’phan la skyes, appointed Myaṅ ’dus khoṅ. Having made an account of [it], [one] prepared
the funeral ceremony of lady Khri btsun. Thus one year.”
Dismissions and appointments to a post are expressed in the above passages always by a pair of
verbs:
byuṅ ~ bchug (l.193)
byuṅ ~ bchug (l.205)
phyuṅ ~ bchug (ll.228-9)
phyuṅ ~ bcug (l.257)
byuṅ ~ bcug (l.261)
phyuṅ ~ bcug (l.301)
phyuṅ ~ bcug (ll.301-2)
On account of the fact that the second verb is always the V2 stem of the TR ’jug “1to put into; 2to
make, render, appoint, constitute; 3to put” (J:178a-b), we can assume that the same concerns the
first verb, i.e., it should be identified with CT TR ’byin (V2 phyuṅ, V3 dbyuṅ, V4 phyuṅ) “to cause to
come forth; 1to take out, to remove; 2to let proceed from, to send out, to emit” (J:396b).1

Now, having identified on the semantic level the first element of the pair with the CT verb ’byin and
the second one with ’jug, we should clarify the form ’byuṅ ’jug. The compound consists of two verbal
stems that go back to the first, imperfective form of the verbs *’byuṅ and ’jug, respectively. I would
1
The alternation byuṅ ~ phyuṅ attested in the examples above resulted in all likelihood from the unsettled orthography of
the OT texts. The secondary reading byuṅ might have additionally been triggered by the better known verb byuṅ < V1 ’byuṅ.
 325

like to put forward an hypothesis that ’byuṅ- is to be traced back to the original written V1 stem of
the CT suppletive paradigm of ’byin.1 The reconstructed written paradigm would be: V1 *’byuṅ, V2
phyuṅ, V3 dbyuṅ, V4 phyuṅ, for which compare the conjugations of, e.g., ’big(s), ’bud, ’bubs, ’bul, ’bebs,
etc. The original V1 of the c-verb ’byuṅ could have been replaced by ’byin after the nc-verb ’byuṅ had
been derived by means of the prefix ’a chuṅ from the stem byuṅ. As BIELMEIER points out, “nc-verbs
do not really distinguish between a perfect or perfective and a present or imperfective stem. Nc-
verbs usually have only one basic stem which is aspectually neutral.” (2004b:408).

Beside its nominal usage in the OTA (’byuṅ ’jugi rtsis), ’byuṅ ’jug occurs in PT 997 as a verbal
complement of the verb gyur. On account of the fact that the subject of the verb is dpon sna gñen len,
“various heads who were holding assistant [posts]”, i.e., it denotes human beings, ’byuṅ ’jug cannot
be a nominal complement, *”various heads who were holding assistant [posts] became (gyur) ’byuṅ
’jug”.2 Furthermore, if we juxtapose some of the above quoted clauses with the respective passage
from ITJ 750 that contains the compound under consideration we can observe a striking paralellism:
XABS phyuṅ ste / YABS bcug pa’i rtsis bgyis (ll.257-8)
XABS byuṅ nas / YABS bcug pa’i rtsis bgyis (l.261)
XABS phyuṅ ste / YABS bcug pa daṅ / ZABS phyuṅ ste / RABS bcug pa’i rtsis bgyis (ll.301-2)
As against:
[(X daṅ Y) gñis]ABS ’byuṅ ’jug i rtsis bgyis (l.290)
From this it is obvious that the phrases in ABS constituted objects of the verbal stems phyuṅ and
bcug. Hence, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of ’byuṅ ’jug as *’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa,
lit. “removing [and] appointing”, i.e., *“replacing”; ’byuṅ ’jugi rtsis < *[’byuṅ ba daṅ ’jug pa]’i rtsis, lit.
“account of removing and appointing”. The fact that ’byuṅ ’jug in ITJ 750:290 still retains the
argument structure of the underlying verbs proves its deverbal character.

An analogous compound is found in modern administrative language; to wit, spo len, lit. “to remove
and to accept”, rendered by CÜPPERS as “transfer of officials (with a new official taking over from the
old one)” (2003:336), cf. also “gsar rñiṅ ’pho len daṅ. ’gyur ldog maṅ ba” (DUṄDKAR:1311a, s.v. spo len
maṅ ba). As with ’byuṅ ’jug, also here both verbal stems go back to controllable and transitive verbs
spo and len, respectively. I assume that the commonly attested variant ’pho len, “las ’khur rñiṅ pa
’khyur nas gsar pa rtsis len pa” (BTC:1785b), “transfer of officials (new official taking over for the old
one)” (Gs:705c, s.v. ’pho lan), is a later development perhaps even resulting from an error since a
composition of two verbs one of which is an ncA and the other a cEA3 seems less probable (*’pho ba
daṅ len pa, lit. “[one] changes/moves and [the other] accepts [to the post]”).

1
For details on the suppletion in this paradigm see BIELMEIER 2004b:407-8. Compare also the dialectal form phjuŋ attested in
WAT Balti and Hardas for WT ’byin (CDTD.V:901).
2
For the structure ‘V1+TERM gyur ’ compare, for instance, caṅ mi smra bar gyur te “he became speechless Dzl.” (J:97a) and
khyod mi śa za bar gyur cig “may you be obliged to eat human flesh! Dzl.” (J:97a).
3
For the argument structure of the verbs see CDTD.V:811 and 1235, respectively.
 326

[T] kwa cu lha ris kyi khab so / sṅon gźi ’dzin ban de man ’ju śi ris thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) btab tshun cad
// lo maṅ mo źig tu / (10) [dpon sna gñen len]ABS ’byuṅ ’jug tu gyur gyis kyaṅ / ’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ lastsogs
pa thaṅ la ma brgal (PT 997:9-10; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1992:108)
“Although for many years since the khab so of the monastic estate [of] Kwa cu, the earlier resident
(gźi ’dzin) ban de Man ’ju śi ri, issued a tally of jurisdiction, it came to replacing various heads holding
assistant [posts], subjects and property in grain, among others, did not contradict the record.”
zlor śud pu khoṅ zuṅ daṅ / laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan gñis / ʼbyuṅ ʼjugi rtsis bgyiste thaṅ khram (291) btab / (ITJ
750:290-1)
“Having made an account of replacing both, Śud pu khoṅ zuṅ and Laṅ gro khoṅ rtsan, at Zlo, [one]
issued a tally of jurisdiction.”

101 ’brog mkhos

BTC:2007a: (rñiṅ) ’brog khul gyi bdag gñer las don byas pa (s.v. ’brog mkhos bgyis); DSM:604b: ’brog khul gyi khral bsdus kyi
las ka byed pa (s.v. ’brog mkhos bgyis); BYD:382b: ’brog khul gyi bdag gñer las don byas pa (s.v. ’brog mkhos bgyis).
DTH:33: inspection des nomades; DOTSON.2009:90: administration of pastureland.

[E] *’brog gi mkhos “necessaries of summer pastures”

[M] (N) organisation of summer pastures
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NOBJV+N]
[R] mkho śam / yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs
[A] For the reconstruction of the underlying structure of the compound compare the following
clause:
dbyar ʼdun mkhris pa rtsar ʼdu(172)ste / g.yo ruʼi ʼbrog gyi mkhos bgyis / (ITJ 750:171-2)
“The summer council, having gathered at Mkhris pa rtsa, administered the summer pastures of
the Left Horn.”
The semantics of mkhos has been analysed s.v. mkho śam. The proposed reading “summer pasture”
for ’brog is supported by the dialectal meanings glossed in CDTD:6010. For an analogical compound
compare źiṅ mkhos in PT 1078bis:7, 29.

[T] bya gagi lo laʼ btsan po dbyar stod pho dam mdo na bźugs śiṅ / dbyar smad sum chu bor sposte / (57)
ʼdun ma ʼdoṅ kaʼi ne tso luṅ du mgar btsan sña ldom bu daṅ / khri ʼbriṅ btsan brod gñis gyis bsduste (58) ʼbrog
mkhos chen po bgyis / (ITJ 750:56-8)
“In the year of the duck, the btsan po, while residing in the early summer in Pho dam mdo, moved
[his residence] in late summer to Sum chu bo. Both, Mgar btsan sña ldom bu and [Mgar] khri ’briṅ
btsan brod, having gathered the council at Ne tso luṅ of ’Doṅ ka, carried out a great administration
of summer pastures.”

102 mu su
BTC:2104a: (rñiṅ) spraṅ po (s.v. mu su pa); DSM:643b: mu to pa’am spraṅ groṅ ba (s.v. mu su ba); BYD:397b: mtha’. yul gyi
mtha’ lta bu; spraṅ po’i miṅ (s.v. mu su pa).
BDN:380n3: mtha’ daṅ rgya ru ʼgrel ba daṅ. mu su pa ni spraṅ por ʼgrel ba’aṅ mchis; BTK:74n3: mi su źes pa daṅ ʼdra’o. “mu
daṅ bu” gñis ʼphyugs pa yin min ma yig la brtag dgos; STK:182n6: mtha’ daṅ rgya ste rgya che ba’i don yin la mu su ni spraṅ
po źes ʼgrel ba byas pa nor ba yin par sñam.
DTH:155: tout autour; p.201: = mi su; DOTSON.2013a:292: beggar.

[E] *myi su yaṅ “whatever man”

 327

[M] (N) everyone, everybody

SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+[PRN+INDF]]
[R] thoṅ myi / pur myi / mun mag / myi rlag
[A] The quotation-triplet in which the compound in question occurs in PT 1287 as well as the verse
immediately following it (both underlined in the Text section) are apparently later interpolations
that disturb the otherwise perfect rhythm of the song. The latter seems to have consisted of four
stanzas each of which contained originally four verses.1 Accordingly, the first stanza should be
reconstructed as:
yul gyi skal pog pa / “The share of land allotted [to me]
khyuṅ luṅ ni rdul mkhar źig // [is] the Rṅul castle [of] Khyuṅ luṅ.
mchis su ni ma tho ʼam // was [it] not good to possess [it]?
skya mo ni bseṅ bseṅ mo // - ?The pale-she, the meager-she?.”2

We gather from the introductory formula of the interpolated citation (mu su ni gźan na re) that mu su
referred to human or anthropomorphic beings to whom the author of the composition attributes a
sentence that could be some kind of proverb or an articulation of folk wisdom. The opinion
expressed therein, namely that a foreign country, although not friendly from the outside, conceals
some treasures inside, is contrasted with the personal impression of the princess Sad mar kar (bdagi
ni g.yar sṅa ru).

In the proverbs from ITJ 730, mu su refers obviously to a broad group of people, one could even say
people at large. For this reason THOMAS (1957:109f.) translated the word as “any man; every man,
everyone” even though he added a question mark to his equation of mu with myi (ibid., p.111).

I suggest to reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound as *myi su yaṅ “whatever man,
any man”, i.e., *“every man, everybody”.3 Morphological processes that took place here can be
sketched as follows: *myi su yaṅ > *myi su (compounding) > mu su (regressive vowel assimilation).
The proposed interpretation assumes that ya btags, written in OT texts between the root consonant
m- and the front vowels -i and -e, had no phonological value and was a mere orthographic device.4
For another compound formed with the pronoun su compare Tshangra su med “child with nobody to
look after” (CDTD:8776) that could in fact go back to *mu su med pa, lit. “sb. (pa) who has nobody (to
take care of him)”.

[T] I(408) yul gyi skal pog pa / “The share of land allotted [to me]
khyuṅ luṅ ni rṅul mkhar źig // [is] the Rṅul castle [of] Khyuṅ luṅ.
1
For the sake of identification the stanzas have been numbered in the Text section.
2
The meaning of the last verse remains highly obscure. As can be inferred from other stanzas, it appears to describe the
subjective view of the princess Sad mar kar on the Rṅul castle.
3
For other examples of the indefinite pronoun su yaṅ in OT documents see OTDO.
4
Whether the vowel assimilation was additionally triggered by the dialectal pronunciation of the word mi “man” remains
to be clarified. As far as the modern Tibetan dialects are concerned, a back vowel is documented only for Ndzorge dialect,
cf. ɲɤ “human being” (CDTD:6195). Thus, the hypothesis put forward by THOMAS (1957:106) and repeated by BEYER (1992:31)
cannot, for the time being, be corroborated. They claim, namely that mu is an OT dialectal variant of m(y)i.
 328

mu su ni gźan na re / Everyone else says:

pyi bltas ni ṅam daṅ brag // ‘When viewed from outside - ravines and rocks.
naṅ bltas ni gser daṅ dbyig / When viewed from inside - gold and riches.’
(409) bdagi ni g.yar sṅa ru In front of my g.yar,
mchis su ni ma tho ʼam // was [it] not good1 to possess [it]?
skya mo ni bseṅ bseṅ mo // - ?The pale-she, the meager-she?.
II
bran gyi ni skal pog pa // The share of serfs allotted to me,
gu ge ni rkaṅ pran źig / the rkaṅ-serfs [of] Gu ge,
(410) ʼkhol du ni ma tho ʼam // were [they] not good to use [them] as servants?
gu ge ni bdris śiṅ sdaṅ // Gu ge is wrathful when acquainted [with].
III
zas kyi ni skal pog pa / The share of food allotted [to me]
ña daṅ ni gro mchis te / being fish and wheat;
ʼtshal du ni ma tho ʼam were [they] not good to eat [them]?
(411) ña gro ni bchaʼ źiṅ khaʼ // Fish and wheat are bitter when bitten.
IV
pyugs kyi ni skal pog pa / The share of cattle allotted [to me]
śa daṅ ni rkyaṅ mchis ste // being stags and asses;
ʼtsho ru ni ma tho ʼam / were [they] not good to graze [them]?
śa rkyaṅ (412) ni btsaʼ źiṅ rgod // (PT 1287:408-12) Stags and asses are wild when born.”
rtag du ñes pa ni / mu su la dgra yaṅ myi byed do // (ITJ 730:9)
“As concerns those who constantly commit offences, [they] do not act as enemies towards
everyone.”
dwa bśes myed ni / mu su ’i dgra la yaṅ sdug la // (ITJ 730:25)
“Those who do not have companions nor friends2 are dear even to enemies of everybody [else].”
srid ma ’dus pa’i phu nu ni / mu su ’i dgra ’o (ITJ 730:34)
“Elder and younger brothers from (lit. of) a dominion that was not united are enemies of
everybody.”3

103 mun mag

[V] mun dmag (ITJ 740:337, 339; Or.15000/329:r1; hypercorrection)
DSM:645a: 1gsaṅ dmag; 2mi mṅon pa’i dmag so pa lta bu; 3mi rabs chad pa sogs.
THOMAS.1936:284: mun-troops; p.286n40: Does it mean “household troops”, with mun = Chinese men, “gate”? Or min,
“people”?; DTH:33: fantassin; TLTD.2:270: mun troops; p.435: mun-army; TLTD.3:165a: mun (civil) army force;
DOTSON.2007b:55: soldiers; p.70: soldier, conscript?; DOTSON.2009:54: soldiers conscript; p.90n160: lit. “darkness soldier”; in
IOL Tib J 740 (2): the bondservants levied from an estate as troops; interchangeable with dmag; p.260: soldier or conscripted
soldier.

[E] *mu’i dmag myi “border soldier”

[M] (N) border guard

1
Translating tho with “good” I follow the Tibetan lexicographic tradition which glosses the lexeme with “bzaṅ ba’am legs
pa” (DSM:1034b, s.v. o tho ba). Although the translation is only tentative. We find also tho glossed with gal
(LCAṄSKYA.2006:277). In the latter case, one could connect gal with the dialectal gal gal Balti “too much, excessive, sufficient,
enough”, Kargil “doing sth. for the sake of doing sth.” (CDTD:1123), or CT gal “1importance; 2constraint, compulsion”
(J:68a). Although the meaning of tho remains uncertain, one could speculate whether it did not develop from tho *”peak
(N)” (for the reconstructed meaning see s.v. mna’ mtho) > *“top (A)” > *“sufficient” > *“(good) enough” > “good”.
Alternatively, the etymon could have been an adjective *“high(est)” that developed, on the one hand, to a noun *”peak” (<
“what is the highest thing”) and, on the other hand, to another adjective with a more specialised meaning “(good)
enough”. Its obvious derivative is CT mtho.
2
I tentatively identify dwa- with CT do “an equal, a match; a companion, associate” (J:257a).
3
Two other occurrences of mu su are attested in ITJ 739:8v2 and 11r8 but the vague context does not allow for a reliable
translation.
 329

SEM
[C] esocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NLOC+[NPART+N]]
[R] thoṅ myi / pur myi / mu su / myi rlag
[A] The underlying structure of the compound in question is proposed to have been *mu dmag myi,
lit. “border-soldier(s)”. The following changes are assumed to have taken place: *mu dmag myi >
*mud mag myi (consonant migration) > mun mag myi (regressive assimilation) > mun mag (truncation).
Although it would be more reasonable to assume that the compounding of *mu dmag myi to *mu
dmag appeared first, the following passage proves that the formerly proposed order is more correct:
myi’i chaldu ’oṅs pa’i rnams / rkod (read: rgod) mun mag myi źig na (v53) bruṅ pa la myiṅ snond / du
gdabo (ITJ 753:v52-3)
“If those who came as chald of men are braves and border guards (lit. braves who are border
guards), [they] shall be added as a name-gain for bruṅ pa.”
In this sentence the phrase rkod [mun mag myi]APP confirms the existence of the intermediary form
mun mag myi.

The attested variant mun dmag is assumed to have resulted from hypercorrection that was
supported not only by the semantics (and etymology) of the compound itself but also by the
frequent occurrence of the simple word dmag either in the same document ITJ 740 or in the
environment in which a document was written (e.g., in a military fort of Central Asia, cf.
Or.15000/329).1

Combining the information on the preparation of conscription from rkaṅ field units for guard
soldiers (ITJ 750:59; for more details on rkaṅ ton see s.v.) with the statement from ITJ 740:339-412 we

1
The variant form mun dmag occurs also in mun dmag traṅ which was interpreted by THOMAS/KONOW (1929:127ff.) as a
proper name of a Khotan king. The respective passages are:
slad kyis ham sin ca daṅ ’bye tu tu (7) daṅ co tu tu // mṅa’ bdag lha rgyal po seṅ ge la źu ba gsol (8) nas // śa cur phyin ma thog du
// co bo la źu ba gsol nas // mun dmag traṅ (9) rgyal po seṅ ’ge ’i spya ṅa na (read: nas) g.yon (read: yon) blaṅs (ll.6-9; trslr. after
THOMAS/KONOW 1929:123)
“Thereafter, Ham sin ca, ’Bye tu tu, and Co tu tu submitted a petition to the sovereign, the deity, the king Seṅ ge. Then,
after arriving in Śa cu, [we] submitted the petition to the lord. After that, [we] received gifts from the one who leads (traṅ
< OT draṅ) border guards, the king Seṅ ge.”
slad kyis ham sin ce daṅ ’bye tu tu daṅ coṅ tu tu (27) mchis pa la // jo bo seṅ ge lha rgyal po la źu ba gsol nas / śa cur phyin ma thog
du // jo bo the po la źu ba gsol na // (28) mun dmag traṅ // jo bo seṅ ge rgyal po ’i spya ṅa nas kyaṅ yon blaṅs // (ll.26-8; trslr.
after THOMAS/KONOW 1929:124)
“Thereafter, as Ham sin ce, ’Bye tu tu, and Coṅ tu tu arrived, [they] submitted the petition to the lord Seṅ ge lha rgyal po.
Then, after arriving in Śa cu, when [they] submitted the petition to the lord The po, [they] received gifts also from the
one who leads border guards, the lord Seṅ ge rgyal po.”
The order of the elements in appellations like mṅa’ bdag lha rgyal po seṅ ge, mun dmag traṅ rgyal po seṅ ’ge, jo bo seṅ ge lha rgyal
po, and mun dmag traṅ jo bo seṅ ge rgyal po clearly demonstrates that they were formed according to the rules of some
foreign language and not Tibetan. mṅa bdag lha and mun dmag traṅ are not parts of the proper name, as suggested by
THOMAS and KONOW (ibid., p.129), but epithets. According to KONOW, mun dmag traṅ corresponds to Skt. senāvāhana (ibid.).
The variant form mun dmag instead of mun mag could be explained by foreign influences operating on the coinage of the
appellation mun dmag traṅ especially if the foreign title contained a word analogous to Skt. senā. It is obvious from the
examples of mun mag cited in the Text section below, that the Tibetan compound denoted primarily human beings and not
a collective like an army.
2
rkyar btab pe’i sgos rdzoṅ ’di lta bo rdzaṅ (340) gźan la dbab par ni ltaṅ bur bab pas da’ ltar / stoṅ sde so’i ’og (341) naṅ srid du bgyis
nas bcu tshan daṅ khram tshan gyis rdzoṅ ba’ du mchis (ITJ 740:339-41)
“The households that sowed (lit. threw [seeds] on the field) supply [with the provisions]. In this way, because the
dispatches appeared in bales so that [they] were not sent down to others, the inferiors of the guards of the thousand-
 330

can conclude that, depending on the size of their fields or produce they could achieve from these,
Tibetan subjects were bound to supply soldiers who were sent to do their military service in the
border zone.1 The calculations of border soldiers mentioned twice in ITJ 750 (ll.105, 254-5) provided
the administration with the necessary data regarding the needs for provision, etc.

In the course of time the meaning of mun mag might have undergone generalisation to denote
soldiers that were sent from Central Tibet to the conquered regions of Central Asia to do their
military service there not necessarily as border guards.

[T] myig mar las ’byuṅ ba’ / mun dmag btus (338) pe’i rtsis mgo daṅ bla’i bka’ gsuṅ ba’ dag daṅ sbyar na /
mun (339) mun dmag gźan kun bsdu / (ITJ 740:337-9)
“When [one] compared what appears from the myig mar with the initial account of border guards,
that were gathered, and with orders of authorities, all the other border guards shall be gathered.”
dgun pho braṅ śaṅs gyi rab ka tsal du gśegs śiṅ / ʼdun ma duṅs (59) gyi stag tsal du bsduste / mun magi rkaṅ
ton bgyis / pha los bkug par lo gcig / (ITJ 750:58-9)
“In the winter, while the court went to Rab ka tsal of Śaṅs, having convened the council at Stag tsal
of Duṅs, [one] prepared rkaṅ-conscription for (lit. of) border guards [and] convoked suitable
commoners. Thus one year.”
blon che khri ʼbriṅ gyis ʼo yugi tsha steṅsu mun (105) magi rtsis mgo bgyis pha daṅ / (ITJ 750:104-5)
“Grand councillor [Mgar] khri ’briṅ [btsan brod] made at Tsha steṅs of ’O yug the initial account of
border guards.”
dgun pho braṅ brag mar gyi dbu tshal na bźugste rgyaʼi (254) po ña li tsoṅ kan pyag ʼtsald / blon chen po cuṅ
bzaṅ gyis / dgun ʼdun skyi śo ma rar bsduste / mun magi snon (255) god brtsis / dmag dru gu yul du draṅs
pha slar ʼkhord par lo gchig / (ITJ 750:253-5)
“In the winter, the court stayed in Dbu tshal of Brag mar; the Chinese messenger Li tsoṅ kan paid
homage. Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having gathered the winter council at Śo ma ra
[of] Skyi, drew (lit. calculated) the balance of border guards. Those who had led the army to the land
of Dru gu returned. Thus one year.”
r[ta’]i lo la // s[k]un mkhar / nob chuṅu g.yuṅ dru[ṅ] rtser / rkyen gyi / mun dmag spu tshugs dkar /
(Or.15000/329:r1)
“In the year of the horse, at G.yuṅ druṅ rtse [of] skun mkhar Nob chuṅu, the border guard of the
supply, Spu tshugs dkar.”2

district, now, functioned in internal affairs. Thereafter, groups of ten and tally-groups were to dispatch [the
provisions].”
For an alternative translation see DOTSON 2007b:55.
1
It is possible that the community was obliged to support those soldiers with provisions from its own fields.
2
Another occurrence of mun mag is attested in ITN 215:v2. However, due to the damage of the wooden slip the translation
of larger parts of the document is impossible.
THOMAS (TLTD.3:107) suggests that spun dmag attested in Or.15000/497:r5 should be read *mun dmag. The compound
occurs in the following clause:
dgun (r5) tshun chad spun dmag myi ’thu (Or.15000/497:r4-5)
“spun dmag do not gather before winter.”
Although the phrase spun dmag myi ’thu resembles mun dmag btus from ITJ 740:337, this could result from the fact that both
compounds have in their underlying structures the compound *dmag myi with the head -myi. Should, however, spun dmag
be indeed a misspelling for mun mag, this would mean that soldiers were conscripted during the winter time, probably first
after all the work on fields was done.
 331

104 myi rlag

DTH:126: hommes perdus; HAARH.1969:404: the destroyed man; HILL.2006:94: the destroyed man; ZEISLER.2011:107: one
destroyed by men (/the destroyed man) [i.e. Bkrags]; DOTSON.2013a:268: the lost man.

[E] *myi rlag pa “a lost man”

[M] (N) a lost man
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+VAV2]
[R] chu rlag / thoṅ myi / pur myi / mu su / mun mag
[A] According to the analysis of the compound in question presented s.v. chu rlag, myi rlag referred
in the passages quoted below to two sons of Dri gum, Śa khyi and Ña khyi, that were expelled to the
land of Rkoṅ.

[T] ʼuṅ nas spus kyi bu ṅar la skyes kyi mchid nas / ṅa myi rlagi ni rjes gcod / chu rlag gi ni dbres tshol du
ʼgro źes mchi nas / chaste soṅ ṅo (PT 1287:34-5)
“Thereafter, Ṅar la skyes, the son from (lit. of) the Spus[-clan] spoke: ‘I [shall] go to follow the traces
of the lost men, to look for the tracks of the lost water-demon.’ Having said that, [he] set out going.”
brgyags chad lham bugste / slar ma ʼi gan du ʼoṅs nas / myi rlag gi ni rjes chod / chu rlagi ni dbres kyaṅ rñed
do (PT 1287:39-40)
“[His] provisions being consumed, [his] shoes full of holes; as [he] went back to [his] mother, [he
said:] ‘I followed the traces of the lost men. I found the tracks of the lost water-demon as well.’”

105 gtsug lag

[V] gtsug (PT 1287:354, 358; Khri 3; truncation)
Mvy:1415: śāstram; 1432: ārṣa; 5046: vihāra; YeŚes:428b: gsuṅ rab, dam chos, sde snod, pra ta śa stra; BYMD:84v1: ayimaγ
saba; šastir;1 SR.2:518.1-2: luṅ, gźuṅ; ārṣa, bihāra, sde snod dam gsuṅ rab, viṭaka; γoul; nom-un sang; bid; šastir; daγun-u
sudur;2 GC:673b: sde snod; LCh:633a: 1ārṣa; 2vihāra; 3śāstra; BTC:2194b: sde snod dam gsuṅ rab; Negi.11:4690a-b: 1śāstram;
2
ārṣa; 3ārṣam; 4śāstā; DSM:696b: ’di’i sgra bśad ni ’phags pa’i gtsug nas bton te źu byed kyi lag tu bźag pas na miṅ de ltar
brjod pa ste; BYD:430b: sde snod.
STK:215n2: chab srid kyi don yin la ʼdir (PT 1287:367 - JB) spyi tshogs kyi lam lugs źes ʼgrel na ʼgrig sñam.
Cs:30b: encyclopedy, literature, learning; Sch:437b: Encyclopädie, Literatur, Gelehrsamkeit; J:433b: 1sciences; 2scientific
work or works; Schr:25b: science, knowledge, learning, intelligence, intellect; Desg:782a: science, ouvrages scientifiques,
académie; D:1002a: defined as: gtsug lag ces pa ni. ’phags pa’i gtsug nas bton. źu byed lag tu bźag pas brjod that which has come
out of the head of the most holy, i.e., the result of his intellect, and has been placed in the hands of the inquirer; hence
sciences, sacred literature; B:490b: the sciences, scientific works, sacred literature; R.7:175b: наука; священная
(каноническая) литература; раздел канонических книг (питака); энцикопедия; science; sacred (canonical) literature;
a division of canonical books (piṭaka); encyclopaedia.
RICHARDSON.1952:60: sciences; p.63: arts and sciences; TLTD.3:99: science; p.104: monastery (THOMAS reads gtsug lag khaṅ for
gtsug lag - JB); p.167b: wisdom; URAY.1972b:50: erudite; STEINRA.1983:45: Le mot gtsug-lag désigne un art, une science, un
savoir-faire (bouddhique ou non) est aussi l’équivalent de bstan-bcos = śāstra et désigne donc un livre; RICHARDSON.1985:109:
world order; p.111: wisdom and method; STEINRA.1985:93: ne désigne pas une “religion”, mais des institutions politiques ou
administratives ou une bonne conduite; pp.132-3: comporte un éventail assez large d’acceptions, de sorte qu’il est
impossible d’adopter une seule et même traduction dans tous les cas. Il désigne une sagesse, un art, une science, un savoir-

1
CM ayimaγ “tribe, clan; aimak; class, category, species, genus, world (in nature); part of speech; faculty or department of
a monastery school” (Less:21a); saba “any container or receptacle; vessel, vase; purse, wallet; internal organs, abdomen,
matrix, uterus; river bed” (Less:653a); γurban ayimaγ saba “the three divisions of the Buddhist scriptures known as
Tripiṭaka” (Less: 21a).
2
CM γoul “axis, shaft, spindle; pivot; trunk; core; cernel; wick of a lamp; center, nucleus, heart (as of matter); origin;
foundation, basis; aorta; central, main, chief; pivotal; fundamental, basic; general” (Less:362a); nom-un sang “library”
(Less:590a); bid < Skt. veda (I would like to thank Prof. Klaus Sagaster for the elucidation of the Mongolian term, pr.com.);
šastir “religious or philosophical textbook, exposition; explanation; story, narrative; treatise, tract” (Less:753b); daγun
“sound, noise; voice; tone; musical sound; song” (Less:219a); sudur “sutra; book; textbook; chronicle” (Less:734b).
 332

faire (et les écrits qui en parlent). Pour les rois [...] il s’agit clairement de l’art de gouverner et d’une sagesse politique;
p.133: Il désigne alors la morale et la bonne conduite des laïcs (synonyme de mi chos) servant de préparation au
bouddhisme (lha chos) [...]. On pourrait aussi y voir l’acception d’excellence ou d’éminence; LI/COBLIN:442: wisdom,
knowledge; the entire body or system of indigenous, pre-Buddhist beliefs; statecraft (when referring to the principles
underlying the king’s rule); STEINRA.1988:50: devin; COBLIN.1991a:317b-8a: renders the general idea of “cultural tradition”,
with specific exclusion of the technical areas of writing and mathematics. In “native” texts of the Royal Period the OT
word gtsug lag seems to have referred to the entire body of pre-Buddhist religious belief and custom, especially where this
served as the basis for royal power; HAHN.1997:142: gtsug (bk)lag(s) that which has been (or: is to be) recited in order to be
penetrated, or: to be impressed on the mind; KAPSTEIN.2000:55: the Sacred Authority; DOTSON.2007b:6: governmental system;
BELLEZZA.2008:384: religious system; p.482: learned ritualist; SCHAIK: custom (http://earlytibet.com/2008/04/30/buddhism-
and-bon-iii-what-is-yungdrung/; 07.09.2014); WALTER.2009:227-8: the transmitted (for want of a better term) power which
consisted of a superior ability to protect, guide, and conquer that made btsan-pos valuable as leaders; DOTSON.2013a:91: art
of governance; p.312: governance.

[E] *gtsug gi lag “branches [that originate from] the crown”

[M] (N) 1principles, principia; 2code; sacred literature
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NSOUR+N]
[R] ru lag
[A] gtsug. We should start our survey on one of the most commonly analysed OT compounds, gtsug
lag, with a closer look at phrases and other OT formations (except for proper names) that contain
the morpheme gtsug1 (the examples are ordered according to the syntactic function of the word):
1
Subject:
pywa ’i ni gtsug myi ’gyur (PT 1287:476)
“The gtsug of pywa does not change.”

gtsug myi (r3) ’gyurd (PT 1290:r2-3)

“gtsug does not change.”

kye bka’ draṅ ni gsuṅ rtag pas / (3v9) cho lo ni gtsug ’dus kyis / daṅ sems ni rnal du phob / (ITJ 739:3v8-
9)
“Oh! Because through a sincere word [and] eternal voice gtsug of dice gathered, give up [your]
pure mind to rest!”2

btsan po lha sras / ’o lde spu rgyal // gnam gyi (2) lha las myi’i rjer gśegs pa // chos lugs bzaṅ / (3) po ni
gźar gtsug myi ’gyur // mṅa’ thaṅ chen po ni nam źar (4) kyaṅ byin myi ñam ste // (Khri 1-4)
“The btsan po, the Divine Son, ’O lde spu rgyal, who came down from the gods of the sky as a ruler
of men; concerning [his] good customs and manners, [their] gtsug will never change; concerning
[his] great authority, [its] splendour will never decay either.”
2
Object:
dguṅ sṅo ni ma ʼog gi / “Above the dark earth

1
gtsug is glossed in lexicographic sources with, e.g., “der Scheitel; ein Wasserwirbel, Strudel; der Federbusch bei Vögeln”
(Sch:437b), “1crown of the head, vertex; 2tuft, crest; 3whirlpool, eddy, vortex” (J:433b), “1the top, crown of the head; 2arc.
palace” (Gs:848c). The attested CT meaning “whirlpool” comes in all probability from a characteristic hair whorl that
occurs on top of the head.
2
I assume that gtsug in this metrical passage is an independent morpheme and does not represent another compound.
This assumption can be confirmed by the following sentence from the same document:
lha daṅ ni srin gñis gyis / (15v8) cho lo ni rgyan cig btab / (ITJ 739:15v7-8)
“Both, deities and demons, cast the ornament of a dice.”
It seems legitimate to postulate the syntactic equivalence of the phrases cho lo ni gtsug and cho lo ni rgyan.
 333

dog mon ni ya steṅs na // [which is] below the blue sky,

gtsug btsugs ni btsugs legste / [one] established the gtsug. Being well established,
mthos te ni dguṅ myi rdib (PT 1287:457) being lofty, the sky does not fall down.”
3
Adjunct:
[bzo ba dge sloṅ rin snaṅ mdzad daṅ / rgyal (5) gzaṅ daṅ dpal ldan daṅ lag dpon thams cad] [dge legs su
byed pa]ATTR gtsug nas (6) gla la mi stobs ldan rnamste / brag la sku gzugs daṅ dar ma ’di rnams bris pa daṅ
(’Bis.2 4-6)
“craftsmen: monk(s) Rin snaṅ mdzad, Rgyal gzaṅ, and Dpal ldan together with all the architects,
[all] who work well, being strong men from gtsug to ?bottom?, carved these images and dharma
text on the rock.”1
4
Head of an NP:
gtsug che ba (PT 1287:354) “a great gtsug [lag]”2
5
Apposition:
gtaṅ rag spyi bo gtsug gyis ’tshal źiṅ mchis so (PT 126:151)
“Thanksgiving was wished with the top of the head, the gtsug.”
6
Determiner:
yar lha śam po ni gtsug gi lha’o (PT 1286:41)
“Yar lha śam po is the deity of gtsug.”
To sum up the information from those among the above examples the interpretation of which
leaves no room for doubt, we can state that gtsug would not change or at least one wished that it
does not change.3 In a poetic fragment from PT 1287, gtsug is said to be set over the earth and
because it is good and lofty the sky does not break down (l.457). Furthermore, we read about gtsug of
dice in which case the word seems to be synonymic with rgyan “1ornament, decoration” (J:107a);
both phrases can be juxtaposed with the CT compound cho lo ris “the figure of a die, a square figure”
(J:161b). The clause *cho lo’i gtsug ’dus would then express the fact that a combination of particular
figures was achieved (lit. gathered) in a cast. In the NP spyi bo gtsug, the latter word should be
understood as an apposition, i.e., it either specifies spyi bo “crown of the head, top” (J:334a) more
closely as its hyponym or is its near synonym. The last quoted passage glorifies Yar lha śam po as
the deity of gtsug. Furthermore, in PT 1051:3 we read: sman ri ni gtsug sdiṅs (PT 1051:3) “gtsug and the

1
KARMAY (1998:63) gives a different transliteration of the most controversial fragment: “[...] byed pa (the reading of the
word byed pa is uncertain) daṅ gtsug nas bla la”. On account of the fact that the reading of the most important part of the
inscription is uncertain, the interpretation of the function and meaning of gtsug remains tentative. However,
grammatically gtsug can be here either an INTR verb the subject of which stands in ABS - such a verb has not been attested
so far - or a noun. The latter understanding is convergent with other occurrences of the word in OT sources whereas no
verbal usage of gtsug has been documented so far. HAHN (1997:142 and n.21) proposed to read gtsug in gtsug myi ’gyur as a
verb but such a reading is unacceptable for syntactic reasons.
2
Here gtsug stands most probably for gtsug lag the second member of which has been omitted from the text for metrical
reasons. This is evidenced by the passages cited below in which gtsug lag is given the attribute chen po (see the Text
section).
3
Although there exists also the possibility that gtsug in the clause gtsug myi ’gyur (PT 1287:476; PT 1290:r2-3; Khri 3) stands
in fact for *gtsug lag. Compare hereto the sentence from ITJ 751:41v3 quoted in the Text section.
 334

heart of Sman ri”. Here, gtsug sdiṅs is a coordinate compound both members of which denote two
most evident characteristics of a mountain: its peak (gtsug) and the main part, the body (sdiṅs). All
this confirms that the original meaning of gtsug was *“sth. that is on the top of sth. else”, i.e. “the
crown”. The word obviously possessed great potential for metaphorical usage: the “crown” of the
earth is obviously the firmament; the “crown” of a dice is most probably its highest figure; the
“crown” of a mountain is its peak.1

I propose to include the following lexemes into one word family together with gtsug: tsug “for ci-ltar
adv. interrog. and correlat., how, as, [...] In W. com. in the form zug” (J:432a); tshug pa “W. to, up to,
till” (J:449a), “till” (CDTD:6803) with its dialectal variant tshag pa “up to” (CDTD:6736)2; gzug “top, la’i
of a mountain-pass” (J:494b).3

-lag. There is a small group of enigmatic Old as well as Classical Tibetan compounds formed with the
second member -lag which cannot be traced back directly to lag pa “1hand, arm; 2fore-paw; also paw
or foot in gen[eral]” (J:541a-b). These include: dgon lag “Dependancen, jedem Kloster zugeordnete
Zweigkloster der gleichen Sekte” (TUCCI/HEISSIG 1970:164); ñiṅ lag “a category not familiar to us;
members of a second order” (J:187b; for details see s.v. ñiṅ rim); dbon lag “baγ-a saγ-a (“trifle,
bagatelle; little bits, odds and ends; trifling; a bit, a little”, Less:67b); salburi (“branch of river or
road; sprout, shoot; branch office or establishment, subdivision; department, part”, Less:664b) keyid
(“convent, monastery, temple”, Less:444b)” (SR.2:301.4-5), “od[er] dgon lag wenig, unbedeutend,
Kleinigkeit” (Sch:558b)4; maṅ lag (PT 1134; ITJ 731) “crown (of a plant); branches, twigs”; rtsa lag
“bandhu relations, kindred” (J:438a); ya lag pa “’branch relative’, a synonym for pha spun spad”
(DOTSON 2009:65n96)5; yan lag “1member, limb; 2fig. branch of a river, branch of a tree; 3branch,
section, separate part of a doctrine or science, a particular head, point, thought, in a treatise”
(J:507a; for the etymological meaning of yan- see s.v. ñiṅ rim); ru lag “dependency of the (Three)
Horns” (for details see s.v.); le lag “appendix, supplement, addition” (Cs:270a; < *le’u’i lag or *le’u’i yan
lag). These lexemes seem to denote objects, understood as a collective, that have originated from
one common source which is given by the first member of each compound. Thus, -lag could be
explained here as *“a member, element; branch”. Accordingly, yan lag refers to elements of outer
layer as opposed to ñiṅ lag which is a collective term for elements of internal order (for details see

1
Other OT compounds containing the syllable gtsug are assumed to be formed from gtsug lag. For details see below.
2
One could also consider tshags “1cap” (J:444a) as a further cognate with the vowel -a-.
3
The latter lexeme seems to be attested as zug in OT compound ri zug, lit. “top of a mountain”, that denoted a kind of
military station situated on a hill. For more details on the function of ri zug during the Tibetan Empire see TAKEUCHI 2004
who, however, derives zug from ’dzug (sic! instead of ’dzugs; p.51a-b).
Whether the verbs ’dzugs and zug also belong here - an hypothesis rather implausible on semantic grounds - remains to
be clarified.
4
There exists apparently a confusion in the sources concerning the two compounds: dbon lag and dgon lag. dbon lag “trifle”
is derived from dbon po “1grandson, nephew” (J:389a) whereas the latter compound goes back to dgon pa “2hermitage;
3
monastery” (J:87b).
5
It is in all likelihood a derivative of *yab lag which is attested in OT sources, as far as I am aware, only once as a part of
the proper name Mgos khri bzaṅ yab lag (PT 1287:113). The literal meaning of *yab lag pa would be “those who belong to
yab lag” or “those who are part of yab lag”.
 335

s.v. ñiṅ rim), etc. Therefore, the term gtsug lag would encompass a collective of things that have their
common source in gtsug, “crown”.1

gtsug lag - a contextual analysis. chos bzaṅ “good customs” and gtsug lag che (or sometimes: gtsug che)
“great gtsug lag” characterise a perfect ruler, Tibetan (PT 1287:354, 358) but also, for instance,
Chinese (ST Treaty E 20). The same qualities are said to guarantee the ruler that his dynasty will last
(ITJ 751). The latter document extends also the list of people endowed with invariable gtsug lag by
lords and councillors of the country. From PT 1287:367 we learn that a ruler could make gtsug lag
and then it should be an example to be followed by common people. The most interesting passage
from the Chronicles concerns the phrase gtsug lag bkaʼ grims ched po (l.452) where bka’ grims (read:
khrims) ched po functions as an apposition to gtsug lag. From this we can infer that the terms were if
not strictly synonymous then at least closely related semantically. The same sentence makes us
believe that this invention as well as the remaining ones from the list came into being first after the
script had appeared. The ’Phyoṅ rgyas inscription informs us of the existence of gtsug lag of gods
that shall remain unimpaired if a btsan po rules according to the tradition of his forefathers.
However, gtsug lag seems to have been ascribed not only to human or anthropomorphic beings but
also to such abstract notions like good customs and manners or perpetuity as can be inferred from
the inscription on the tomb of Khri lde sroṅ brtsan. One observes a more general meaning and usage
of the compound in divinatory or mythological texts ITJ 733, ITJ 734, and ITJ 738. According to these,
gtsug lag characterised common people of yore who are treated as wicked in the age of decline (ITJ
734). Here also gtsug lag acquires the attribute bzaṅ “good” instead of che “great” from the official
texts of the inscriptions or the Chronicles.2 As a matter of fact, the clause bu gcig draṅ mkhraṅ che myi
pha log po la dṅan myi byed nor myi / (1r9) tshold te (ITJ 734) “a son of great integrity, not misusing
[his] power against other people, not having sought for wealth” could be seen as a definition of a
person that is guided by gtsug lag. Finally, a positive character of gtsug lag is once more confirmed in
the divination from ITJ 738 where a lot which has fallen for gtsug lag is stated to be very auspicious.

In order to further specify the OT meaning of gtsug lag we should now examine OT compounds the
underlying structure of which can be reconstructed as containing the element gtsug lag. The
following formations can be listed:
gtsug mkhan < *gtsug lag mkhan “one who knows gtsug lag [of pywa]” (PT 1287:474);
gtsug lag khaṅ, lit. “a house of gtsug lag”;

1
It is relevant to mention here the etymology of the Skt. term ārṣa which is glossed already in Mvy:1432 as the first
equivalent of gtsug lag. To wit, ārṣa is derived from ṛṣi “a singer of sacred hymns, an inspired poet or sage, any person who
alone or with others invokes the deities in rhythmical speech or song of sacred character” (MW:226c) and its etymological
meaning is “relating or belonging to or derived from Ṛishis (i.e. the poets of the Vedic and other old hymns)” (MW:152c).
Similarly, the etymological meaning of gtsug lag is assumed to have been *“anything derived from gtsug”. In this case the
compounding by means of the morpheme -lag would correspond to the process of word formation by means of vowel
gradation in Sanskrit.
2
The decision to choose che instead of bzaṅ as an attribute of gtsug lag could have been a stylistic one. We can surmise that
the official texts underwent editing and their language was more well thought-out as opposed to rather natural text
production in case of mythological texts.
 336

chos gtsug (PT 16:25v4) for chos gtsug lag, see below;
chos gtsug lag “customs and gtsug lag” (PT 16 33v1; ITJ 733:10; ’Phyoṅ 2).
From these it appears that gtsug lag can be acquired and that there existed specialists in different
kinds of gtsug lag. The compound is mentioned throughout the OT literature in connection with chos.
Their connotational proximity finds its most straightforward expression in the compound chos gtsug
lag - a fact that allows us to state that the words belonged to one semantic field and expressed both
abstract notions.1

Combining the results of our morphological survey with the information we gathered from the
contextual analysis we can assert that gtsug lag was a collective term denoting abstract ‘things’ that
originated from the “crown”, i.e. the highest level of existence. It qualified any good man but during
the imperial period especially rulers who were supposed to lead their folk according to gtsug lag.
Hence, I propose to render the original meaning of gtsug lag by *“principia” or less specialised,
*“principles”.2 Already during the earliest period of the history of Tibetan language the term
underwent a semantic widening to denote also everything that contained “principles”, i.e.
collections of principles, codes, e.g., sacred or scientific books.3 The proposed meaning would also
explain why gtsug lag could be used in translating from Sanskrit language terms that contained the
polysemantic word nīti “leading or bringing, guidance, management; conduct, (esp.) right or wise or
moral c[onduct] or behaviour, prudence, policy, political wisdom or science, moral philosophy or
precept” (MW:565a; cf. also HAHN 1997:134-5).

Against any attempts to look for a loan translation behind gtsug lag one can emphasise its
widespread usage in many OT documents of miscellaneous contents as well as its native word
formation for which further examples could be cited.
1
[T] chos bzaṅ ni gtsug che bas // “Thanks to [his] good customs [and] great
principles
rgyal pran ni kun kyaṅ ʼdum // (PT 1287:354) all the petty kings reconciled.”

1
In the OT but openly Buddhist text ITJ 339:2v2, we find the expression gtsug lag dam pa’i chos which is commented upon
by VAN SCHAIK with the following words “the dharma is called ‘the supreme tsuglag’”
(http://earlytibet.com/2007/07/31/buddhism-and-bon-ii/; 25.08.2014). This rendering goes, however, against the
syntactic rules of the language. Instead, the phrase should be understood either as “the dharma of the noble gtsug lag” or,
what is more probable in the light of what has been stated above as regards the semantic relationship between chos and
gtsug lag in early literature, “gtsug lag, the dharma of the noble (ones?)”. The first interpretation reads gtsug lag dam pa as
one NP whereas in the latter dam pa’i chos is an apposition to gtsug lag.
2
Compare hereto the etymology of Eng. principle < Latin principium “source”, principia “foundations”, < princeps, princip-
“first, chief” (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/principle?q=principle; 25.08.2014).
3
In our examples, the CT meaning “sacred literature” is attested only once, namely in PT 943 - a collection of stories that,
even though translated into Tibetan from Chinese, belong to Sanskrit literature. I include by way of exception a passage
from this collection that contains the compound gtsug lag only for contrastive purposes. The compound is richly attested
in the early Buddhist literature from Dunhuang.
As a matter of fact, the semantic change from “principles” to “sacred literature” has succeeded most probably through
another formation, namely gtsug lag khaṅ “temple” < lit. *“house of principles”. Even today gtsug lag khaṅ denotes a room in
greater monasteries where sacred literature is kept and gtsug lag is widely explained as “sde snod” (see the Lexicographic
section). Hence, my assumption is that the original meaning *“house of principles” was re-interpreted as “house/room of
sacred books” giving rise to the new understanding of gtsug lag as “sacred book(s)/literature” already during the sṅa dar.
 337

lha sras ni gtsug che la // “To the divine son, whose principles are great,
chos bzaṅ ni rjed gśin źiṅ customs good, respect high (lit. good),
bkaʼ draṅ ni gsuṅ rtag laʼ / order just, [and] words constant,
(359) la boṅ ni srid gsol baʼ / (PT 1287:358-9) La boṅ offered [his] realm.”
btsan po khri sroṅ lde brtsan gyi riṅ la // chos bzaṅ srid che ste / rgyal po ni [gnam sa gñis kyi bar yul du
(367) brnam źiṅ // ʼgreṅ dud gñis kyi rje daṅ bdag mdzad pa ʼi gtsug lag chen po]O / myi ʼi dper ruṅ bar
mdzad do’ // (PT 1287:366-7)
“During the life of btsan po Khri sroṅ lde brtsan, the customs were good, the realm great; as regards
the king, [he] introduced (lit. made) great principles so that they were an example for people (lit. so
that they were suitable as an example of people) - [principles] of a one who, while having taken the
space between the sky and the earth as [his] land, functioned as a lord and master of both, men and
animals.”
bod la sṅa na yi ge (452) myed pa yaṅ // btsan po ʼdi ʼi tshe byuṅ nas // [bod kyi gtsug lag bkaʼ grims ched po
daṅ / blon po ʼi rim pa daṅ / che chuṅ (453) gñis kyi dbaṅ thaṅ daṅ / legs pa zin pa ʼi bya dgaʼ daṅ / ñe yo ba
ʼi chad pa daṅ / źiṅ ʼbrog gi thul ka daṅ dor ka daṅ / sluṅs kyi go bar bsñams (454) pa daṅ / bre pul daṅ /
sraṅ la stsogs pa]S // [bod kyi chos kyi gźuṅ bzaṅ po kun]APP // btsan po khri sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ las byuṅ ṅo /
(PT 1287:451-4)
“Even the writing, which Tibetans did not possess before, appeared during the lifetime of this btsan
po. Thereafter, the Tibetan principles - the great law, successions of councillors, prerogatives of
both, great and small ones, rewards for good ones that adhere [to us], punishments for culprits,
standardisation of thul ka and dor ka of fields and pastures, and of distances between (lit. of) sluṅs,
(weight units) bre, phul and sraṅ among others, all the good foundations of the Tibetan customs
appeared from the reign (lit. life) of the btsan po Khri sroṅ brtsan.”
rgyal po so so nas thugs thub byaste gna’i chos bzaṅ po daṅ gtsug lag [bzaṅ?] po na / [---]ṅ ṅo [---] // (8) so
so nas thugs thub du byaste yul re chos re gtsug lag re re byas par ’oṅ ṅo’ // (ITJ 733:7-8)
“Every king, having acted irresponsibly, [disregarded?] good customs and good principles of ancient
times. Every [---], having acted irresponsibly, every land, every custom, [and] all principles were
coming to be practised.”
dus ṅan pa daṅ tshe ṅan pa la yaṅ gtsug lag la sred pa1 (ITJ 733:17)
“even during bad days and bad times, those who desired principles”
chos tshul gñis kyaṅ / (20) gna’i gtsug lagi chos bzaṅ po ltar byasna / dusla babste ’chi na yaṅ gśin yul na’ [---
] y[u]l [d]u phyin te / ñon myi [moṅs?] [pa?] (21) skyid do’ // (ITJ 733:19-21)
“If [one] practiced both, customs and manners, according to good customs of ancient principles, in
death when the time comes, [being?] in the realm of dead, having gone to the land of [---], those
who are free from misery, will be happy.”
bu gcig draṅ mkhraṅ che myi pha log po la dṅan myi byed nor myi / (1r9) tshold te / gtsug lag gi myi ni ṅan
ces smad par ’oṅ ṅo // (ITJ 734:1r8-9)
“As regards a man of principles, a son of great integrity, not misusing [his] power against other
people, not having sought for wealth, [he] will be humiliated as ‘A wicked one’.”
gtsug lag kyi mo la [ba]b ste // [---] yid la ’tad ciṅ ’phrod pa daṅ ’dra ste bzaṅ rab bo // (ITJ 738:2v22)
“Fallen for a lot of principles, being like something pleasant and congenial to the mind, [it] is very
good.”

1
The reconstruction of the last few syllables of the sentence remains uncertain; this part has been omitted from the
quotation.
 338

’o lde spu rgyal gnam gyi lha las myi’i rjer gśegs pa yoṅ gis sku bla gñan / chab srid che / chos bzaṅ / gtsug
(35v3) lag che bas yul byuṅ sa dod tshun cad rje’i gduṅ ma gyurd te / (ITJ 751:35v2-3)
“Because ’O lde spu rgyal, who came down from the gods of the sky as the lord of men, came [to us],
due to powerful sku bla, great realm, good customs, [and] great principles, the lineage of the lords
did not change within the land that appeared [and] place [that] was prominent1.”
bod rje blon kyi gtsug lag ñi ma daṅ ’dra bar nam źar myi ’gyur ba daṅ / (ITJ 751:41v3)
“The principles of Tibetan lords and councillors, being like the sun, shall never change.”
lha btsan po khri sroṅ lde brtsan gyi źa (6) sṅa nas kyaṅ / yab myes kyi lugs bźin / (7) [lha’i gtsug lag ni ma
ñams / gnam (8) sa’i chos daṅ ni ’thun pa]r mdzad / sku (9) yon tan yoṅs kyis brjod pa’i yi ge / (10) nam źig
rdo riṅs la bris so // (’Phyoṅ 5-10)
“Also in the presence of the deity, btsan po Khri sroṅ lde brtsan, one day [one] wrote a text on a
stone pillar [which tells first of all that the btsan po], according to the ways of [his] father and
forefathers, acts so that (par) the principles of gods were not damaged [and] in agreement with the
customs of the sky and the earth, [and secondly] that [his] virtues were promulgated by all.”
btsan po lha sras / ’o lde spu rgyal // gnam gyi (2) lha las myi’i rjer gśegs pa // chos lugs bzaṅ po (3) ni gźar
gtsug (read: gtsug lag) myi ’gyur // mṅa’ thaṅ chen po ni nam źar (4) kyaṅ byin myi ñam ste (Khri 1-4)
“btsan po, the Divine Son, ’O lde spu rgyal, who came down from the gods of the sky as a ruler of
men; concerning [his] good customs and manners, [their] principles will never change; concerning
[his] great authority, [its] splendour will never decay either.”
g.yuṅ druṅ gi gtsug lag chen po (6) bźin du // [btsan po] lha sras khri lde sroṅ brtsan myi’i rje (7) mdzad pa
// lha’i lugs daṅ ’thun par ni mṅa’ thaṅ che (8) gnam gyi chos daṅ mtshuṅs par ni / bka’ brtsan te (Khri 5-8)
“In accordance with the great principles of perpetuity, btsan po, the Divine Son Khri lde sroṅ brtsan,
who acted as a ruler of men: [his] authority, being in agreement with the laws of gods, was great;
[his] orders, being similar to the custom of the sky, were mighty.”
[g]nam gyi lha las // myi’i rgyal por gśegs te // gtsug lag (9) [chen pos] ni // [---]d kyi srid btsugs // (ST
Treaty E 8-9)
“Having come down from the deities in the heaven as the king of men, [he] established the realm of
[---] thanks to [his] great principles.”
mtsho chen po’i [bar // ñi ma] (19) śar pa logs kyi rgyal po ste // lho bal gźan daṅ myi ’dra [bar // srid daṅ]
(20) chos bzaṅ // gtsug lag che bas // bod daṅ yaṅ // ’thab kyi zla [// gñen] (21) gyi [do] ste // (ST Treaty
E 18-21)2
“Being the king of the region between great sees where the sun rises, unlike other foreigners, due to
[his] good srid and customs as well as great principles, [he] was a match in fighting even with
Tibetans [and] a companion in friendship.”
2
rgyal pos ’di sñam du bsams so // [yi ge daṅ gtsug lag las [dud ’gro gaṅ gi spu dog gser ltar ’dug na / ṅes par
byaṅ cub sems dpa’ yin te / skyes bu chen (5) po yin no]QUOT źes ’byuṅ na / ci’i phyir rṅon pa ’di la bya dga’
sbyin / gal te byin na bdag kyaṅ gsad (read: gsod or bsad?) pa daṅ tha myi dad do]QUOT sñam bsams nas / (PT
943:57r4-5)
“The king thought: ‘If it stands in texts and sacred literature that when the fur of whatever animal is
like of golden colour, being certainly a bodhisattva, [it] is a great person, why [should] I offer any
present to this hunter? If I give [it to him], I myself will not differ from a killer.’”

1
JÄSCHKE glosses dod pa as “to project, to be prominent; also elongated” (258b).
2
The bracketed elements are reconstructed after RICHARDSON 1985:110.
 339

106 rtsis gra

CT rtsis grwa
Sch:75a: eine Schule für Astronomie, Astrologie etc. (s.v. rtsis grwa); J:75a: a school where mathematics are taught (s.v. rtsis
grwa); D:239a: a school where mathematics is taught (s.v. rtsis grwa); Desg:163b: école pour les mathématiques et
l’astronomie (s.v. rtsis gra); R.7:206b: астрологическая (астрономическая) школа; astrological (astronomical) school (s.v.
rtsis grwa).
DTH:131: calcul; DOTSON.2013a:272: matters concerning accounts.

[E] *rtsis kyi grwa “school of calculation”

[M] (N) school of calculation
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] khyim rtsis / rtsis mgo / źal ce gra
[A] I propose to identify the second element of the compound with the CT grwa “1angle, corner; lap,
lappet, extremity; 2school; 3a cell (?)” (J:75a). For other compounds of analogical structure see, e.g.:
klog grwa “a reading-school” (J:75a); sgom grwa “a meditating-school” (J:75a); sṅags grwa “a school for
mystical theology” (J:75a); ’dul grwa “a training-school, seminary” (J:75a); sman grwa “a medical
school” (J:75a); źal ce gra “school of law” (see s.v.); bzo grwa “a school for artisans” (Cs:123b); yig grwa
“a writing-school” (J:75a); slob grwa “school, school-room, school-house” (J:587b).

Alternatively, one could reconstruct the underlying structure of the compound in question as *rtsis
kyi slob grwa - an NP glossed in SUMATIRATNA’s dictionary as “boduqu (“to calculate, compute, reckon,
count, estimate”, Less:109a) surγaγuli (“school; teaching, doctrine; training, exercise”, Less:739a)”
(SR.2:548.4). However, the word slob grwa does not seem to be attested in OT sources, therefore the
proposed reconstruction *rtsis kyi grwa.

The passage quoted below mentions three calculation-schools (rtsis gra gsum); thus, one could
assume that the term encompassed different systems of calculations, like astrological and divinatory
ones. Here calculation schools are mentioned together with a school of law which all together were
obviously perceived as one functional system. This observation would confirm the hypothesis put
forward by DOTSON (2007b) concerning the usage of dice and divination in judicial practice.

[T] spuṅ sad zu tse ʼdzaṅs kyad kyi tshad ni // rtsis gra gsum (97) źal ce gra bźi yaṅ rna bas ñan źiṅ gchod /
(PT 1287:96-7)
“Spuṅ sad zu tse, as concerns the measure of [his] wisdom, was deciding while listening (lit. with
[his] ears) to three schools of calculation, four [together with the] school of law.”

107 rtsis mgo

[V] mgo (Or.8212.187:1; scribal error)
LCh:636c: piṇḍalakṣaṇa (s.v. rtsis kyi rtsis mgo); Negi.11:4738b: kriyākāraḥ; p.4738b: uddiśati sma (s.v. rtsis mgo phog); p.4739a:
uddiśatu (s.v. rtsis mgo phog śig); DSM:706b: źib bśer byas pa (s.v. rtsis mgo bgyi ba); BYD:436a: rtsis byas pa’i bsdoms tho.
Gs:860b: sb. who is capable in accounting (s.v. rtsis mgo thon pa); WTS.9:156a: der Beginn der Zählung (s.v. ’khos śam).
THOMAS.1933:390: census; DTH:31: recensement; p.37: commença le dénombrement (for rtsis mgo bgyis - JB); TLTD.3:168b:
total of account; URAY.1972b:27: the head (i.e. the preparatory stage) of the census; URAY.1975:161: le commencement de la
conscription; URAY.1990:425: beginning of the registration; COBLIN.1991a:319: main accounting; [In PT 986] an “account” of
 340

the laws of Shang; RICHARDSON.1992:107: head of account; UEBACH.2003:22: the beginning of the account/writing;
DOTSON.2007b:7: legal and bureaucratic manual; manual; code; DOTSON.2009:54: manual, protocol; SCHAIK.2011:53: manual;
DOTSON.2012:175: manual.

[E] *”rtsis [mgo nan]APP “an account [which is] an incipit”

[M] (N) initial account
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTappositional; STRC[N+[N+VV1]]
[R] khyim rtsis / mgo nan / rtsis gra
[A] The doubled entry for the year 743/4 of the Old Tibetan Annals provides us with first hints
regarding the nature of rtsis mgo:
ITJ 750:294-5 Or.8212.187:1-2
S: pha los gyi byaṅ bu bor bod yul gyi pha los gyi [rtsis] mgo mdzad1
W: rgod g.yuṅ gyi pha los (295) cen po bkug pha los bgyis
The passages concern the same events which, however, are described in different words. According
to ITJ 750, in the summer, tablets were issued for a census, whereas Or.8212.187 speaks of a *rtsis mgo
of a census. These events are followed in the winter by a great convocation of populace or, as stated
in the other document, by undertaking a census. We observe that the account of Or.8212.187 is more
concise and unspecific than that of ITJ 750; the former text uses generalised statements whereas the
latter speaks in more details. We can infer also that issuing tablets was a preliminary action,
probably one from among many that resulted in conducting a census.

One finds in the OTA the verbal phrase rtsis bgyis (for examples see OTDO) that can be juxtaposed
with rtsis mgo bgyis from the same work.2 Thus, even though Or.8212.187 contains an NP rtsis gyi mjug
(l.11)3 that, at first glance, would speak for the reconstruction *rtsis kyi mgo, I assume that it is rtsis-
that functions as the head of the compound. This assumption is additionally supported by the
passage from Or.15000/326:r2 where rtsis mgo functions as a direct object of the verb bris.

Three OT documents (Or.15000/326, ITN 475, ITN 548) refer explicitly to themselves as rtsis mgo
evidencing concurrently the correctness of the above analysis as concerns the identification of the
head element. We can infer that the compound referred to a preliminary account that was made at
the beginning of a particular administrative means and was preserved until the proceedings were
completed.

Since both elements of the compound taken at their face value, i.e. as rtsis- and mgo-, are nouns and
the former was stated to be the head, the only possible reconstruction of the syntactic relationship

1
Although the text reads mgo mdzad I propose to amend it to *rtsis mgo mdzad. The main reason behind this reconstruction
is that the phrase mgo mdzad, nor any of its possible equivalents (i.e. *mgo byed or *mgo bgyid), is not attested elsewhere in
OT sources.
It is worth mentioning in this context that Or.8212.187 seems to be using the verb mdzad whenever PT 1288 and ITJ 750
use bgyid. The latter documents make use of mdzad only when explicitly referring to btsan po whereas this restriction does
not seem to be observed in Or.8212.187.
2
Although in later lexicographic sources one finds mgo byed glossed with “to lead, to command, to be at the head” (J:91a), I
was not able to trace this phrase or any of its possible equivalents in the OT documents.
3
As opposed to rtsis (mgo) bgyis, rtsis gyi mjug is attested with the verb bcad (ibid.).
 341

within the formation is to understand it as an appositional compound. This hypothesis would,

however, require mgo- to represent a hyponym or a near-synonym of rtsis-. In fact, we have already
analysed a lexeme that, first, contains the syllable mgo-, and, second, refers to a kind of official
document. To wit, I propose to reconstruct the underlying structure of rtsis mgo as *rtsis [mgo nan]APP,
lit. “an account [which is] an incipit”, i.e. “initial account”.1

[T] lug gi lo’i dgun zlugs byaṅ gis bul tu stsal te / rtsis mgo bźin thaṅ la’ (16) brgal nas // (PT 997:15-6)
“In the winter of the sheep year, having requested [him] to present [it] by means of an information-
tablet, [one] quarreled about the value in pursuance of the initial account.”2
rgya rje li yug / śa cu na mchis pa’i (20) tshe / nas khal brgya’ daṅ khre ci (< *ci tshe) khal bcu nos pa / stsaṅ
dam źag gi rtsis mgo / reg zig daṅ myi sbyar źiṅ god stsal par (21) źaṅ lon ched pos gnaṅ nas / (PT 1111:19-
21)
“At the time when the Chinese lord Li yug was staying in Śa cu, those who received hundred khal of
barley and ten khal of millet were allowed by great aristocrats to be paid the loss while not having
compared the initial account of dam źag grain with the notes taken.”
blon che stoṅ rtsan gyis / moṅ pu sral ʼdzoṅ duʼ (28) bsduste / rgod g.yuṅ dbye źiṅ / mkho śam chen pho bgyi
baʼi rtsis mgo bgyi bar lo gchig / (PT 1288:27-8)
“Grand councillor [Mgar] stoṅ rtsan [yul zuṅ] convened [the council] at Sral ’dzoṅ [of] Moṅ pu; the
initial account of braves and weaklings, that were divided, as well as of the great administrative
arrangements, that were undertaken, was made; thus one year.”
myig mar las ’byuṅ ba’ / mun dmag btus (338) pe’i rtsis mgo daṅ bla’i bka’ gsuṅ ba’ dag daṅ sbyar na / mun
(339) mun dmag gźan kun bsdu / (ITJ 740:337-9)
“When [one] have compared what appears from the myig mar with the initial account of border
guards, that were gathered, and with orders of authorities, all the other border guards shall be
gathered.”
blon che khri ʼbriṅ gyis ʼo yugi tsha steṅsu mun (105) magi rtsis mgo bgyis pha daṅ / (ITJ 750:104-5)
“Grand councillor [Mgar] khri ’briṅ [btsan brod] made at Tsha steṅs of ’O yug the initial account of
border guards.”
bod yul gyi pha los gyi mgo (read: rtsis mgo) mdzad / dgun po braṅ brag mar na bźugste / dgun ʼdun blon ce
cuṅ bzaṅ gyis rnam(2)su bsduste / pha los bgyis par lo cig / (Or.8212.187:1-2)
“[One] prepared the initial account of the populace of Tibet. In the winter, the court stayed in Brag
mar. Grand councillor [’Bro] cuṅ bzaṅ [’or maṅ], having convened the winter council at Rnam, made
the census.”
dbaṅ po daṅ źiṅ ’god kyi riṅ lugs kyis sug las ’tshal ba’i rtsis mgo myiṅ smrar bris pa (Or.15000/326:r2)
“an initial account of demanded work written by the owner and the representative of źiṅ ’god in
order to announce the names”

1
Alternatively, one could postulate to reconstruct the compound as *rtsis kyi mgo nan, lit. “an incipit of an account”, for
which compare, for instance, khyim yig gi mgo nan that refers to a mgo nan of an official document (khyim yig ~ rtsis). In this
case, however, one would have to reckon again with mgo as the head of the compound - an interpretation already
dismissed above.
2
The exact meaning of the phrase thaṅ la brgal is uncertain. RICHARDSON translates the latter part of the clause as “and
when it had been scrutinized under each head of account” (1992:107). In my rendering, I follow the examples quoted by
JÄSCHKE, like mi la rgol ba zu (sic! read: źu) ba “to find fault with another (higher in rank), to pick a quarrel with him”
(J:104b).
 342

rtsis mgo las ’gal te / bźeṅs dral daṅ thoṅ bros bgyis (r6) pa źig mchis na / źiṅ bye’u non du bgyis te / thog
blar bsdu / (Or.15000/326:r5-6)
“If there is a one who, having violated the initial account, did bźeṅs dral or escaped the plough,
having to catch the źiṅ bye’u, the harvest shall be gathered to authorities.”
yos bu lo la no[---] rtsis mgo (Or.15000/326:v1)
“an intial account of [---] in the year of the hare”
źib du rtsis mgo goṅ du stsald pa lags (ITN 475:r1)
“It is an initial account in detail that has been given earlier.”
sug las [b]gyi ba’i rtsis mgo (ITN 548:r2)
“an initial account of a handwork that shall be done”1

108 mtshan źiṅ

DSM:731b-2a: mtshan mo’i tshe kha nas me ’bar ba.
DTH:136: la nuit; THOMAS.1957:137: be it night; DOTSON.2013a:276: by night.

[E] *mtshan gyi źiṅ (na) “(in) the duration of the night”
[M] (Adv) during the night, at night
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[R] ñin źiṅ
[A] A detailed semantic analysis of -źiṅ exemplified by further analogical formations is presented
s.v. ñin źiṅ. Apart from the passage cited in the Text section below, the compound is attested also in
PT 1052:r242, 248; PT 1068:20; PT 1194:33; ITJ 732:24; ITJ 738:3v123, 155; ITJ 739:17v8.

[T] mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ bar mchi ste // dbu sñuṅ bro mnaʼ gcod pa ʼi tshe // yar myi ʼbaṅs (162) kyis dpyad
paʼ //
myi bzaṅs ni rta bzaṅs śig //
ñin źiṅ ni phag tshal na /
mtshan źiṅ ni pyiṅ (163) bar mchiʼ /
dgraʼ ʼam ni zin ci ʼu
źes dpyad do // (PT 1287:161-3)
“By night, at the time of going to Pyiṅ ba and swearing an oath, a subject of a man from Yar, who
was examining [the three men], enquired:
‘Good men, good horses,
by day in a forest hideout,
by night going to Pyiṅ ba,
are [you] enemies or allies?’ (lit. “what are you, enemies or allies”)”

109 mtshe gzugs

DSM:735a: phru gu mtshe ma’i miṅ ste.
BDN:43n8: mtshe ma daṅ don gcig pa ʼdra la. tshe ʼdzugs te rte’u daṅ be’u daṅ lu gu sogs la’aṅ zer ba ʼdra; BTK:112n5: mṅal
du sbrul theṅs gcig la gñis brtsegs su sbrum ste btsas pa la’o. bkra śis pa’i don no; DUṄDKAR:1755b: phru gu mtshe ma’i miṅ;
BNY:138n11: lug mtshe ma (s.v. mtshe zugs); STK:151n10: lu gu daṅ lu gu mtshe ma źes bkral yod ciṅ. bkra śis pa’i rtags
mtshan nam bkra śis pa’i bya ba źes mchan ʼgrel byas pa’aṅ mchis so.

1
According to RKTS, rtsis mgo occurs plenty of times in the canonical literature although in some cases it should rather be
identified with another, later formed compound rtsis ’go/mgo glossed by SCHUH with “Zeitpunkt der Fixierung einer Epoche,
Epoche” (2012:1541). The underlying structure of the latter formation should most probably be reconstructed as *rtsis kyi
mgo, lit. “beginning of a calculation”.
 343

DTH:138: les deux jumeaux; DOTSON.2013a:279: ephedra we stuck in (reads gzugs as a verb - JB).

[E] *mtshe’i gzugs “a stalk of an ephedra plant”

[M] (N) ephedra-stalk
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] In both its occurrences mtshe gzugs is mentioned in the second part of a couplet paralleling
syntactically myi smon from the first verse of the couplet. In the second passage quoted below, mtshe
gzugs occurs in a story that narrates the birth of [Gnam ri] slon mtshan, the father of Khri sroṅ
brtsan (alias Sroṅ btsan sgam po) and the ruler that, according to traditional accounts, united the
central Tibetan clans thus laying foundations for the Tibetan Empire. It seems reasonable to connect
the birth-story and mtshe gzugs to mtshe “an evergreen grass which does not grow more than a cubit
in length and is burnt as incense also mixed with snuff in Tibet” (D:1040b-1a), i.e., “ephedra”, since,
according to HUBER, “both symbols (i.e., a stalk of mtshe and an arrow - JB) are directly connected
with rites for preservation of aspects of the life force or vitality principle.” (2013:279).1

I propose to reconstruct the primary meaning of gzugs as *”a stalk” (lit. “what is placed down”),
originally V3 of ’dzugs “1to prick or stick into, to set, to set a plant, into the ground, to plant; 2to put
down, to place; 3to lay out, to found; to institute; 4to prick, sting, pierce” (J:465b), from which the
classical meaning “body” has developed.2

[T] rje groṅs gyis myed / g.yu grugs (46) gyis myed myi / smon no smon du / ma ruṅ mtshe gzugs gzugsu
ma tsugs (read: btsugs) (PT 1134:45-6)
“Because the lord died, there is no [lord anymore]. Because the turquoise crumbled, there is no
[turquoise anymore]. As regards the man we prayed for, [it] was not suitable to pray [for him]. As
regards the ephedra-stalk, [one] did not plant [it] as a seedling.”
myaṅ dbaʼs kyis // mchid blaṅs pa // “Myaṅ and Dba’s gave a speech:
gzus ni lha bon to / ‘The honest ones offered [gifts] to the gods.
slon mtshan slon kol / (186) Slon mtshan [and] Slon kol,
gzus ni lha bon to // the honest ones offered [gifts] to the gods.
prin bya rgod kyis btagste // Having sent a message with a vulture,
tshes poṅ nag seṅ gis btags so / Tshes poṅ nag seṅ sent [it].
rje bden gyis ni bkol to / A true lord subordinated [a horse].
(187) sga bden gyis ni bstad do // [He] saddled [it] with a true saddle.
myi smon rum du byuṅ ṅo // The men [we] prayed for appeared in the womb.
mtshe gzugs rum du ʼkhruṅs so / / (PT 1287:185-7) The ephedra-stalks were born in the womb.’”

1
For more ethnographic information and a short survey of secondary sources in which the symbolism of the plant mtshe
is discussed see HUBER 2013:278n51 and 279f.
2
Compare hereto the following meanings of English trunk “1the main woody stem of a tree as distinct from its branches
and roots” and “2a person’s or animal’s body apart from the limbs and head”
(http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/trunk; 29.08.2014). For the derivation of gzugs from ’dzugs
compare the etymology of Eng. stalk: “prob[ably] fr[om] I[ndo]-E[uropean] base *st(h)el-, ‘to place’” (KLEIN 1966:1502b).
 344

110 ʼdzaṅs kyad

[V] ’dzaṅs (PT 1287:74, 75; truncation)
BYD:459a: mkhas khyad.
BDN:37n8: mdzaṅs khyad de mdzaṅs pa’i khyad par daṅ khyad chos.
DTH:131: le savoir; DOTSON.2013a:272: wisdom.

[E] *’dzaṅs pa’i khyad “a distinction of a wise one”

[M] (N) wisdom
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NEXPL+N]
[A] Beside providing the usual explanations for khyad, like “1difference, distinction; 2something
excellent, superior; 4part, division” (J:45a-b), JÄSCHKE makes also the following remark “3syllable
employed to form abstract nouns. A transition to such formations appears in the following sentence:
dkar nag chos kyi che khyad blta Mil. we wish to examine the difference of greatness or worth of the
white and the black religion; so also whenever a certain measure is given, and in general, when such
abstract nouns are used in a relative sense” (ibid.). Furthermore, he quotes some examples, like mtho
khyad “height”, zab khyad “depth”, phyug khyad “wealth” (ibid.), to which we could also add che khyad
“size, greatness” (D:423b). We find analogical formations also in OT documents, cf.: dpa’ khyad (PT
1290:v11); bla khyad (PT 1283:106); bzaṅ khyad (PT 1290:v11); ’dzaṅs kyad (PT 1287:96).

On account of the fact that khyad is attested exclusively as a noun1, there are only two possible
interpretations of the compounds:
1
appositional compound: “X, which is a distinction”;
2
determinative compound: “a distinction of X”.
The first solution has to be rejected due to the fact that khyad is neither a synonym of the terms that
form the first syllable of the above compounds nor can it be a hyponym of all of them. If, however,
‘X-khyad’ should be understood as determinative compounds, then their first members have to be
nouns. It can be easily observed that -khyad in these formations is attached to syllables that are
primarily considered adjectival roots, cf. mdzaṅs pa “1wise, learned; 2gentle, noble” (J:462a). As every
adjective, also these involved in compounding may be used as nouns with the main meaning
“sth./so. that possesses the quality of X”. In accordance with this, I propose to reconstruct the
compound in question as *’dzaṅs pa’i khyad, lit. “a distinction of a wise one; wisdom”, i.e., the quality
that distinguishes a person who is characterised as “wise”.2

1
According to OTDO, the remaining OT occurrences of the morpheme khyad ~ kyad are limited to the derivative khyad bar
can (PT 16:30v3; ~ CT khyad par can) and the unrelated reduplicative formation khyad khyud (PT 1134:36; PT 1136:40).
2
The etymology of khyad is uncertain mainly due to the fact that it does not seem to have any direct cognates in Tibetan. I
would like to put forward an hypothesis that khyad is the only remaining variant representing the original root consonant
cluster khy- of its word family. The latter one is supposed to have undergone palatalisation and is represented already
from the OT phase onwards by lexemes like gcod pa, ’chad pa, and possibly also chad pa. The original meaning of khyad could
have been *“what is cut off from sth.”, i.e., “a part, division”, like in the compound sa khyad “Ort, Platz”(Jä:592b; cf. also
CDTD:8704) < *“a part of a space”. For a similar semantic development compare ris “part, section, devision, region, tract,
side, corner, quarter, party” (Cs:235a; for more details concerning the etymology of ris see s.v. rkyen ris) ~ ’phri “to lessen,
 345

Although the authors of the previous transliterations of PT 1287 (DTH, OTDO, DOTSON 2013a) have
accounted for only one occurrence of the compound in question, some further examples should be
taken into consideration as well. The attached pictures (Figs. 8-10) demonstrate three of the
assumed occurrences:

Fig.8 ’dzaṅs kyaṅ (l.74) Fig.9 ’dzaṅs kyad (l.82) Fig.10 ’dzaṅs kyad (l.96)
In the second and third case, the last letter of the second syllable can be clearly stated to be -d for its
lower stroke is considerably longer than the one of the -ṅ- from the first syllable. As opposed to
these two instances, the formation presented in Fig. 8 has to be transliterated as ’dzaṅs kyaṅ. The last
letter of the second syllable is identical with the -ṅ- of ’dzaṅs: the lower stroke is short and there is
no upper horizontal stroke. However, it constitutes a part of the phrase ’dzaṅs kyaṅ tshad that can be
juxtaposed with ’dzaṅs kyad kyi tshad from the l.96. It is probable that at least the last two clauses
from the former passage were originally written in verse, cf.:
ltag brñan daṅ ʼdom / (74) ste //
ʼdzaṅs kyaṅ tshad myed do //
I assume that ’dzaṅs- represents here the compound ’dzaṅs k(h)yad, the second syllable of which has
been omitted due to the rules of the Tibetan metrics. This interpretation can also be supported by
the contextual analysis: it is much more logical to say that the wisdom of councillors had no
measure (*’dzaṅs khyad kyaṅ tshad myed do) than to state that councillors had no measure of wisdom
(*’dzaṅs khyad kyi tshad myed do). The latter reading would, in fact, give a negative impression of the
councillors - a point surely not intended in an eulogy.

Besides, I propose to reconctruct ’dzaṅs k(h)yad for the attested ’dzaṅs also in l.75. First of all, ’dzaṅs is
not documented as a noun and, secondly, it occurs within a phrase ’dzaṅs kyi tshad, the complete
version of which appears in l.96 as ’dzaṅs kyad kyi tshad.1

It is assumed that the deaspiration of kh- in the second syllable was additionally triggered by the
syllable-final -s of ’dzaṅs- - a condition not fulfilled by other aforementioned OT examples of
compounds with -khyad.

[T] de ʼi ʼog (73) du śud pu rgyal to re ṅa myis byas te // ʼdi yan chad kyi blon po ʼphrul daṅ ldan te / ltag
brñan daṅ ʼdom / (74) ste // ʼdzaṅs kyaṅ tshad myed do // (PT 1287:72-4)

diminish; to take away from” (J:360a) and the OT compound sa ris “territory” of stricking semantic similarity with the
discussed sa khyad.
1
The defective character of some of the phrases quoted above could prove that the respective passages have been copied
from another manuscript and the errors have occurred accidentally. Alternatively, some of the fragments could have
originally been written in verse but their metrical character had been lost in the course of time and the underlying
structure has not been recovered fully when they were rewritten in prose.
 346

“Thereafter, Śud pu rgyal to re ṅa myi served [as a councillor]; all the councillors including the
latter one (lit. the councillors up to this one) were endowed with ’phrul [and] committed to support.
[Their] wisdom had no measure.”
de ʼi ʼog du moṅ / (75) khri do re snaṅ tshab kyis byaste // ʼdzaṅs kyi tshad ni / rtsaṅ bod kyi jo bo mar mun
brlags te / (PT 1287:74-5)
“Thereafter, Moṅ khri do re snaṅ tshab served [as a councillor]; as regards the measure of [his]
wisdom, [he] conquered Mar mun, the lord of Rtsaṅ and Bod.”
(79) de ʼi ʼog du // mgar khri sgra ʼdzi rmun gyis byaste // ʼdzaṅs rgya daṅ ltag brñan ni // ʼdron po myi /
(80) gsum ʼgrogs te ʼgro na // [ʼdron po thog ma ʼi sñiṅ la ʼdi sems // bar ma ʼi sñiṅ la ʼdi // (81) sems / tha
ma ʼi sñiṅ la ʼdi sems śes]QUOT // grogs po la gtam byas pa daṅ // bden nam brdzun / (82) ʼdron po gsum kha
bkalte rmas na // khri sgra ʼdzi rmun mchi ba bźin mad de // ʼdzaṅs kyad // (83) ni de tsam mo // (PT
1287:79-83)
“Thereafter, Mgar khri sgra ’dzi rmun served [as a councillor]; as concerns [his] vast wisdom and
helpfulness, when going accompanied [by] three men, foreigners, [he] said to [his] friend what the
first foreigner was thinking about this [and that] in [his] mind, the middle about this [and that],
[and] the latter about this [and that]. When, having ?translated? (lit. loaded mouth), [one] asked the
three foreigners whether it was true or false, [it] was true like Khri sgra ’dzi rmun was saying.
Regarding [his] wisdom, it was just like that.”
spuṅ sad zu tse ʼdzaṅs kyad kyi tshad ni // rtsis gra gsum (97) źal ce gra bźi yaṅ rna bas ñan źiṅ gchod / (PT
1287:96-7)
“Spuṅ sad zu tse, as concerns the measure of [his] wisdom, was deciding while listening (lit. with
[his] ears) to three schools of calculation, four [together with the] school of law.”

111 źa ’briṅ
[V] źam ’briṅ (PT 126:153; Źol N 14; Źwa W 34; nasalisation)
źam riṅ (ITJ 1368:12, 25: nasalisation; elision)
CT źabs ’briṅ / źam riṅ / źam ’briṅ
Mvy:3742: sevakaḥ; źam riṅ byed pa, źam ’briṅ ba; YeŚes:461a: śa pi nar, tha pig chi, da ga gwa li, hu the chi (s.v. źa ’briṅ);
p.462a: da gal tha, śa dar da gal tha, śa dar da gag chi, hu thu chi (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); p.462b: da gag chi, śa pi nar, śa dar tha li lal;
gsol ka pa, gsol dpon (s.v. źam riṅ ba); śa pi, da gal tha, hu the chi; g.yog po (s.v. źam ’briṅ); Ts:148v3: baribsitaṃ (s.v. źabs
’briṅ byas); sebakaḥ, niyodzya (s.v. źabs ’briṅ pa’am źam riṅ ba); BYMD:101v1: tabiqči; daγaliči (s.v. źabs ’briṅ)1; SR.2:674.1-2: źa
’briṅ daṅ źam ’briṅ ni źabs ’briṅ; daγaγuli šabi nar (s.v. źa ’briṅ); p.680.1: yaruča terigüten (s.v. źa ’briṅ sogs); p.680.2: źam riṅ;
tabiqči (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); p.680.7-681.1: gsol dpon. ’di la gsol ka pa yaṅ zer; kötüči (s.v. źam riṅ ba); p.681.1: sebakaḥ; źabs ’briṅ
ste g.yog po. ’di la gsol ka pa yaṅ zer; tabiqči, kötüči (s.v. źam ’briṅ)2; GC:730a: źabs ’briṅ ste źabs phyis źam ’briṅ źes pa’aṅ
snaṅ. źabs ’briṅ. źam ’briṅ (s.v. źa ’briṅ); p.732b: g.yog po’i miṅ źam ’briṅ daṅ źa riṅ źam riṅ śes pa’aṅ snaṅ. źam ’briṅ. źa
riṅ. źam riṅ. źabs phyis (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); p.733a: źabs ’briṅ g.yog po’i miṅ du snaṅ. źabs ’briṅ (s.v. źam ’briṅ); LCh:670a: nirvṛta
(s.v. źam ’briṅ); p.670b: parivāra (s.v. źam ’briṅ ba); sevaka (s.v. źam ’briṅ ba); upasthāyaka (s.v. źam riṅ ba); BTC:2376a: ’khor
g.yog (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); Negi.12:5134a: = g.yog; paricārakaḥ; pādamūlikaḥ; niyojyaḥ; bhaṭṭaḥ (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); p.5136a-b:
1
upasthāyakaḥ; sevakaḥ; pauruṣeyaḥ; parivāraḥ; 2paricaryā; 0(sic!) purohitaḥ (s.v. źam riṅ ba); DSM:759b: źabs ’briṅ ba;
p.762b: źabs ’briṅ ṅam g.yog po (s.v. źam ’briṅ); p.762b-3a: 1źabs ’briṅ ṅam ’khor g.yog; 2ñe gnas (s.v. źam riṅ); BYD:465b: źabs
’briṅ ṅam źabs phyis; źa ’briṅ daṅ ’dra’o (s.v. źa riṅ); p.467b: źabs ’driṅ ṅam źam riṅ. g.yog po (s.v. źam ’briṅ); źam ’briṅ daṅ
’dra’o (s.v. źam riṅ).
BDN:44n20: źabs ʼbriṅ naṅ ma’am źabs ʼbriṅ pa ʼdra yin par snaṅ ba źes pa’i don (s.v. źa ʼbriṅ snaṅ ma pa); BTK:115n4: źabs
ʼbriṅ naṅ ma pa daṅ gcig go. źal ʼbriṅ. źam riṅ. źabs phyi. źabs ʼdegs. źabs tog. źal ta ma. źal ta ba. rim gro ma. riṅ gro ba.
mṅag gźug pa. mṅag gźug ma. źa ʼbriṅ. lag bde ba. lag bde ma. g.yog po. g.yog mo bcas ni don gcig miṅ gi rnam graṅs so;

1
CM daγaliči: daγa- “to follow, accompany, travel with; to submit oneself to, obey; to imitate; to observe, comply with”
(Less:216a), -li “deverbal nouns” (POPPE 1964:47), -či “suffix denoting person acting” (GRØNBECH/KRUEGER:100a) (s.v.
źabs ’briṅ); tabiqči: tabiq “offering, sacrifice; religious ceremony or service” (Less:761a), -či “suffix denoting person acting”
(GRØNBECH/KRUEGER:100a).
2
CM daγaγuli “retinue, cortege, follower; satellite; step-child of a father” (Less:217a); šabi “[Ch. sha-mi, S. çramaṇera] n.
disciple, pupil, student; novice; adherent; clerical or lay subject of a hutukhtu” (Less:747a); yaruča “footman, servant;
mental worker” (Less:1039b); kötüči “guide; escort; groom, orderly; officer’s servant” (Less:493b).
 347

DUṄDKAR:1788b: źabs ’briṅ ṅam ’khor g.yog gi miṅ daṅ ñe gnas la’aṅ ’jug go (s.v. źam riṅ); BNY:138n26: 1źabs ʼbriṅ naṅ ma;
2
gsaṅ ba’i gtam ñan chog pha’i g.yog po (s.v. źa ʼbriṅ snaṅ ma pa).
Cs:160b: an attendant, a servant (s.vv. źam ’briṅ, źam riṅ); Sch:486a: Jünger, Dienerschaft; p.487b: od[er] źam riṅ ein Diener,
Aufwärter (s.v. źam ’briṅ); J:471a: v. źabs (s.v. źa ’briṅ); p.472b: źabs phyir ’braṅ ba, źabs ’braṅ ba or ’briṅ ba to follow as a
servant, źam ’briṅ (pa), źam riṅ, źa ’briṅ servant (s.v. źabs); D:1064b: a corrupt form of źabs ’briṅ = źab (sic!) phyi an attendant,
a servant; = sku mdun presence of a great man (s.v. źam riṅ); = sku mdun pa personal attendant, a private secretary, officer in
waiting, an aide de camp (s.v. źam riṅ pa); Schr:377b: obsequiousness, a train or retinue, the servants, the attendants, the
train of a great personage (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); Desg:846a: źam riṅ = slob ma = źabs ’breṅ = źa ’briṅ servitur, suivant, disciple (s.v.
źam ’briṅ); R.8:50a: слуга; attendant, servant; p.57a-b: почт. слуга, прислужник, сопровождающий; hon. servant,
attendant (s.v. źabs ’briṅ); p.58a: см. ’bas ’briṅ (s.v. źam ’briṅ); 1присутствие высокопоставленного лица; presence of a
great man; 2см. źabs ’briṅ (s.v. źam riṅ); личный сопровождающий, личний секретарь; personal attendant; private
secretary; aide-de-camp (s.v. źam riṅ ba); Gs:924a: government officials (s.v. źabs ’briṅ pa); p.924b: sm. źabs phyi (s.v. źam riṅ;
źabs phyi “h. of g.yog po”, Gs:923c).
LALOU.1952:351: le desservant; n.8: pour źabs ’briṅ; p.357: serviteurs; RICHARDSON.1952:30: private attendants; RÓNA-
TAS.1955:268n46: servant; < źabs ’braṅ ba / ’briṅ ba “to follow as a servant” (s.v. źam ’briṅ); EMMERICK.1967:149b: servant (s.v.
źam ’briṅ); RICHARDSON.1985:17: personal attendance; LI/COBLIN:176: attendants, retinue; a changed or sandhi form of
źabs ’briṅ; PHUNTSOK.1990:55: rje las is interchangeable with the term źabs ’briṅ. This latter expression means either
“attendants given to the king” or “service rendered to the king by his attendant”; UEBACH.2008:58n8: the chief-servant (for
źa ’briṅ rje bo - JB); DOTSON.2011a:91n24: a servant of the rgyal; ZEISLER.2011:182: attendant; DOTSON.2013a:281: a servant;
p.286: private servant; UEBACH.2014:105: servant; źa ’briṅ naṅ pa the servant for inner affairs.

[S] *źa ’breṅ ”to follow the [btsan po’s] face”

[E] *źa ’breṅ ba “one following the [btsan po’s] face”
[M] (N) entourage
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[A] Contextual analysis. From PT 1042 it appears that the term źa ’briṅ denoted a group of
important people that were entitled to take part in a funeral ritual of a ruler and, above that, were
first to tread in the funeral cortege followed by aristocrat-?pages? (źaṅ lon źal ta pa; l.32).
Furthermore, in the same text the compound źa ’briṅ acquires the apposition rje bo thaṅ chen po from
which we learn that it was a group of great authority that was given one of tallies (khram) in the
funeral ritual (l.106). Due to the fact that the second tally shall be given to a sheep mount - a
psychopomp par excellence - a question arises as to whether źa ’briṅ were not also sacrificed to
likewise “accompany” the ruler in his afterlife? This assumption is made even more probable by the
next passage in which źa ’briṅ naṅ pa is mentioned among thugs gur, riṅ gur, dbon lob, zi mo, and horse
tack (ll.125-7) - things that were obviously deposited in a grave.

Other occurrences of the compound provide us with information concerning the status of źa ’briṅ in
non-religious context. We read that the position of a źa ’briṅ (more concretely, of a źa ’briṅ snaṅ ma
pa) was desired eagerly even by members of the most important clans, like Myaṅ in PT 1287:219. In
the same passage, the compound źa ’briṅ is determined by the word btsan po making it clear that
there existed a closer relationship between these two. Besides, we learn from ITJ 1368 that there
were also źa ’briṅ (or źam riṅ here) of a btsan mo (l.12) and royal mother and her children (yum sras,
l.25). The affiliation to źa ’briṅ was preceded by taking a vow (PT 1287:275). It appears that those who
were admited to the oath were individuals of higher social status (e.g., źaṅ lon, i.e., aristocrats in PT
1287:275) or persons distinguished by virtue of their merits (’os pa in Źwa W 34) but not necessarily
of Tibetan ethnicity since from the incomplete sentence in ITJ 1368:25 we can infer that an ’A źa
 348

aristocrat could join the źa ’briṅ as well. A guarantee to be allowed to enter źa ’briṅ (here: źam ’briṅ)
was perceived as a privilege offered for one’s service to the btsan po that was bestowed even upon
future generations (Źol N, Źwa W).

Morphology. At least three compounds are attested in OT documents that, on the one hand, contain
the syllable źa, and, on the other hand, are not documented in these forms in later literature or
lexicographic sources, i.e., źa sṅa, źa ’briṅ, and nam źa (also reduplicated as nam nam źa źa). Instead,
we find:
OT: źa sṅa źa ’briṅ nam źa
CT: źal sṅa źabs ’briṅ gźa’ gna’1
źal mṅa’ źam riṅ gźa’ pyi
źam ’briṅ gźa’ ma
źa riṅ gźar yaṅ ~ nam yaṅ
nam źag (in Balti, cf. J:303b)
From these we can infer that, depending on the context in which it appeared, the syllable źa has
been either replaced by another word (źal, źabs) or changed to gźa’ or, later, gźar (probably from the
terminative case as in nam nam źa źar).2 The proliferation of variants assures us that at some point
the morphological structure of the compounds ceased to be understood and a need for folk
etymologisation arose.3

TB cognates. On account of the fact that the available data on Tibetan languages do not provide us
with sufficient information on the semantics of źa-, I propose to include into our analysis material
from some other TB languages. The following juxtaposition of the relevant Tibetan lexemes with
their potential cognates from Chepang, could point to *y- as the original initial sound:
gźa’ in gźa’ tshon yo “rainbow” (CAUGHLEY 2000:220b)
gźa’ in gźa’ gna’ yoh “yesterday” (CAUGHLEY 2000:222a)
yoh.nəm “former times” (CAUGHLEY 2000:222a)
gźa’ “to hide os.” (CDTD.V:1092) yoʔ- “vi. decrease, diminish in volume; be used, empty
(partly)” (CAUGHLEY 2000:221a)
źu “1to melt; 2to digest” (J:476b) yu- “vi. dissolve, melt” (CAUGHLEY 2000:219a)

1
An hypothesis is put forward that the CT gźe- in gźe niṅ (CDTD:7254) is a derivative of the OT źa by means of the prefix g-.
The vowel -e in gźe as well as the vowel -i in gźi (cf. J:282a, s.v. gźes and dialectal variants listed in CDTD:7254) assimilated
from the original -a under the influence of -i- in -niṅ. The original vowel seems to be preserved in Purik ɕa̱ɲīŋ “year before
last” (CDTD:7254). These formations should be distinguished from gźes “the second day after tomorrow” (J:481b) and its
derivatives that appear to be cognate to CT rjes and connote future dates as opposed to the past orientation of gźe-. In fact,
this gźes could have been an additional trigger for the vowel change in gźe.
2
There is no reason to assume, as RÓNA-TAS (1955:268n46) followed by LI and COBLIN (p.176) did, that źa- replaced the
original źabs. As the above variant readings demonstrate, źa- is definitively the lectio difficilior.
3
Although the third group of words, referring to time, does not seem to be semantically related to the former two groups,
we observe an interesting parallel within the following three: źa sṅa ~ źa ’briṅ ~ gźa’ pyi. Their second constituents form a
logical sequence “before, early” ~ “middle” ~ “after, later”.
 349

CAUGHLEY glosses also a verb yo- “vt. look at (with purpose), investigate; try (action)” (2000:220b)
which we could compare with LEPCHA yă “to know, to comprehend, to understand, to be acquainted
with” (MG:320a; cf. also yă-ši “T[ibetan] ye śes to become apparent”, MG:320b1; ší “1to look, to see; to
regard; 2to appear, to be visible”, MG:427a).2 Further examples of the diachronic sound change (g.)y-
> ź- in Tibetan include: ya > źwa; g.yen > źen3.

It appears that in OT sources źa and its variant źal connoted in various phrases the btsan po himself.
In this connection compare the etymology of Eng. person < Latin persōna ‘mask, masked person,
character, part, rôle, person” < Etruscan φersu ‘masked figure’, “orig. the embodiment of a god of the
nether word, whose office it was to receive the soul of the dead and to accompany it to Hades”
(KLEIN 1966:1163b-4a). A very similar meaning seems to be attested for źal in PT 1042 where it clearly
denotes an object deposed in the grave; thus, my proposal to translate the lexeme in this context as
*“[clay] figurine”. The classically documented meaning “2face, countenance” (J:472b) could have
resulted from either the narrowing of the original sense, i.e. “[btsan po’s] person” > “[btsan po’s]
countenance” (mainly through phrases like źa sṅa) or the divergent development of the
etymological meaning *“what is seen” > “face”.4

The final -l of the CT źal might be a back formation resulting from compounds like źal c(h)e or,
alternatively, a contraction from źa la for which see below. Although STEDT reconstructs the PTB
etymon as *zyal “face, mouth” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/1190;
30.08.2014), the only lexemes attesting to the final -l are quoted from Tibetan languages.5

Further lexemes that could have been derived from źa include: źa chag “ma sgrub pa’am ma ’grig pa
(DSM:759a; < *”broken form”); źa la *”wax for an outer form”6; źa lag “yan lag” (DSM:760a; < *”what
comes out from the outer form of sth.”; for the meaning of -lag see s.v. gtsug lag); źa lu “1myu gu sogs

1
Lepcha yă-ši seems to be a native lexeme for MAINWARING and GRÜNWEDEL list additionally ye-še as a loanword from Tibetan
ye śes “eternal knowledge” (MG:325b).
2
Another cognate could be the Tamangic tsjaː “to look” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/gnis?t=look;
30.08.2014).
3
g.yen pa is glossed in BDSN (apus MIMAKI 1992:490) with chags pa.
4
For this hypothesis compare the etymological meaning of Ger. Antlitz “[...] eigentlich ‘das Entgegenblickende’ (oder ‘das
Aussehen’ mit Bedeutungsverengung)” (KLUGE 2011:51a) and the explanation “M[ittel]h[och]deutsch antlitze,
a[lt]h[och]d[eutch] antlizzie (Mischform aus *antliʒ und gleichbed[eutendem] antlutti), a[lt]englisch andwlita, schwedisch
anlete enthalten als ersten Bestandteil die unter 1ant..., Ant... “entgegen” behandelte Vorsilbe und als zweiten Bestandteil
eine Bildung zu einem im Deutschen untergegangenen Verb mit der Bed[eutung] “blicken, sehen” [...].” (DudenH:42a) as
well as the etymology of the Pol. lico “face, countenance” < PS *liko ( > *lice / *likъ) “twarz, oblicze; zewnętrzna, wierzchnia
strona czegoś; zewnętrzny wygląd, postać, forma” probably from the verb *ličiti “kształtować, formować, zdobić; być
widocznym, być podobnym” (BORYŚ 2005:287b).
LAUFER (1916:407) speculates about a possible relationship between Tibetan źa la, źal, źal ba, śal ba “ein Pflaster, eine
gepflasterte Stelle” (Sch:575a, s.v. śal ba) and Mongolian šala “floor, pavement, platform” (Less:749a). If a borrowing took
place then, on account of the fact that the Tibetan word is attested in the earliest written documents, it must have been
the Mongolian word that was borrowed from Tibetan. Still, it remains questionable whether Tibetan źa la and its
derivatives are cognate to śal ba.
5
Lepcha jal is marked in MG:95b as a loanword from Tibetan źal.
6
źa la is documented in the OT document Ch. lxxiii, xiii, 18, ll. 3 and 5 (cf. TLTD.2:405). THOMAS translated it as “plastering”
(ibid.) identifying it with the CT źal ba “also źal, źa la, źal rtsa or -rdza clay, lime-floor; plastering, rough-cast” (J:474a). The
same document contains two further lexemes that are obviously derived from źa la, namely, źa myi “plasterer” (TLTD.2:405;
lit. “clay-man”) and źa co “plaster-master?” (TLTD.2:405).
 350

thon ma thag pa” (DSM:760a; < *”origin of a form”). The same word could also form part of: źa byis
“child” (CDTD:7091); źa źi “children” (Gs:921b)1. It is feasible that gźa’- in gźa’ gsaṅ “(rñiṅ) 1’phrin las;
2
g.yuṅ druṅ; 3phyi naṅ gñis” (BTC:2415b) denoted an outer form of a thing as opposed to gsaṅ- that
connotes hidden parts.

Basing my hypothesis on this, altogether rather scanty, evidence, I propose to reconstruct the
etymon of źa as *(g.)ya with the primary meaning *“appearance, shape, form”, later “face,
countenance”. I maintain that the morpheme *g.ya, identical with the later źa, is attested in OT
documents in the following phrases:
g.yar sṅar (PT 1078bis:25; PT 1111:27; PT 1297.2:7, 9, 15, 24; Or.15000/426:v13; Or.15000/490:r2;
Or.15000:78:r2; ITN 552:B1) ~ g.yar sṅa ru (PT 1287:409) ~ g.ya sṅar (ITJ 1359(A):3);
g.yar nas (Or.15000/119:v5);
g.yar du (PT 126:160; ITJ 739:14v4; ITJ 856(A):4; Vol.55.fol.20:9, after TLTD.2:56; Verso of
Ch.fragm.82:3, after TLTD.2:58; Or.15000/497:r1; Or.15000/37:r2; Or.15000/529:r13).
These should be juxtaposed with the well known OT phrases like źa sṅar and źa sṅa nas. The most
important difference regarding the distribution of the former as against the latter ones seems to be
related to the social status of the persons concerned. To wit, the phrases źa sṅar and źa sṅa nas were
apparently applied only to btsan po and his family whereas no such restrictions were imposed on
those containing the morpheme g.yar-. With regard to the morpheme g.yar, I put forward an
hypothesis that it represents an old TERM form of the original *g.ya (see g.ya sṅar in ITJ 1359(A):3)
that has subsequently been treated as an independent word able to take another case particle; for
better known examples of such a process compare CT mthar gyis (< mtha’), phyir na (< phyi), slar du (<
*sla), etc. In this context we should also quote CT źar la “secondary” (Schr:377b), “1following,
succeeding (Schr[ö]t[er]); 2= źor la on the occassion of, in connection with” (D:1067b).2

Conclusions. źa ’briṅ recruited from families of higher social status and served at btsan po’s court.
Additionally, they seem to have played a considerable role in funeral rituals of a ruler. A comparison
with squires or page-boys in the European history inflicts oneself automatically although the
Tibetan word was in all probability either a collective or even perhaps an abstract term like źa sṅa.3
In conformity with these establishments and for the lack of a better equivalent in European
languages I propose to translate the compound in question tentatively as *“entourage; retinue”.4
The semantic shift towards the classically attested “servant” resulted from, on the one hand, the

1
The written form źa źi has arisen in all probability as a transcription of the Amdo pronunciation of the CT źa byis, cf. the
dialectal forms glossed in CDTD:7091.
For this semantic development compare the proposed etymology of CT sras *”semblance” < ’dra.
2
JÄSCHKE, however, connects źor to the verbal stem sbyor (479a).
3
Hereto compare also the Mongolian suffix -nar in SUMATIRATNA’s dictionary at the end of the gloss (see the Lexicographic
section). According to LESSING, -nar is a “suffix added to stems of words denoting human beings and deities to express
plurality; also: ‘... and others’” (565a). Worth mentioning is here also the formation źam riṅ pha (< *źa ’briṅ p(h)a)
documented in PT 1047:7, which, if not erroneously for *źa ’briṅ (s)naṅ (ma) pa (on which see below), would refer to a single
person belonging to a collective of źa ’briṅ. Compare the pair dku rgyal ~ dku rgyal pa.
4
In this context, see the Mongolian equivalents given by SUMATIRATNA, especially daγaγuli.
 351

folk etymologisation that has replaced the original źa- with źabs- and, on the other hand, the decline
of the Tibetan Empire and the specific hierarchic organisation of the society with btsan po as the
highest authority.

Regarding the second element of the compound, it is possible that it should be understood in its
etymological meaning *“following” - a cognate of the verb ’braṅ ~ ’breṅ “to follow, to walk at
another’s heels” (J:399b), although the vowel shift remains to be clarified.1 In this case, źa ’briṅ
should be interpreted as an O-incorporating compound *”[one] following the [btsan po’s] face” <
*[źa]O ’briṅ ”to follow the [btsan po’s] face”.

źa ’briṅ and its variant forms occur sometimes followed by the attributes naṅ pa (PT 1042:32, 662, 126)
or snaṅ ma pa (PT 1287:126). There should be no doubt concerning the essential identity of both
words the latter of which seems to be the lectio difficilior; naṅ- is attested only in PT 1042, a document
characterised by its inconsistent orthography and abounding in scribal errors. For the lack of a
better solution I propose to trace snaṅ- here to the present participle snaṅ ba “shining”, i.e. “visible”,
although its exact connotation when accompanying źa ’briṅ as an attribute remains unknown.

[T] bdag cag ṅan pa lta śig mchis pa / bus ba ṅan pa (153) ’ga[’] źig rkaṅ riṅs te skyes na / khyed kyi źam
’briṅ ’dab du / riṅ ba’i ni srab mda’ ’dzin pa ’am / thuṅ ba’i (154) ba’i ni yob cen gi rten tsam ’am / (PT
126:152-4)
“If we, the humble ones who came, ?a few wicked children having long legs?, are born, will [we] be
holding the reins of a long one or just the tread (lit. support) of stirrups of short ones on the side [of]
your entourage?”
(30) deʼi ʼog du / zo rig / deʼi ʼog du nam kaʼ / deʼi ʼog du smra źal // deʼi ʼog du źal daṅ sku rten / (31) g.yas
g.yos su mnabs sgye // de nas thugs gur / deʼi ʼog du dbon lob / deʼi ʼog du / (32) zi mo // gur gñis kyi g.yas
gsos (read: g.yos) su // źa ʼbriṅ naṅ pa daṅ / źaṅ lon źal ta paʼ / źal gyi / (33) sdun g.yas g.yos kyi zur la //
go ṅan daṅ / zug skyan tshar gñis // dbon lob kyi phyi zur / (34) g.yas g.yos su / sku gśen gñis kyis sna draṅs
nas // (PT 1042:30-4)
“Thereafter zo rig, nam ka, smra źal, [clay] figurine and sku rten, to the right and left - bags of edible
produce; after these: thugs gur, dbon lob, zi mo; to the right and left of both gur: visible entourage and
aristocrats who were pages; at the corner of the right and left sdun of the [clay] figurine: two rows of
go ṅan and zug skyan; in the right and left back corners of dbon lob: two sku gśen led.”
dguṅ saṅs na // źa ʼbriṅ pa (read: naṅ pa) daṅ / phyag ʼtshal baʼ phyi naṅ / (67) rim pa bźin du gśin phyag
du ʼtshalo // (PT 1042:66-7)
“At dawn, outer and inner ?visible? entourage and those who were paying homage paid homage to
the deceased-one according to [their] order.”
rgyal gyis thaṅ bcad de khram / (106) gñis bgyis te // gcig ni źa ʼbriṅ [rje bo thaṅ chen po]APP la gtad // khram
gcig ni skyibs lug la / (107) gtad // (PT 1042:105-7)

1
It is worth considering whether the original *źa ’breṅ was not changed to źa ’briṅ by analogy with two aforementioned
formations źa sṅa and gźa’ pyi. The second morpheme, *’breṅ, might have been replaced by ’briṅ to adjust to the triple sṅa
~ ’briṅ ~ *phyi.
Cf. also Latin secundus “der folgende, zweite” (WALDE 1910:694) < sequor “nachfolgen, begleiten, verfolgen” (ibid., p.701).
2
It seems reasonable to assume that źa ’briṅ pa in PT 1042:66 stands for *źa ’briṅ naṅ pa. The latter phrase is attested twice
in the same text whereas we find źa ’briṅ pha documented only once in PT 1047:7.
 352

“The officiant1, having decided the extent of power, made two tallies. One was delivered to the
entourage, lords of great authority. One tally was delivered to a sheep mount.”
sor gśegste / (123) gśegs kyi rim pa la / thog ma la yag pa bźi / deʼi ʼog du phyag cha mduṅ pa / deʼi ʼog du
phyag cha dgra sta / (124) pa / deʼi ʼog du gśen / deʼi ʼog du zo rig / deʼi ʼog du nam ka / deʼi ʼo du smra źal /
deʼi ʼog du / (125) źal daṅ sku rten / mnabs sgye ni thugs kyi sṅon zur g.yas g.yos / źal gyi ʼog du thugs gur /
(126) deʼi ʼog du riṅ gur // deʼi ʼog du dbon lob / deʼi ʼog du źa ʼbriṅ naṅ paʼ / deʼi ʼog du zi mo / (127) deʼi ʼog
du rkya rol // (PT 1042:122-7)
“Going to the spot; on the order of those going: in front, four yag pas, thereafter those holding
utensils that were lances, those holding utensils that were battle-axes, thereafter gśen, zo rig, nam ka,
smra źal, [clay] figurine and sku rten; as for the bags of edible produce, [they were] to the left and
right of the front-corners of thugs; after the [clay] figurine - thugs gur, thereafter riṅ gur, dbon lob,
thereafter ?visible? entourage, zi mo, horse tack.”
ʼuṅ gi rjes la / myaṅ smon to (219) re glo ba ñe baʼi bu // źaṅ snaṅ btsan po ʼi źa ʼbriṅ snaṅ ma pa ʼtshal źiṅ
mchis so // (PT 1287:218-9)
“Thereafter, Źaṅ snaṅ, the son of the loyal Myaṅ smon to re, was wishing [to enter] the ?visible?
entourage of the btsan po.”
źaṅ lon źa ʼbriṅ du bro ʼdor ʼdor ba / khu khri do re smyaṅ (276) zuṅ daṅ / gnubs sña do re gtsug blon daṅ /
rṅegs rgyal ʼbriṅ lan ton daṅ / tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto / (277) daṅ / ʼo ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan daṅ /
khu smon to re phaṅs tshab daṅ / rje blon bdun gyis de ltar dbu sñuṅ / (278) gnaṅ ṅo // (PT 1287:275-8)
“Aristocrats, who were swearing an oath as entourage, Khu khri do re smyaṅ zuṅ, Gnubs sña do re
gtsug blon, Rṅegs rgyal ’briṅ lan ton, Tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto, ’O ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan,
Khu smon to re phaṅs tshab, and seven lords and councillors bestowed the vow in that way.”
de’i dbyar / yum btsan mo khri ba[ṅ]s kyi źam r[iṅ du] [---] (ITJ 1368:12)2
“That summer, as entourage of the mother, btsan mo Khri baṅs [...]”
yum sras kyi źam riṅ du // ’a źa’i źaṅ lon ch[e]d po [---] (ITJ 1368:25)
“As entourage of the mother and [her] son, great aristocrats of ’A źa [...]”
(12) btsan po sras dbon sku tse rabs (13) re źiṅ yaṅ / zla goṅ gi bu tsha rgyud (14) ’peld las gcig / źam ’briṅ /
(15) na naṅ kor yan cad du gźug (16) ciṅ tshal zar rtag du mchis par (17) gnaṅ ṅo // (Źol N 12-7)
“It is granted that during (źiṅ) each generation of btsan po, son or grandson, one from among the
descendants of Zla goṅ, while being installed in the entourage up to naṅ kor, has always a meal to
eat.”
(32) nam nam źa źar / btsan po gduṅ rabs rgyud kyis // ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzind kyi (33) myes po blon snaṅ
bzaṅ ’dus koṅ gi bu tsha ’phel rgyud // spyan ras kyis (34) btsa’ źiṅ ’os pa źam ’briṅ du gźag pa daṅ / (Źwa W
32-4)
“While the [coming] generations of btsan pos will forever be looking kindly (lit. watching with
glance) on the descendants of the councillor Snaṅ bzaṅ ’dus koṅ, the forefather of ban de Tiṅ
ṅe ’dzin, the worties [from among the descendants] shall be put in entourage.”

1
On the reading *rgya bon for rgyal see s.v. khram skya.
2
The reconstruction of źam r[iṅ du] is based on the transliteration of the text as given in TLTD.2:8.
 353

112 źaṅ lon

[V] źaṅ lond (PT 1073:18, 26)
źaṅ blon (Or.15000/150:r1, PT 1071:r5, r27, r423; folk etymology)
CT źaṅ blon
Mvy:3683: rājānakaḥ; źaṅ blon; Ts:148v1: rādzanakaḥ (s.v. źaṅ blon); SR.2:677.7: rādzanakaḥ; guṅ blon chen po; yeke tüsimel
(s.v. źaṅ blon)1; GC:731b: lha źig la’aṅ (s.v. źaṅ blon); LCh:669c: rājānaka (s.v. źaṅ blon); BTC:2372b: 1źaṅ po’i rigs las byuṅ ba’i
blon po; 2sruṅ ma bye brag pa źig (s.v. źaṅ blon); Negi.12:5127a: 1= blon po; amātyaḥ; 2rājānakaḥ (s.v. źaṅ blon); DSM:762a: źaṅ
blon; BYD:466b: źaṅ blon.
J:471b: seems to be a kind of title given to a minister (or magistrate) (s.v. źaṅ blon); Desg:845a: = blon po, titre de l’un des 4
ministres d’État (s.v. źaṅ blon); R.8:53b: rājanakaḥ; 1сановник; dignitary; 2имя божества; n. of a god (s.v. źaṅ blon); Gs:922b:
ministers from the maternal, matrilateral side of the Tibetan king (s.v. źaṅ blon).
FRANCKE.1914:43: uncle minister; THOMAS.1936:283: Uncle-councillors; DTH:66: Źaṅ Councillor; BENEDICT.1942:329n37:
honorific use of źaṅ; minister; i.e. źaṅ lon = hon. blon; TUCCI.1950:58: the meaning implying cognatic relation is excluded; źaṅ
seems to have here a pure honorific significance; LALOU.1952:354: les ministres chambellans (for źaṅ lon źal ta pa - JB);
LALOU.1955:180: le ministre d’État (for źaṅ lon ched po - JB); RÓNA-TAS.1955:268: the general term denoting ministers; the
terms dku rgyal, blon po and źaṅ lon all denote the feudal aristocracy; the expression dku rgyal indicates belonging to the
royal court, the blon po term denotes the real or titular ministerial rank, while źaṅ lon (źaṅ blon) marked the group of
aristocrats built up on the avuncular system; STEINRA.1972:108: minister-maternal uncle; according to T’ang Chinese
sources, denote the ministers who belong to a queen’s family (źaṅ) and those belonging to the king’s family (blon);
RICHARDSON.1985:21n12: the general body of ministerial officials; źaṅ is perhaps an equivalent of the Chinese shang shu, head
of an office; and must be distinguished from źaṅ, maternal uncle, designating a marriage relationship between certain
noble families and the Tibetan royal line. Ministers with that qualification are always known as źaṅ blon, not lon;
LI/COBLIN:180-1: general expression denoting ministers; COBLIN.1991c:103: lit. “źaṅ’s and (b)lon’s”; officials in general;
YAMAGUCHI.1992:60: źaṅ gsum blon bźi (or źaṅ gsum blon daṅ bźi) – it is to this institution that the term “źaṅ lon system” as
used in this paper refers; RICHARDSON.1998b:138n7: the general body of ministers; to be distinguished from źaṅ blon, blon źaṅ;
RICHARDSON.1998c:161n3: the whole body of ministers (for źaṅ lon - JB); those of highest rank (for źaṅ blon - JB);
WALTER.1998:314n4: maternal uncle minister; BLONDEAU.2000:254: counsellor of the maternal clan (for źaṅ blon - JB);
DOTSON.2004:79-80: the term źaṅ was commonly employed as an honorific in the compound źaṅ lon/źaṅ blon, which simply
means “minister”. Only in very few circumstances does źaṅ blon indicate “maternal uncles and ministers” or simply
“maternal uncle minister”, that is to say, a minister who is also a źaṅ; p.82: the term źaṅ lon/źaṅ blon is best translated as
“landed gentry”, “aristocracy” or “ministerial aristocracy”, since the term źaṅ lon/źaṅ blon designates a social stratum, and
not necessarily a government post; ministers’ kin, both male and female of ascending and descending generations, are
included in these aristocratic social categories simply by virtue of their consanguineous relationship to their ennobled
relative; DOTSON.2007b:16: ministerial aristocracy; DOTSON.2007c:9: minister; DOTSON.2009:59: minister, class of ministerial
aristocracy.

[S] *źaṅ lon “to take the źaṅ[-position]”

[E] *źaṅ lon pa “one taking the źaṅ[-position]”
[M] (N) aristocrat
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[A] Out of dozens of OT occurrences of the compound only in few cases its attested form is źaṅ
blon2; the overwhelming majority of documents reads źaṅ lon. Moreover, we find in PT 1073 even the
variant źaṅ lond (ll.18 & 26).3

As is well known, źaṅ is a kinship term denoting mainly “uncle by the mother’s side, mother’s
brother” (J:471b) but also “son-in-law and brother-in-law” (ibid.) - the meanings attested
independently in OT by formations such as źaṅ dbon, dbon źaṅ, and źaṅ druṅ (po). This fact contradicts

1
CM yeke “great, big, large; older, elder; majestic, imposing; adult; much, very, greatly” (Less:431a) tüsimel “official,
functionary; dignitary” (Less:857a).
2
These are: Or.15000/150:r1, PT 1071:r5, r27, and r423.
3
According to ACIP, the form źaṅ lon is attested also once in ’Dul ba rnam par ’byed pa (H 3, ’dul ba, ja 264v4) side by side
with the classical variant źaṅ blon.
Besides, EHRHARD mentions a CT variant źa ’on attested in Deb ther sṅon po (2002:84n47).
 354

the hypothesis put forward by some scholars that źaṅ blon would be a honorific term for blon po (see
the Lexicographic section above). First of all, kinship terms are not used in Tibetan as honorific
classifiers and, secondly, official titles (like blon po) do not possess honorific equivalents.1 Thus, if we
assume that the second member of the compound was identical with the CT blon po, the only
possible reconstructions would be:
1
*źaṅ gi blon po “councillor(s) of a źaṅ”;
2
*źaṅ daṅ blon po “źaṅ and councillor(s)”.
We do not possess any knowledge about a special class of councillors that would represent źaṅ. Thus,
we can state that the second interpretation could be the only feasible one. This reading, however,
would group together in a coordinate phrase terms that belong to two different semantic fields:
KINSHIP and OFFICIAL FUNCTION.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that OT documents speak predominantly of źaṅ lon(d) and not źaṅ
blon. Examples like naṅ blon (PT 1071:r4; PT 1287:146; Ldan.2:7; ST Treaty N 26; Źol E 2, S 24) or guṅ
blon (PT 1287:257) demonstrate that the final -ṅ of the first syllable did not block the occurrence of
the initial b- in a word internal position between two consonants. From this we can infer that the
original form of the compound in question was źaṅ lon with the variant źaṅ lond pointing to a
deverbal character of the second syllable. An analogical formation consisting of a kinship term and -
lon(d) is in fact widely spread in OT sources, namely, the compound bu lon(d).2

Interestingly enough, źaṅ lon is mentioned only once in ITJ 750 (l.217; the year 720/1) and twice in
Or.8212.187 (ll.58, 64; the year 764/5). Another very important historical text, namely PT 1287,
speaks about źaṅ lon only twice (ll.104 & 275). The compound occurs particularly frequently in legal
texts, like PT 1071, PT 1072, PT 1073, or ITJ 753. From the first two texts we learn that źaṅ lon could
be bestowed with different kinds of letters (yi ge): turquoise (g.yu), golden (gser), phra men, silver
(dṅul), brass (ra gan), and copper (zaṅs).3 Furthermore, źaṅ lon is the only person in these documents
holding a letter. To this we should add the fact, demonstrated clearly by DOTSON (2007b:9), that the
main division in Tibetan society was established between źaṅ lon and dmaṅs, “commoners”.
Moreover, incorporating into our picture of the semantics of źaṅ lon the special signification of the
terms źaṅ dbon ~ dbon źaṅ in international politics and the aforementioned deverbal character of -lon
we can reconstruct the compound in question as *źaṅ lon pa, lit. “(one) taking the źaṅ[-position]”,

1
Although a weak possibility exists that OT źaṅ is a loanword from Chinese (cf. RICHARDSON 1985:21n12: “źaṅ is perhaps an
equivalent of the Chinese shang shu, head of an office; and must be distinguished from źaṅ, maternal uncle”) no other titles
of high officials in the Tibetan Empire are known to have been borrowed from other languages except for some specific
titles used exclusively in the Central Asiatic territories that were conquered and temporarily annexed by the Tibetans
(e.g., spa or phar śa, for details see EMMERICK 1985:313, 315, TAKEUCHI 1994a:582, and p.578n17).
2
The variant reading bu lond is documented in ITJ 740:251, 263, 297, 349, 359. In later phases of Tibetan languages also the
following compounds are attested: gob lon “bya sla ba le lo byas pa” (DSM:86b; cf. gob non “(spelling uncertain), to tease,
vex, irritate”, J:73a; < *mgo lon with the linking element -b-); goms lon “las ka byaṅ chub pa” (BTC:375a); chu lon “dam, dike”
(J:158b); gñen len (PT 997:10) “[one] holding assistand [post]” (< *gñen lon); śe lon “Pächter von Vieh” (CÜPPERS 2004:94; < *śa
lon pa); gseg lon “carpenter’s tool” (Gs:1158b).
3
It is interesting to note in this context that “great źaṅ lon” (źaṅ lon chen po) is never additionally qualified as possessing a
letter (yi ge pa).
 355

which I understand as applying to those who were allowed to become, at some point, wife-givers,
i.e., to receive the position of a źaṅ to the heir. Thus, the proposed translation of the term -
“aristocrat”, as referring to the highest and most privileged social class of the society.1

[T] (30) deʼi ʼog du / zo rig / deʼi ʼog du nam kaʼ / deʼi ʼog du smra źal // deʼi ʼog du źal daṅ sku rten / (31)
g.yas g.yos su mnabs sgye // de nas thugs gur / deʼi ʼog du dbon lob / deʼi ʼog du / (32) zi mo // gur gñis kyi
g.yas gsos (read: g.yos) su // źa ʼbriṅ naṅ pa daṅ / źaṅ lon źal ta paʼ / źal gyi / (33) sdun g.yas g.yos kyi zur la
// go ṅan daṅ / zug skyan tshar gñis // dbon lob kyi phyi zur / (34) g.yas g.yos su / sku gśen gñis kyis sna
draṅs nas // (PT 1042:30-4)
“Thereafter zo rig, nam ka, smra źal, [clay] figurine and sku rten, to the right and left - bags of edible
produce; after these: thugs gur, dbon lob, zi mo; to the right and left of both gur: ?visible? entourage
and aristocrats who were pages; at the corner of the right and left sdun of the [clay] figurine: two
rows of go ṅan and zug skyan; in the right and left back corners of dbon lob: two sku gśen led.”
duṅ dbu ma bus na / źaṅ lon źal ta pa daṅ / zi mo rnams / gśin phyag du ʼtshal / (PT 1042:64)
“When the middle trompet blew, aristocrats who were pages and zi mos paid homage to the
deceased-one.”
źaṅ lon źig mdo smad na ñam noṅs lags / (141) par btaṅ naʼ // phaṅs cha ri gaṅ du gśegs kar gsol / (PT
1042:140-1)
“When [they] had sent an aristocrat to be a mourner in Mdo smad, [they] offered items of archery
that should go to the mortuary.”
źaṅ lon chen po daṅ / khoṅ ta’i myes po daṅ pha daṅ ’di rnams / naṅ gcig gis / gcig ri dags la / ma’s (read:
mda’s) drṅul bas phog pa daṅ (r3) źaṅ lon ’di rnams la’ / źaṅ lon g.yu’i yi ge pa man cad / dmaṅs mtha’ ma
yan cad / kyis ri dags la mda’s drṅul ba’i khrim / (r4) la (PT 1071:r2-4)
“On the law of: [In case] great aristocrats, one’s own forefathers, fathers, or these [here], due to
aiming with an arrow at a game, hit each other and [in case one], from aristocrats holding a
turquoise letter down to the lowest commoners, aiming with an arrow at the game [hits] these
aristocrats:”
źaṅ lon g.yu’i yi ge pa daṅ / g.yu’i yi ge pa stoṅ mñam ba / źig / (r66) la / gtsaṅ chen man cad / dmaṅs mtha’
ma yan cad / cig gis / ri dag la stsogspa la / mda’ (read: mda’s) / (r67) rṅul pas / phog ste gum yaṅ ruṅ //
ma gum yaṅ ruṅ (PT 1071:r65-7)
“Shall one, from gtsaṅ chen down to the lowest commoners, who, due to aiming with an arrow at a
game and the like, has hit an aristocrat who holds a turquoise letter or one equal to a holder of a
turquoise letter, die or not?”
źaṅ lon gser gyi yi ge ṅo bo daṅ / gser gyi yi ge pa daṅ / stoṅ thaṅ mñab (read: mñam) ba / źig la / źaṅ lon /
(r80) man cad / dmaṅs mtha’ ma yan cad / gcig gis ri dag la stsogs pa la / mdas rṅul pas / (r81) phogste /
gum daṅ / ma gum ba’i khrims la (PT 1071:r79-81)
“On the law of: [Whether] one, from aristocrats down to the lowest commoners, due to aiming with
an arrow at a game and the like, having hit an aristocrat who holds a golden letter himself or one
equal to a holder of a golden letter, shall die or not?”

1
The second syllable -lon has been replaced by -blon already during the Old Tibetan phase of the language as the examples
quoted earlier from PT 1071 demonstrate. Two factors might have contributed to this morphological shift: 1the decay of
the Tibetan Empire as a political unit with its specific hereditary rules; 2commonness of the term blon po that remained to
be used also in new political circumstances. It is possible as well that the term has lost its original meaning and started to
be used as a mere title already in the Tibetan Empire or shortly after its fall.
 356

skyin bar źaṅ lon pra mo daṅ ʼbaṅs kyis dpyaʼd pa ni // dbaʼs sum snaṅ / (105) bcug kraṅ źes dpyad do // (PT
1287:104-5)
“As regards skyin bar that minor aristocrats and subjects examined, “Perhaps [we] should install
Dba’s sum snaṅ.” - thus [they] were examining.”
źaṅ lon źa ʼbriṅ du bro ʼdor ʼdor ba / khu khri do re smyaṅ (276) zuṅ daṅ / gnubs sña do re gtsug blon daṅ /
rṅegs rgyal ʼbriṅ lan ton daṅ / tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto / (277) daṅ / ʼo ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan daṅ /
khu smon to re phaṅs tshab daṅ / rje blon bdun gyis de ltar dbu sñuṅ / (278) gnaṅ ṅo // (PT 1287:275-8)
“Aristocrats, who were swearing an oath as entourage, Khu khri do re smyaṅ zuṅ, Gnubs sña do re
gtsug blon, Rṅegs rgyal ’briṅ lan ton, Tshes poṅ khri btsan khoṅ sto, ’O ma lde khri bzaṅ lod btsan,
Khu smon to re phaṅs tshab, and seven lords and councillors bestowed the vow in that way.”
(217) dgun ʼdun bzaṅ sum tshal du źaṅ btsan to re daṅ / blon khri sum rjes bsduste / źaṅ lon gtsaṅ la / chibs
gyi chas (218) phab / rgyaʼi mkar so ga soṅ phab / mdo smad gyi dgun ʼdun gtse nam yor du bsdus par lo
gchig / (ITJ 750:217-8)
“Źaṅ btsan to re and councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having gathered the winter council
at Bzaṅ sum tshal, brought down1 horse tack to aristocrats who were gtsaṅ2, sacked the Chinese fort
So ga soṅ, [and] gathered the winter council of Mdo smad at Gtse nam yor. Thus one year.”
yum sras kyi źam riṅ du // ’a źa’i źaṅ lon ch[e]d po [---] (ITJ 1368:25)
“As entourage of the mother and [her] son, great aristocrats of ’A źa [...]”
bod yul du mol cen / (58) mol cen mdzade /// źaṅ lon chen pho spo bleg mdzade // blon che (59) snaṅ bźer ke
ke ruʼi yige stsalde / blon cher bcug / źaṅ rgyal zigs chen pho g.yuʼi yi(ge) (60) stsalde / mgar ʼdzi / rmun gyi
thaṅ du chog śesu bstod // blon khri bzaṅ blon cer bcug // (61) stoṅ rtsan g.yuʼi yige / stsal te / so mtha bźi
dmag pon du bkaʼ stsald // par lo gcig // (Or.8212.187:57-61)3
“In the land of Tibet, having prepared a great consultation, having made a promotion-slate [for]
great aristocrats, [and] having given grand councillor [Dba’s] snaṅ bźer [zla brtsan] the ke ke ru-
letter, [one] nominated [him] as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the turquoise letter on the
great Źaṅ [mchims rgyal] rgyal zigs [śu theng]4, [one] praised [him] ?for being fulfilled? (lit. knowing
the sufficiency) in the prerogatives (thaṅ) of mgar ’dzi rmun. [One] appointed councillor [Mgos] khri
bzaṅ [yab lag] as a grand councillor. Having bestowed the turquoise letter on [Źaṅ] stoṅ rtsan, [one]
ordered [him to function] as an army commander of the four frontiers. Thus one year.”
gcen mu rug brtsan daṅ / jo mo mched daṅ (49) rgyal phran rnams daṅ / chab srid kyi blon po man cad / źaṅ
lon che phra kun kyaṅ (50) mnas bsgagste / gtsigs g.yuṅ druṅ du gnaṅ ṅo / (Źwa W 48-50)
“Having bound by the oath [all] downward from [my] elder brother Mu rug brtsan, [my] lady-
sister(s), petty kings, and councillors of chab srid - all the major and minor aristocrats, [one] granted
a charter in perpetuity.”
blon snaṅ bzaṅ (26) ’dus koṅ gi bu tsha ’phel rgyud dmaṅs kyi rnams kyaṅ gtsaṅ (27) [da]ṅ stoṅ las stsogs pa
sgor bde ba’i rnams / źaṅ lon yi ge (28) can gyi thaṅ du gnaṅ ba daṅ / (Źwa E 25-8)

1
The verb phab taken literally does not really fit in the context of this statement. It can reasonably be argued that the
verb phab has erroneously replaced another verb of similar morphology. The substitution might have been triggered by
the verb phab from the following clause.
2
I understand źaṅ lon gtsaṅ as an appositional phrase of the structure źaṅσlon#gtsaṅAPP, lit. “aristocrats who are gtsaṅ”. The
exact meaning of gtsaṅ that appears also in legal texts and as a part of the compound gtsaṅ chen remains unknown.
3
The same entry is repeated in Or.8212.187:63-8.
4
I translate the clause in accordance with its actual syntactic structure, although chen po as an attribute attached to one’s
name is highly unusual.
 357

“Favourable sgor such as gtsaṅ and stoṅ, among others, in the rank of aristocrats possessing letters
are granted to the descendants of the councillor Snaṅ bzaṅ ’dus koṅ, even those among
commoners.”
jo mo (36) [m]ched daṅ / rgyal phran daṅ / chab srid kyi blon po rnams daṅ / źaṅ (37) lon phra mo thams cad
kyaṅ brnan te / mnas bsgags nas / (Źwa E 35-7)
“All, lady-sister(s), kinglets, councillors of chab srid, and minor aristocrats, being present, were
bound by the oath.”

113 źal ce gra

DTH:131: procès; DOTSON.2013a:272: matters concerning law.

[E] *źal ce’i grwa “school of [law-]sentences”

[M] (N) school of law
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTmetacompound: determinative/determinative; STRC[[N+N]+N]
[R] rtsis gra
[A] For more compounds with the second element -gr(w)a and the significance of calculations in
judicial practice see s.v. rtsis gra.

[T] spuṅ sad zu tse ʼdzaṅs kyad kyi tshad ni // rtsis gra gsum (97) źal ce gra bźi yaṅ rna bas ñan źiṅ gchod /
(PT 1287:96-7)
“Spuṅ sad zu tse, as concerns the measure of [his] wisdom, was deciding while listening (lit. with
[his] ears) to three schools of calculation, four [together with the] school of law.”

114 źu bub
LALOU.1958:162: épithète de gśen, peut-être péjorative; p.201: épithète des mo gśen assemblées pour guérir; źu est l’arceau de
coiffure porté par les femmes de Lhasa; pour bub, le sens de “toit” (phub) donné par F.W. Thomas dans AFL, p. 96, l. 46 et p.
152, compète l’aspect particulier de la coiffure; BELLEZZA.2008:227: hat-wearing; DOTSON.2013a:341n18: might represent an
overturned hat, or the shape of a hat. Don grub rgyal states that źu is the figure of a bird extending its wings in a dome
shape.

[E] *źu phub pa “a cover spread over”

[M] (A) with a headgear
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+VAV2]
[A] A verbal phrase that occurs twice in PT 1287 greatly resembles the compound under discussion,
cf.:
rje ʼis ni bkaʼ stsal na gźaʼ ma ni yun kyi srid // bya ʼis ni źu pub na la pyi ni gdaṅs su dro // (PT 1287:272)
rje ʼis ni bkaʼ stsal pa gźaʼ pyi ni yun kyi (441) srid / bya ʼis ni źu pub pa / la pyi ni gdaṅsu dro // (PT
1287:440-1)
To these we shall add the following passage:
lhas bka’ stsal pa gźa ma yundu ñondu (25) ñon cig / bya’is khab sgob na lan phyi gtandu droste mthar
legs źiṅ dge’o mo bzaṅo (ITJ 740:24-5)
Now, we can juxtapose the respective clauses with each other in order to determine the scope of
similarities:
 358

PT 1287:272 PT 1287:440-1 ITJ 740

rje ʼis ni bkaʼ stsal na rje ʼis ni bkaʼ stsal pa lhas bka’ stsal pa
gźaʼ ma ni yun kyi srid gźaʼ pyi ni yun kyi srid gźa ma yundu ñondu (25) ñon cig
bya ʼis ni źu pub na bya ʼis ni źu pub pa bya’is khab sgob na
la pyi ni gdaṅs su dro la pyi ni gdaṅsu dro lan phyi gtandu droste1
From these it appears that źu pub corresponds to khab sgob. sgob is attested as a V4 stem of the verb
sgab (BTC:586b). However, on account of the fact that the clause is a conditional one, I propose to
amend sgob to sgab. In JÄSCHKE we find a phrase that resembles to some extent the clause in question:
bya mas bu la sgab pa “the covering of a young bird by its mother” (J:114a). To this we can add the
dialectally attested verbs: Kargil MZ bups cA “to brood”, Tshangra, Leh bups cA? “to brood”, Nubra
bups “to brood”, Yolmo pu̖p “to cover up, to keep warm” (CDTD.V:879, s.v. ’bub). As the dialectal
forms prove, the verb should rather be identified with CT ’bubs “to put on a roof, or something for a
roof” (J:393b)2 instead of ’bub as in CDTD. It seems reasonable to assume the existence of two
controlable verbs with the respective meanings *“to open sth. over sth.” (cEA) and *“to open os.
over sth.” (cA). In this connection, we should notice that sgab is documented in Southern Mustang as
a cA verb with the meaning “to mother, to brood” (CDTD.V:283).

Now, returning to our passages, bya ʼis ni źu pub as well as bya’is khab sgob have both agents in ERG
(bya ’is) and direct objects in ABS (źu, khab), thus both verbs are clearly transitive and controllable
(cEA). The literal renderings of the phrases could be proposed as follows: “a bird opened źu (over
sth.)” and “a bird spread a cover (over sth.)”.3 Both verbs, pub and sgob, point to the protecting
character of spreading one thing over another, hence my tentative translation of pub (< ’bubs): “to
cover in a protecting manner”, i.e., “to spread sth. over (in order to protect sth./sb.)”; cf. CT gur
’bubs “to pitch a tent” (J:393b) < *”to spread a tent over sth.”.4 By comparing the phrases gur ’bubs
and khab sgob with źu pub we can assume that źu denoted an object that could be spread over to
protect sth./sb. from above. The last couplet from the aforementioned passages appears to express a
kind of proverb the general sense of which is that when a bird[-mother] offers her protection
nestlings can warm themselves under her wings.5

If we look at the compound źu bub, we observe that it occurs only as an attribute of mo gśen “female
gśen” who are contrasted with p(h)o gśen “male gśen” described more closely by means of the
attribute thod (d)kar “white turban”. Thus, since pho gśen are characterised by a special headgear one

1
The three passages are also analysed in DOTSON 2013a:341n18 and DOTSON 2013b:205n8.
2
Kyirong phūp cEA “to roof over, to open (umbrella)”, Nangchen phɔp “with kɔɦr to put up a tent”, Bathang phūʔ “to open
(an umbrella)” (CDTD.V:880).
3
For the etymological meaning of khab see s.v. rje dbyal.
4
Cf. also spub Khalatse, Nurla, Leh “with thok to roof over” (CDTD.V:764); dbub “to cover up” (CDTD.V:854); sbub Western
Drokpas “with khu̱rkāŋ to put up a tent”, Dingri “to put up (a tent)”, Nangchen “to put under sth.” (CDTD.V:934). Compare
also a short note on the word family given in THOMAS 1957:152.
5
Compare hereto the following explanations offered to the phrase źu pub in Tibetan sources: “gśog pa rkyaṅ nas ʼphur ba”
(BNY:156n21), and “źu phub pa ste gśog pa rkyoṅ ba’am gśog pa brkyaṅs nas ʼphur ba’i don yin la. byas sgro gur phub pa’i
don du ʼgrel ba’aṅ yod do” (STK:172n15).
 359

could assume that the same is true for mo gśen - źu bub would be a special kind of headgear worn by
female officiants. This hypothesis is confirmed by the above presented understanding of the verb
pub in the clause bya ’is źu pub, i.e. “to spread sth. in order to protect sth./sb. from above”. This leads
us to the constatation that źu must be somehow related to the CT źwa “a covering of the head, hat,
cap” (J:470b).

We encounter the same syllable also, reckoned as a Źaṅ źuṅ word, in źu śum as “a kind of hat”
(LZB:219) and źu phud glossed by LALOU with “crête” (1958:188) and attested in the following clauses:
rje ni źu phud nas / mgo nag ’greṅ la rje myed (112) rje skos la / rṅog chags dud la khram thob cig (PT
126:111-2)
“Oh lord, having taken off źu, appoint a lord for the black-headed upright ones, who have no
lord, and tally (lit. cast a tally for) maned animals!”

dbu źu phud du sṅo (PT 1285:v44)

“[They] were dedicating [it] to dbu źu phud.”
Similarly as in the case of źu bub/pub, also here it seems that a primarily verbal phrase has been
lexicalised and eventually formed into a compound.1

To sum up, one could propose two hypotheses with regard to the origins of źu:
1
źu = CT źwa; the vowel -u could have resulted from the assimilation to the -u- of the second
syllable (bub, pub, phud) although in view of the aforementioned verbal phrases this seems to be
less probable;
2
źu is a cognate of CT źwa but with a slightly differing meaning.2
For the lack of any further recognisable cognates, I propose to translate źu in the most general way,
i.e., as “a cover”, keeping in mind that the original verbal phrase could be used even to describe the
manner in which a bird protects its nestlings by, most probably, spreading its wings over them.

It appears that the compound źu bub (p(h)- > b- / -Vσ_V-: voicing between two vowels) has acquired a
narrower meaning denoting a special kind of a headgear which, however, we are unable to describe
more closely.3

As concerns the phrase and compound źu phud, it is feasible that it represents a later product of folk
etymologisation in which the original verbal element -phub has been replaced by a similar syllable

1
The morpheme phud occurs also in OT compound pra phud (PT 1042:115) for which we find the following explanations in
lexicographic sources on Źaṅ źuṅ language: “3dbu rgyan źig; a head ornament” (LZB:142), “5(dbu rgyan źig) a head ornament,
crown” (MARTIN 2010:142a), “crown” (BELLEZZA 2008:238).
2
Other compounds containing the same morpheme źu include: tshem źu ~ tshem źwa “rmog gi miṅ” (DSM:725b); prog źu
“coronet” (BELLEZZA 2008:238), “a type of crown” (ibid., p.387).
For other examples of similar alternation compare rwa ~ ru and grwa ~ gru. It would be worth analysing whether źwa and
źu could have been derived from the root ya “root signifying above, up etc.” (J:504a). For the hypothesis concerning the
historical relation between root consonants y- and ź- see s.v. źa ’briṅ.
3
MAINWARING and GRÜNWEDEL have documented Lepcha compound ša-kap with the meaning “a mantle”, that they speculate
might have been a loanword from Tibetan źa (read: źwa) khebs “a cap” (MG:425b; although compare źwa sgab pa below). The
latter lexeme is found glossed, however, as “the covering of a hat or cap” (Cs:159b) - in the light of our above discussion
and its Lepcha meaning, a not very convincing explanation.
 360

that, however, was better understood in the context of a headgear, cf. ’bud “IIto put off, pull off, take
off, the turban, hat, coat, ring etc.” (J:393a) and źwa ’bud “va. to take off one’s hat” (Gs:939c). This
hypothesis would explain the strange clause rje ni źu phud nas quoted above (PT 126:111) instead of
which one would rather expect in this context *rje ni źu pub “Oh lord, having put on (lit. spread over)
a źu [...]”.1 The morphological change from -p(h)ub to phud could have been additionally triggered by
another compound of possibly analogical semantics, namely, pra phud.

[T] dags ri dkar po laʼ las / pho gśen thod / dkar brgya bsogs te smrigs daṅ śar te śar / mo btab phya klags
kyaṅ / (r67) sñun gyi zo ma rñed / skran gyi lde ma rig // sribs ri nag mo laʼ / mo gśen źu bub / brgya bsdus
/ mtho daṅ ljags se ljags / mo btab phya klags (r68) kyaṅ sñun gyi zo ma ʼtshal / skran gyi lde ma rig // (PT
1285:r66-8)
“On the white sunny slope of the mountain, [one] gathered one hundred male gśen with white
turbans; although [they] smrigs and continously cast mo [and] recited phya, [they] did not discover
(lit. find) the constitution of the illness. [They] did not understand [that] kind of swelling. On the
black shady slope of the mountain, [one] gathered one hundred female gśen with a headgear.
Although [they] mtho and ljags se ljags cast mo and recited phya, [they] did not know the constitution
of the illness. [They] did not understand [that] kind of swelling.”
dags ri dkar po [la] // pho // (r166) gśen thod kar brgya bsdus kyaṅ / sñun gyi zo ma [ʼtshal] // [skran gyi
lde] ma rig / sribs ri nag mo [la] / mo gśen źu bub / brgya bsdus kyaṅ / sñun kyi (r167) zo ma ʼtshal / skran
gyi lde ma rig // (PT 1285:r165-7)
“On the white sunny slope of the mountain, although [one] gathered one hundred male gśen with
white turbans, [they] did not know the constitution of the illness. [They] did not understand [that]
kind of swelling. On the black shady slope of the mountain, although [one] gathered one hundred
female gśen with a headgear, [they] did not know the constitution of the illness. [They] did not
understand [that] kind of swelling.”
bdags ram (read: dags ri) / (2r48) dkar po la / po gśen thod kar brgya bsogs te // mo bthab [pya] blhags /
[srib] sa (read: sribs ri) nag po la / (2r49) ma mo gśen źu bub / brgya sogs te / mo [bthab pya] [blhagste] /
zuṅsla ni bzuṅ / thagsla ni [bthags] / (ITJ 734:2r47-9)
“On the white sunny slope of the mountain, [one] gathered one hundred male gśen with white
turbans. [They] cast mo [and] recited pya. On the black shady slope of the mountain, [one] gathered
one hundred female gśen with a headgear. [They] cast mo and recited phya. [They] grasped at zuṅs,
[they] bound to a web.”

115 zaṅ yag

Mvy:7734: atyudgataḥ, zaṅs yag; 7862: atyudgatam; Ts:154r1: atyudgataḥ (s.v. zaṅs yag); LCh:687a: atyudgata; BTC:2447b:
graṅs kyi gnas drug cu’i rtsi staṅs khag gcig naṅ yod pa’i graṅs ka’i miṅ źig; Negi.12:5361b: *> viśiṣṭam, saṃkhyāviśeṣaḥ;
devalaḥ; atyudgataḥ; BYD:483a: baṅ rim med pa’i mthon po.
BDN:22n8: dbu ʼbreṅs zaṅs yag ste ko daṅ zaṅs las bgyis pa’i rmog daṅ rmog thag daṅ bcas pa’i dgra lha’i rten daṅ. yaṅ na.
dbu ʼphreṅ zaṅs yag ste dbu rgyan rmog daṅ bcas pa’i gtsug rgyan yin pa ʼdra (s.v. dbu’ ʼbreṅ zaṅ yag); BTK:96n10: draṅ po
la’o. <mkhas pa’i dga’ ston> las. ‘blo yus kyi śags daṅ sbyar nas draṅ por gcod pa la zaṅ yag zer.’; STK:127n10: ko daṅ zaṅs
las bgyis ba’i rmog ste go cha’i bye brag mgo skyob kyi lcags źwa źes bkral na e ʼgrig gam sñam (s.v. dbu’ ʼbreṅ zaṅ yag).
D:1090a: atyudgataḥ n. of a fabulous numerical figure; R.8:132b: atyudgata; назв. мифического числа; n. of a fabulous
number.
DTH:124: courroie de chef (for dbu’ ’breṅ zaṅ yag – JB); HAARH.1969:403: Dbu ’breṅ (head-rope) Zaṅ yag (for dbu’ ’breṅ zaṅ yag
– JB); HILL.2006:92: dbu’ ’breṅ zaṅ yag (untranslated – JB); KAPSTEIN.2006:39: long; DOTSON.2007b:35: good undefiled;

1
For hat as connoting a higher social status compare the phrase źwa sgab pa “an aristocratic family” (Gs:939b; lit. “one
having a hat spread over [his/her head]”).
 361

BELLEZZA.2008:252: very pointed; ZEISLER.2011:105: made of coral / all-transcending; p.122: clearly an attribute of dbu ’breṅ;
The word seems to be of Źan źuṅ origin. In ZhEH (HAARH 1968 - JB) we find it in the form zaṅs yag with the meaning ‘coral’;
DOTSON.2013a:267: all-penetrating translucent.

[E] *zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag “fine and good above all”
[M] (A) excellent
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[A+A]
[A] zaṅ yag is glossed in lexicographic sources unanimously as “atyudgataḥ” (Mvy:7734; D:1090a;
R.8:132b; BTC:2447b; Negi.12:5361b) which is explained as “risen above” (Edg:11a, s.v. atyudgacchati)
or “a high number” (ibid., s.v. atyudgata). Much more interesting in our context is the Sanskrit
equivalent viśiṣṭam “distinguished, distinct, particular, peculiar; pre-eminent, excellent, excelling in
or distinguished by, chief or best among” (MW:990b) marked, however, by NEGI with the sign ‘*>’ as
“doubtful or ambiguous” (12.vi). Another definition of zaṅ yag worth mentioning here is “baṅ rim
med pa’i mthon po” given in BYD:483a.

zaṅ yag as attested in PT 1287 should be understood as either an attribute of dbu’ ’breṅ or, less
probably, an apposition to the latter. In accordance with the above remarks I propose to reconstruct
the underlying structure of the term as *zaṅ zaṅ la yag yag, i.e. a composition of two reduplicated
stems for which compare: zaṅ zaṅ “1good” (IW), “poetic term often used in ritual literature to
capture the quality of great height in sacred mountains” (BELLEZZA 2008:509n518)1, and yag yag “n. of
a great number” (D:1125b), “1as good as; 2doing or saying for sb.’s own good” (Gs:989a), Themchen
yaχjaʁa “fortunately <?” (CDTD:7666).

As is well known, the reduplicated stems often loose their affixes. This observation, that was
documented meticulously by URAY in his paper on reduplication and similar processes in CT (see
URAY 1954a), allows us to assume that the formation zaṅ zaṅ has resulted from the reduplication of
the stem bzaṅ po. Thus, the rendering of the compound in question as *“excellent” (further semantic
development: > *“exceeding [others]” > “high(est) number”).2

1
As a matter of fact, zaṅ zaṅ is attested in OT sources (PT 1194:49; ITJ 734:4r129) beside its variants za ṅe zaṅ (PT 1134:198,
220, 258), zaṅe zaṅ (PT 1134:240), and zaṅ ṅe zaṅ (PT 1285:v25). It always occurs following the phrase gnam du/ru but the
sense of the whole context remains obscure to me. THOMAS (1957:99) equates it with zaṅ ziṅ “disarranged, confused”
(1957:99) or “pell-mell” (ibid., p.82).
2
The compound has subsequently undergone truncation for we find the lexeme zaṅ glossed as “the best heaven”
(Schr:441b) < *the highest heaven” < *“the most exceeding one”. zaṅ in this meaning, representing in fact *zaṅ yag, could
have been used as a part of another compound. This compound might be identified with *zaṅ thal attested in zaṅ thal du
“durchdringend, gründlich” (Sch:502a; < *zaṅ yag thal “to pass beyond the most exceeding one”); cf. also modern zaṅ thal
“going straight through sth. (in a magical way)” (Gs:955a) and the further derivative zaṅ ma “apparent, conspicuous”
(Gs:955a). SUMATIRATNA glosses both zaṅ thal du yoṅ and zaṅ thal du ’bud with “nebte γarqu” (SR.2:738.4; CM nebte γarqu “to go
through”, Less:567b).
The reading “made of coral” proposed by ZEISLER (2011:105) violates the rules of Tibetan syntax; in this case one would
expect the phrase to have been *zaṅ yag gi dbu’ ’breṅ. The form zaṅs yag is a later folk etymology that attempted to give
sense to the otherwise scarcely attested syllable zaṅ. The meaning “coral”, found, e.g., in MARTIN 2010:195b, resulted from
the literal reading of zaṅs yag as *“a good copper thing” in which one material (copper) has been associated with another
one (coral) on the basis of their shared reddish colour. Along the same lines the meaning *“sharp things” developed, for
compare “rtse rno ba’i brag ri daṅ gri mduṅ sogs; sharp rocky mountains, sword, lances etc.” (LZB:224, s.v. zaṅs yag). TETT,
following DAN MARTIN who cited the form bzaṅ yag, glosses it with “= zaṅs yag = byu ru daṅ rtse rnon. Usually occurs with dmu
thag, the red cord of dmu? a sharply pointed coral? Karmay, Treasury”
(http://www.thlib.org/reference/dictionaries/tibetan-dictionary/translate.php; 04.09.2014). This form is most probably of
later origin and is another example of folk etymology.
 362

[T] ʼuṅ nas rta rdzi ʼi mchid nas / dbuʼ ʼbreṅ zaṅ yag kyaṅ (15) gchad du gsol / dbuʼ skas sten dguʼ yaṅ kha
thur du bstan du gsol nas / de rnam gñis kyaṅ de bźin (16) gnaṅ ṅo // (PT 1287:14-6)
“Thereafter, the horse herdsman said: ‘I request that the excellent head-rope be cut off [and] the
nine-stepped head-ladder be turned upside down (lit. [its] surface is shown downwards).’ Both these
[requests] were granted accordingly.”

116 zaṅs brgya’

DSM:795b: zaṅs kyi sgrom bu; BYD:483a: zaṅs kyis bzos pa’i sgam.
STK:128n15: sgam źes pa daṅ mtshuṅs.
WTS.7:18a: Hunderter-Kupferkessel (s.v. kha sprod).
DTH:124: cent vasques de cuivre; HAARH.1969:403: one hundred copper vessels; HILL.2006:92: one hundred copper vessels;
KAPSTEIN.2006:40: copper casket; ZEISLER.2011:105: [vessel] with copper ?seals / with ??hundred iron [nails] / with the
?Chinese [Ornament]; DOTSON.2013a:267: copper cask.

[E] *rgya ma [zaṅs tiṅ]APP “a wide receptacle [which is] a copper-brass vessel”
[M] (N) a large copper vessel
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTappositional; STRC[N+[N+N]]
[A] For the proposed identification of the element brgya- with the meaning *“a large vessel”
compare Nubri tāpca “pan” ~ “large pan” reconstructed in CDTD:3038 as *tab rgya, for which one
could cite ta ba “a flat iron pan without a handle” (J:202b) and the modern Balti toa “pan”, Trangtse
tāwāq “small metal plate <?”, Tabo tāwā “iron pan, griddle”, and Jirel tōu ~ tāwa “circular flat piece of
cast iron (used for baking flat bread)” (CDTD:3034).1 It seems likely that Nubri tāpca should in fact be
reconstructed as an appositional compound *ta brgya, *“a pan (ta- < *ta ba) which is a large vessel”,
with the second element having been identical with brgya- in zaṅs brgya. Alternatively, the first
syllable tab- might have resulted from clipping of ta ba when used in compounds although the above
cited modern pronunciations of ta ba would rather contradict this hypothesis.

An hypothesis is put forward that the word underlying the second element in zaṅs brgya has
acquired a nominalising particle -ma as in the phrase zaṅs brgya ma (PT 1287:32). The lexeme occurs,
namely, in a much distorted form in another text describing a funeral ritual too, cf.:
se ’brum (57) bźi ’i naṅ du lcags te ku ku daṅ zaṅs te ni pyo pyo gñis gya ma [za tiṅ]APP ni dme (read: dma’)
gos nag po ni sku la (58) / mnabs / (PT 1134:56-8)
“As concerns the large pan, a copper-brass vessel, [made of] both, forged2 iron and molten3
copper, [and put] in the grave, black petticoat4 was put over the body.”

1
In these quotations I follow the draft version of CDTD from 2008. Both entries have been omitted from the latest 2013
version.
2
I understand ku ku as a reduplication derived from dgu “to bend, to make crooked” (J:84b) or another cognate word that
expresses some kind of metalworking.
3
I propose to relate pyo pyo to the CT verb ’byo “to pour out, to pour out into another vessel, to transfuse” (J:399a).
The phrase lcags te ku ku daṅ zaṅs te pyo pyo gñis should, in all probability, be reconstructed in verses as:
*lcage te ni ku ku daṅ “both, being iron, forged,
zaṅs te ni pyo pyo gñis being copper, molten”.
4
For the tentative translation of the reconstructed *dma’ gos (-a > -e / _σCo-: vowel assimilation) compare the CT mthaṅ gos
“a sort of petticoat worn by the monks, having many plaits and folds, like the kilt of the Highlanders, but longer and of one
colour” (J:73a-b) and śam gos “śam thabs, resp. sku śam a garment like a petticoat, worn by Tibetan priests and monks”
(J:557a). The reconstructed *dma’- resembles semantically to a great extent both lexemes, mthaṅ “the lower part of the
 363

Although the passage is highly distorted, we can nevertheless identify some of its phrases with the
expressions known from other sources. Thus, se ’brum bźi should be read *se gru bźi (see s.v.), gya ma
is assumed to be identical with our brgya ma, and za tiṅ is reconstructed as *zaṅs tiṅ, for the second
element of which compare CT tiṅ “1a small cup of brass used esp. in sacrificing; 2the sound of metal”
(J:203a) and modern Balti “pot”, Leh “small cup of brass, silver or gold filled with water for offering”,
Tabo “waterbowl, small offering bowl”, Shigatse “small waterbowl used in offering”, Dzongkha
“offeratory vessel” (CDTD:3176).1 Likewise dialectally attested compound tiṅ phor, Dingri “brass
bowl” (CDTD:3177) would point to the original meaning of tiṅ as *”brass” or, in general, “metal”,
since the word seems to be of onomatopoetic origin denoting primarily objects that were making a
characteristic metallic sound when struck against; cf. the Eng. word tink of imitative origin, that
reminds phonetically Tib. tiṅ, and its derivative tinkle. Besides, we notice that in the phrase gya ma za
tiṅ, gya ma is the head of the NP and should be interpreted as a noun.2

Now, as concerns the lexeme brgya ma, lexicographic sources on CT list gyam as “a shelter, a grotto
large and wide, but not deep” (J:74a) which can be compared morphologically with OT gya ma and
’gyam. The remark made by JÄSCHKE that the referent of the term is understood as “wide but not
deep” as well as the meaning “a flat iron pan” of the above mentioned *tab rgya could both suggest
that the word in question is a cognate of CT rgya “2extent, width, size” (J:105a); *rgya ma “a wide
one” > *“a wide vessel”.3 The OT variant brgya- might have been a folk etymology. It is even possible
that the composers/editors of the Old Tibetan Chronicles used as their source a text similar in the
extent of its distortion to the above quoted PT 1134 and reconstructed -brgya (ma) from *gya (ma) on
semantic basis and according to their understanding of the context of the narrative.4 This

body” (J:239b) and śam “the lower part of a thing” (J:557a), that form the first constituents of the compounds mthaṅ gos and
śam gos, respectively.
1
MARTIN glosses tiṅ zaṅs with “(chu lcam) liquid lady. [...] It is interesting that one version of Mdzod [phug] reads Tib[etan]
chu lcam, ‘liquid lady,’ where another reads chu lcags, ‘liquid metal.’ Certainly it is the latter that better fits the meaning of
the Ź[aṅ] ź[uṅ]. And this suggests that the Tib[etan] was ‘corrected’ here without good reason.” (2010:98a).
For another example of metonymic broadening from SUBSTANCE to OBJECT MADE FROM SUBSTANCE see s.v. mdo lcags.
2
That the OT document PT 1134 contained variations on an old ritual narration which, however, had been taken out of its
original context and lost most of its significance can be clearly observed in the following passage:
chab gyi ya (40) bgo na / myi rab ’greṅ ru cho źag (read: źig) / kab daṅ dbyal / btshald pa / chab gyi ma bźug (41) na / ’gyam mo
tshe ’i bu mo / ’gyam za tiṅ gug / chig kab daṅ gdar du blaṅs / (PT 1134:39-41)
“On the upper end of the river, the upright superior man Ru cho, who wished a wife and a consort, took ’Gyam za tiṅ
gug, the daughter of ’Gyam mo tshe, as wife and consort on the lower end of the river.”
In this sentence, the original phrase *rgya ma zaṅs tiṅ was re-interpreted as a proper name and re-formed into ’Gyam za tiṅ
gug which we can juxtapose with the above quoted gya ma za tiṅ. The last element of the name, -gug, might be connected to
the CT verb ’gug “1to bend, to make crooked” (J:93a) as applied in metal processing. Alternatively, it might have resulted
from clipping of the original reduplicated stem ku ku (see the earlier citation from PT 1134 above) > *kug (clipping) > gug (k-
> g- / -ṅσ_V-: voicing). On re-interpreting in ritual contexts obsolete words as proper names see BIALEK 2015 (forthcoming
a).
3
For the reconstructed *rgya ma and its proposed etymological meaning compare the description of a royal grave as
provided by Rgyal po bka’ thaṅ yig (apus HAARH 1969:383) where the casket is referred to as zaṅs chen kha sbyar, i.e., the OT
zaṅs brgya has been replaced here by zaṅs chen.
4
The same re-analysis of the syllable rgya as brgya seems to have taken place in case of CT brgya khram “rtsis sgrom mam
rgya nag skad la zon phan lta bu; brgya śod” (GC:195a), for which compare also rgya khram “sm. rgya gram” (Gs:252b; rgya
gram “cross (+)” (Gs:252c). The original word *rgya khram (< *rgya ma khram) *“a wide object that is a tally” (cf. sgrom- in
rtsis sgrom) has been interpreted anew to confirm on the morphological level to the expected associations of ‘counting’
with the numeral “hundred”. Compare hereto also the remark made by HAARH: “The frequently occurring brgya, one
 364

hypothesis is made even more probable by the fact that the compound zaṅs brgya in its actual form
seems to have been a result of at least a few other morphological changes:
1
*rgya ma [zaṅs tiṅ]APP “a wide receptacle, a copper-brass vessel” (an appositional phrase);1
2
*zaṅs tiṅ rgya ma “a wide receptacle [made of] copper [and] brass” (re-analysed as *zaṅs tiṅ gi rgya
ma);2
3
*zaṅs rgya ma “a wide receptacle [made of] copper” (an error of omission of or a conscious
decision to delete a less known morpheme -tiṅ);
4
zaṅs brgya ma “id.” (folk etymology by analogy with the numeral brgya)3;
5
zaṅs brgya “id.” (compounding).

Fig.11 Sky burial Fig.12 Unwrapping a chest

It may be relevant to mention in this context a wooden (?) box, seen on the picture in Fig.1 s.v. kha
sprod, in which a corpse is placed during funeral rituals. Similar objects seem to be used even
nowadays for transporting bodies to places of sky burials; cf. the following pictures:

Figs.11 and 12 show a man unwrapping a box with a corpse inside. In the first picture, two already

Fig.13 Funeral chests

emptied boxes can be seen in the
background (second red rectangle) as well.
In Fig.13, three chests stand in the
foreground.4 A functional identity of those
and the object referred to as zaṅs brgya in PT
1287 could tentatively be proposed (see also
s.v. kha sprod where further details are
discussed).

hundred, is most probably a later substitute for an original Rgya or Rhya.” (1969:453n14) although his interpretation of the
reconstructed syllable *rgya differs considerably from the one proposed here.
1
The reversed, as compared with the analysed compound, order of lexemes within the phrase is additionally confirmed
by the aforementioned formations gya ma za tiṅ and ’gyam za tiṅ gug, and, on the other hand, by the fact that *zaṅs tiṅ
understood as “a copper-brass vessel” is a hyponym of *rgya ma “a wide vessel” and thus should follow it in an
appositional phrase.
2
The re-analysis explains also why the nominal particle -ma has been preserved and was not subjected to truncation.
3
Accordingly, the phrase, not being a compound, is not quoted in the Text section. For a translation of the respective
passage PT 1287:31-3 see s.v. kha sprod.
4
Figs.11 and 12 are screenshots from the video Sky Burial, l’enterrement traditionnel Tibétain
(http://voyageravecmoi.com/sky-burial-lenterrement-traditionnel-tibetain/; 14.04.2015). The last picture (Fig.13) was
copied from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-29/eurasian-griffon-vultures-gather-to-eat/4657382; 14.04.2015.
 365

[T] btsan po dri gum yaṅ de ru bkroṅs nas / spur zaṅs brgyaʼ kha sprod gyi naṅ (20) du bcug ste rtsaṅ chu ʼi
gźuṅ la btaṅ ṅo / (PT 1287:19-20)
“After [he] had killed there also btsan po Dri gum, having put [his] corpse into an open large copper
vessel, [he] cast [the vessel] into (lit. into the middle of) the river Rtsaṅ.”

117 zur phyuṅ

R.8:151a: приложение, дополнение; supplement; appendix; addition; GOLDSTEIN.1978:1009b: supplement, appendix;
Gs:961a: sm. zur ’don (zur ’don “abbr. of zur du ’don“, Gs:961a; zur du ’don “va. to take out sth.”, Gs:961a); IW: supplement,
appendix.
RICHARDSON.1985:53: a firm addition; LI/COBLIN:280: a supplement.

[E] *zur gyi byaṅ bu “[inscribed] tablet of a side; side-tablet”

[M] (N) appendix
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[N+N]
[A] For similar CT compounds in which the second element stands for byaṅ bu and the first refers to
a place on which a concrete byaṅ bu is made compare, e.g., sgo byaṅ “inscription over a door”
(J:375a); mjug byaṅ “yi ge’i mjug sdud kyi gtam” (BTC:883a); them byaṅ “sgo’i ya them miṅ byaṅ yi ge”
(BTC:1186b); dur byaṅ “[inscription] on a sepulcre” (J:375a); par byaṅ “par gyi mjug byaṅ”
(BTC:1615b).1

The underlying structure of the compound can be reconstructed as *zur gyi byaṅ bu: > zur byaṅ
(compounding)2 > *zur byuṅ (vowel assimilation). The alternation ph- ~ b- in OT documents has been
discussed s.v. ’byuṅ ’jug. The change might have followed the lexicalisation of the compound.
Although, as always in case of inscriptions, deciphering the text written on a stone might also be a
factor for a perhaps inaccurate reading of the compound.

[T] myaṅ gi gtsigs kyaṅ zur (58) phyuṅ brnan bskyed de gnaṅ ṅo // (Źwa W 57-8)
“An edict for (lit. of) Myaṅ, having been added an appendix, is granted.”3

118 zla dpe

LALOU.1955:181: code des suppléances; RICHARDSON.1985:175: precedent; LI/COBLIN:452: = dpe zla: matching or corresponding
example; DOTSON.2013a:326n7: precedent.

[E] *zla daṅ dpe “example and pattern”

[M] (N) exemplar
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[A] Apart from the meanings glossed in lexicographic sources for zla (bo), cf. “1companion,
associate; 2friend, acquaintance; 3lover, bridegroom; spouse” (J:491b), we find another one in the
following passages from OT inscriptions:

1
Worth mentioning here is the special meaning the word byaṅ acquired in later classical literature, namely, “colophon”
(HAARH 1969:16), or “author’s colophon” (SØRENSEN 1994:28) which could in fact go back to the compound zur phyuṅ.
2
As a matter of fact, zur byaṅ is glossed with “additional text/title” in IW.
3
Another occurrence of zur phyuṅ is attested, according to ACIP, in Byaṅ chub sñiṅ po’i rgyan ’bum źes bya ba’i gzuṅs (H 477,
rgyud, ta 503r5).
 366

(47) źaṅ tshes poṅ (48) gsas sto’i bu (49) tsha // gtsigs (50) gnaṅ ba’i / bla (51) dpe ni // phyiṅ ba (52) ’i
skun mkhar (53) na // gtsigs (54) chen po gźan gyi (55) zla la bźag // de (56) daṅ ’dra ba rnam (57) gcig
ni / gtsigs (58) gźan gyi zla la / (59) bka’i sar bźag / (Lcaṅ 47-59)
“[One] laid down the main copy of the edict, that was granted to the descendants of Źaṅ tshes
poṅ gsas sto, in skun mkhar of Phyiṅ ba on zla of other great edict. As concerns a piece similar to
that one, [one] put [it] at the ?place of orders? on the zla of other edicts.”

gtsigs brnand pa’i (56) yi ge źib mo ni // yab kyi riṅ la gtsigs kyi yi ge bris pa’i zla la (57) bźag go // (Skar
55-7)
“As concerns the detailed text of the added1 edict, [one] laid [it] down on the zla of a text of an
edict written during the life of [my] father.”

(56) sṅon myaṅ dba’s sñiṅ ñe źiṅ źo śa phul bar ’dra ba las // dba’s kyi zla daṅ sbyar na / (57) myaṅ bka’
drin chuṅs pa ’dra nas // ṅa’i / bkas // myaṅ gi gtsigs kyaṅ zur (58) phyuṅ brnan bskyed de gnaṅ ṅo //
(Źwa W 56-8)
“Earlier, Myaṅ and Dba’s were resembling [each other] in that, while being loyal, [they] brought
źo śa. [However,] when [one] juxtaposed Myaṅ with the zla of Dba’s, [the former] seemed to be
less favoured (lit. of lesser favour). Therefore, by my order, an edict for (lit. of) Myaṅ, having
been added an appendix, is granted.”
The phrase zla daṅ sbyar found in Źwa W 56 can be juxtaposed with zla dpe daṅ sbyar from the same
document, line 20.2 From the passages just quoted it appears that zla denoted something or someone
that could be taken as a typical example or model for others to follow. In so far the word can be
perceived as a synonym of dpe “1pattern, model” (J:327a).3 Therefore, I propose to interpret the
formation in question as an additively coordinate compound with the underlying structure *zla daṅ
dpe, lit. “example and pattern”. Compare hereto also the later compound dpe zla “dpe can gaṅ źig gi
dpe’am dpe zla” (BTC:1638a).

[T] lho bal gyi to dog / (r22) daṅ stoṅ zlar bskos pa’i rnams // dpon sna gñug ma’i goṅ du mchis pa’i lugs daṅ
zla dpe ma mchiste // (PT 1089:r21-2)
“There were no manners and exemplars of those who, appointed as to dog and stoṅ zla of foreigners,
were above different kinds of native masters.”
gral thabs sṅar chad pa daṅ zla dpe bźin / bdag cag goṅ du mchis par ji gnaṅ // (PT 1089:r28)
“Would [you] allow us to ?come up? according to the exemplars and ranks decided earlier?”

1
I read *bsnand instead of the unanimously transmitted brnand. For the phrase *gtsigs bsnand pa compare, e.g., gtsigs bsnan
bskyed (Źwa E 38, 45), gtsigs phyi ma bsnan bskyed (Źwa E 33), and gtsigs bskyed (Źwa E 16-7). The alternation bsnan ~ brnan is
confirmed by the attested variant readings brnan bskyed (Źwa W 58) and bsnan bskyed (Źwa E 38, 45; for details see s.v. bsnan
bskyed).
2
Alternatively, one could consider zla daṅ sbyar to be an error for *zla dpe daṅ sbyar.
3
Compare also CT dpe med pa “incomparable, unique, unexampled” (D:792b) that can be juxtaposed with zla med
“1matchless” (D:1101a).
The root zla is assumed to be a cognate of sla the etymological meaning of which could be reconstructed as *”that what
follows”, for compare sla bo “servant, employee” (CDTD:8989) attested in Southern Mustang. Taken from this perspective,
the original meaninig of zla could have been *”what is to be followed”, i.e. “an example” or, more specifically, “a
companion”.
 367

lho bal gyi stoṅ pon rnams gyis de’i zla dpes blar gsol nas / (PT 1089:r69)
“The heads of the thousand district of foreigners requested to the authorities with the exemplars of
that.”
’di ltar sṅa phyi gñis su gaṅ bas kyaṅ lhag par sñiṅ (20) ñe źiṅ / źo śa chen po ’bul ’bul ba // sṅon gyi zla dpe
daṅ sbyar źiṅ / bka’ (21) drin ’os par sbyin bar dgoṅs pa las // ban de ñid rjes ’baṅs kyi (22) lugs daṅ / dge
sloṅ gi tshul ’dzin ciṅ / bka drin myi nod par gsol gyis (23) kyaṅ / źo śa’i lan / bka drin sbyin pa’i chos yin bas
// ṅa’i bkas / (Źwa W 19-23)
“Upon considering to adequately bestow a favour, whilst comparing bringing of great źo śa while
being in this way more loyal than anyone else before and after [him] with exemplars of earlier
times, even though ban de himself requested to adhere (lit. hold) to the manner of courtiers as well
as to the way of a monk and to not receive any favour, since the recompense for the źo śa is the
custom of bestowing a favour, by my order [this was decided]:”
ban de tiṅ ṅe ’dzin / ṅa’i chab srid ’don (5) ciṅ / źo śa chen po ’bul ’bul ba / gtsigs sṅa ma (6) gnaṅ ba’i tshe’aṅ
zla dpe daṅ // źo śa’i rkyen bźin (7) bka’ drin ’os pa tsam du gnaṅ ba las / ban de ñid (8) kyis / bka’ drin myi
nod par gsol nas // (Źwa E 4-8)
“Upon granting ban de Tiṅ ṅe ’dzin, who was offering great źo śa while fostering my chab srid, just
suitable favour according to [his] exemplar and the support [in form] of źo śa also at the time of
granting the earlier edict, ban de himself requested not to receive any favour.”

119 yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs

[V] pyi ’brog gdeṅs (PT 1287:52; truncation)
BSODDBAṄ.1992:80n149: ’brog gnas (s.v. ’brog gdeṅs).
DTH:127: les pasteurs confiants des marches; HAARH.1969:405: faithful pyi-’brog; p.406: faithful yul-pyi-’brog; HILL.2006:96:
trusty herdsmen of Pyi; ZEISLER.2011:108: the outer nomads and the vassals; DOTSON.2013a:270: pastures.

[E] *yul gyi phyi’i ’brog gdaṅs pa “vast/open pastures of the marches of the country”
[M] (N) vast pastures of the marches of the country
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTmetacompound: determinative/determinative/attributive;
STRC
[[N+[N+N]]+VAV2]
[R] ’brog mkhos / yul yab
[A] pyi ’brog-, which I presume meant *“pastures of the marches/borderland” (< *phyi “the outside;
borderland”1), is additionally attested in OT sources as a part of place names:
yul phyi ’brog pha byi na (PT 1289:r1.04-05; for which compare lho yul ya byi na in PT 1289:r2.09);
yul pyi ’brog brgyad goṅ du (ITJ 731:r54-5) ~ yul phyi ’brog rgyad gosu byon na (ITJ 731:r106);
yul pyi ’brog ltaṅ gsum du soṅ na (ITJ 731:r91-2).
The last example can be juxtaposed also with the following three:
yul ’brog pyi gtaṅ sum na (ITJ 731:r56);
yul ’brog phyi ldaṅ gsum du (ITJ 731:r83-4);
’brog phyi ldaṅ sum du mchiso (ITJ 731: r95-6).1

1
For the nominal usage of phyi “od[er] phyi ma aussen, die Aussenseite, der äussere Theil” (Sch:349a) compare for
instance: phyi’i źiṅ “the field outside” (J:349a); phyi’i mi “people from abroad, other, strange people, not belonging to the
family” (J:349a); phyi dgra “foreign enemy” (EMMERICK 1967:139a); phyi naṅ “the outside and inside” (J:349b); phyi yul “das
Ausland, ein fremdes Land” (Sch:349a).
 368

I assume that the phrases pyi ’brog ltaṅ, ’brog pyi gtaṅ, ’brog phyi ldaṅ, and ’brog phyi ldaṅ are distorted
versions of the phrase *phyi ’brog gdaṅs which was reinterpreted (probably after it had become
semantically obscure) to serve as a part of place names - a process we already know from the study
of (rgyal) thag brgyad and (se) gru bźi (see s.vv.), among others.2 The first step towards the re-
interpretation might have consisted of analysing *yul phyi ʼbrog gdaṅs as ‘yul+TOPONYM’. This has led
to the development of the above mentioned place names in religious narrations. Nevertheless, here
I follow the etymological meaning of the compound in question and do not construe it as a
toponym.3

The hypothesis is put forward that the variant reading pyi ’brog gdeṅs is a back formation from yul pyi
’brog gdeṅs in which the second syllable *phyi underwent deaspiration due to its word-internal
position. Moreover, other forms of the toponym cited above attest to the vowel -a- in the last
syllable and the morpheme gdaṅs is documented elsewhere in OT sources (see OTDO).4 The vowel -e-
could have resulted from progressive assimilation to -o- of ’brog. In fact, all preceding syllables have
close vowels (u, i, o). To conclude, the primary form of the compound seems to have been *yul phyi
’brog gdaṅs. The first syllable is assumed to have been omitted from PT 1287:52 due to metrics
yielding thus pyi ’brog gdeṅs.

[T] yul yab (52) kyi rje myi bźugs na /
pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs pyol pyol gyi cha ʼo /
dog yab kyi char ma mchisna /
sa ʼon bu spur (53) khog khog (PT 1287:51-3)
(59) yul yab kyi rje ru gśegs so /
yul pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs myi pyol gyi cha ʼo /
dog yab kyi chab mchis (60) kyis /
sa ʼon bu spur myi khog gi cha ʼo / (PT 1287:59-60)
“If the lord over (lit. of) living space does not
reside,
[one] will be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of the country].
If the rain did not come from the sky,
seeds, blown away and flying, are withering.”
“[He] came as the lord over (lit. of) living space.
[One] will not be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of] the country.
For the rain from the sky came,
seeds, blown away and flying, will not wither.”

1
DOTSON’s comment that “phyi ’brog appears interchangeably with ’brog phyi in ritual texts” (2013a:323n35) is insofar
imprecise and misleading as he does not mention that all these occurrences concern proper names. Compare also their
translations in THOMAS (1957:20-8): “the Outer-Wilds country Highlands-eight” (ll.54-5), “the Outer-Wilds country Gtaṅ-
three” (l.56), “the country Outer-Wilds Ldaṅ three” (ll.83-4), “the country Outer-Wilds Ltaṅ-three” (l.91), “Outer-Wilds
Ldaṅ three” (ll.95-6), and “the country Outer-Wilds Highlands-eight” (l.106). The original form could be perhaps
reconstructed as *yul phyi ’brog gdeṅs gsum/brgyad “country of three/eight vast borderland pastures” in which case
phyi ’brog gdeṅs gsum/brgyad would have to be interpreted as an exocentric compound similar to thag brgyad in rgyal thag
brgyad or gru bźi in se gru bźi.
2
For more examples see BIALEK 2015 (forthcoming a).
3
Theoretically, one could also propose to reconstruct the compound under consideration as *(yul) phyi ’brog thaṅ/daṅ
“pastures and plains/meadows of the borderlands (of the country)”. However, thaṅ as well as daṅ are widely recognised
lexemes and there would be no reason to replace them with gdeṅs, ltaṅ, gtaṅ or ldaṅ as is the case with the place names
cited above.
4
gdaṅs = V2 < gdaṅ “to open wide mouth and nostrils” (J:265a); cf. also the dialectal data in CDTD.V:608.
 369

120 yul yab

BYD:511b: pha yul lam skyes sa.
DTH:127: père du pays; URAY.1966:251: fathers of the country; HAARH.1969:311: literally land-fathers, may undoubtedly be
taken in the same general sense of subjects. The close analogy between yul yab kyi rje ru gśegs and the usual formula
applying to the progenitor king mi yi rje ru gśegs quite especially points to an identical meaning of yul yab, mi signifying bod
mi, and (bod) ’baṅs; p.417: the fathers of the Country; HILL.2006:96: fatherland; DOTSON.2009:144: fathers of the land;
ZEISLER.2011:173: the patron of the country; DOTSON.2013a:263: fathers of the land; ZEISLER.2015:758: the patron of the
country.

[E] *yul gyi yab “a covering of the land”

[M] (N) living space
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NOBJV+N]
[R] dog yab / yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs
[A] yul yab occurs in OT sources exclusively as a determiner of the word rje “lord”, namely in the
phrase yul yab kyi rje. In its all four occurrences, yul yab kyi rje is juxtaposed with rain that comes
from the sky (dog yab) and gives life to plants. Analogously to the interpretation of -yab in dog yab, I
propose to trace back the second element of the compound to the deverbal noun *yab “a covering” <
(g.)yab pa “1to lock, to lock up, secure, cover over” (J:507a; for a thorough semantic analysis of the
morpheme yab see s.v. dog yab).

If we presume the underlying structure of the compound to have been *yul gyi yab, lit. “a covering of
the land”, we acquire in fact a phrase very similar to the one adopted for the compound dog yab, i.e.
*sa dog gi yab. It can be assumed that the term under discussion is another metaphoric expression.

Now, the following clauses that structurally resemble yul yab kyi rjer gśegs are found in OT sources:
’greṅ mgo nag gi rjer myi rjer lha las gśegs (PT 16:34v1)
“[He] came from among gods as a lord over (lit. of) black-headed upright ones, as a lord over (lit.
of) men.”

bod ka g.yag drug gi rjer gśegs (PT 1286:34)

“[He] came as a lord of Bod ka g.yag drug.”

gnam mtha’ ’og gi rjer gśegs (PT 1286:35)

“[He] came as a lord of the world.”

rje daṅ daṅ daṅs kyi rje ma gśegs (PT 1289:v2.4)

“The lord Daṅ daṅ, the lord of Daṅs, did not come.”

’o lde spu rgyal gnam gyi lha las myi’i rjer gśegs (ITJ 751:35v2)
“’O lde spu rgyal came down from the gods of the sky as a lord of men.”

’o lde spu rgyal // gnam gyi (2) lha las myi’i rjer gśegs (Khri 1-2)
“’O lde spu rgyal came down from the gods of the sky as a lord of men.”

ña gri btsan po myi yul gyi rjer / lha ri gyaṅ dor gśegs (Rkoṅ 4)
 370

“Ña gri btsan po came [down] to Lha ri gyaṅ do as a lord of men and land.”
From these we gather that the determiner of rje could denote either human beings or a land (world
in general or a particular country). Thus, a similar denotation can be expected in case of yul yab as
well. The analysis of the compounds with the second element -yab (see s.v. dog yab) has uncovered
that the morpheme could be identified with the kinship term yab “father” only if the first element of
the compound denoted a human being. We could suppose that yul- stands for, e.g., *yul myi (a
compound attested in OT sources as well, see OTDO); in this case, however, it would be more logical
for the compound under consideration to take the form *myi yab “father(s) of men” – the form yul
yab for the underlying structure *yul myi’i yab would, for obvious reasons, be highly misleading.
Accordingly, it is proposed to understand yul yab as referring to a land formation.

Comparing the compound under discussion with dog yab as well as considering the contexts in
which it appears the following literal reading of the compound could be proposed: *yul gyi yab, lit. “a
covering of the land”. As regards the proper understanding of the phrase, it is assumed that, as dog
yab was suggested to be interpreted as referring to the sky from which rain comes, so yul yab could
have been a general term denoting all the living creatures together with their living environment,
thus resembling in its contents to some extent the modern term ‘biosphere’. Another argument
supporting this hypothesis comes from ITJ 734 where we read:
yul rje ’o lde spu rgyal bźugs (8r322)
“The lord of the land, ’O lde spu rgyal, resided.”

If we accept the identification of ’O lde spu rgyal with Ñag khri btsan po (at least on the narrative
level1; see LI/COBLIN:101, 209-10) then we can easily juxtapose his denomination as yul rje from ITJ
734 with, on the one hand, yul yab kyi rje and, on the other hand, myi yul gyi rje (Rkoṅ 4). The
comparison of the latter two phrases would confirm the proposed interpretation of yul yab as
referring to broadly understood *“living space” including living beings and land just as in the
coordinate compound myi yul.2

1
The former was the first ancestor of the Tibetan btsan pos according to the inscriptions at the tomb of Khri lde sroṅ
brtsan (l.1) and on the ST Treaty pillar (E 5), whereas the latter if we follow the text of the Old Tibetan Chronicles (PT
1286:31-43).
2
Two further hypotheses could be put forward concerning the reconstruction of yul yab, namely:
1
< *yul yar luṅ “the country Yar luṅ” - a phrase attested in PT 1285:r79; here one would have to assume that the
compound *yul yar was changed to yul yab, perhaps by analogy with dog yab. According to PT 1285:r27-8, the lord of yul yar
luṅ was ’O lde spu rgyal. Referred back to PT 1287, this interpretation would mean that it was indeed Ña khyi who went
back to Phyiṅ ba stag rtse. First of all, the syntax of PT 1287:50-1 would speak for Ña khyi as the subject of the verbs lags
and gśegs (for a more thourough discussion of the passage see ZEISLER 2011:170-1 and DOTSON 2013a:323n34). Secondly, this
can also be inferred from the Rkoṅ po inscription (ll.4-5) which relates that seven generations of Tibetan rulers, from Ña
gri (sic!) btsan po to Dri gum were residing in Phyiṅ ba stag rtse. Furthermore, as remarked by DOTSON (2013a:323n33), the
terms gcuṅ and gcen in PT 1287:50 seem to have been erased and written once more in the reversed order; thus originally
the text read *gcen ña khyi and *gcuṅ śa khyi. This would also correspond to the custom of the Tibetan language to mention
first the elder and then the younger brother, as in the compound gcen gcuṅ (Źwa W 7), for other examples see PT 1068:99
(pu pu gchen po), l.102 (nu po gcung po); PT 1286:30-1, 42 (gcen gsum gcuṅ gsum); PT 1288:8 (btsan po gcen sroṅ rtsan daṅ / gcuṅ
btsan sroṅ); Rkoṅ 5 (gcen ña khyi daṅ / gcuṅ śa khyi). As a matter of fact, one gets the impression that the narrations about
the first rulers of Tibet become complicated with the introduction of two sons of Dri gum, one of whom holds a name
(almost) identical with the one of the progenitor of the royal line (see also HAARH 1969:158f.). If we add to this the
observation that the names of two sons of Dri gum, Ña khyi and Śa khyi, are uniquelly paralleling each other - an
 371

[T] (30) // lha gnam gyi steṅ nas gśegs paʼ // gnam lhab kyi bla na // yab lha bdag drug bźugs pa ʼi sras /
gcen (31) gsum gcuṅ gsum na / khri ʼi bdun tshigs daṅ bdun / khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras / khri ñag khri btsan
poʼ // (32) sa dog la yul yab kyi rje / dog yab kyi char du gśegs so’ // (PT 1286:30-2)
“The ones who came down from the heights of the gods’ sky: the sons of Yab lha bdag drug, who
dwells in the heigths of the broad sky, together with Khri ’i bdun tshigs, [who was] between the
three elder brothers and three younger brothers, [were] seven. The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Khri
ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over (lit. of) living space, as the rain
from (lit. of) the sky.”
(43) khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras // lde ñag khri btsan po / sa dog la yul yab kyi rje dog yab kyi char du gśegs
nas // (PT 1286:43)
“The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Lde ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over
(lit. of) living space, as the rain from (lit. of) the sky.”
yul yab (52) kyi rje myi bźugs na / “If the lord over (lit. of) living space does not
reside,
pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs pyol pyol gyi cha ʼo / [one] will be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of the country].
dog yab kyi char ma mchisna / If the rain did not come from the sky,
sa ʼon bu spur (53) khog khog (PT 1287:51-3) seeds, blown away and flying, are withering.”
(59) yul yab kyi rje ru gśegs so / “[He] came as the lord over (lit. of) living space.
yul pyi ʼbrog gdeṅs myi pyol gyi cha ʼo / [One] will not be avoiding the vast pastures of the
marches [of] the country.
dog yab kyi chab mchis (60) kyis / For the rain from the sky came,
sa ʼon bu spur myi khog gi cha ʼo / (PT 1287:59-60) seeds, blown away and flying, will not wither.”

121 ram ’da’

CT ra mda’
D Zilphukhog ramda “lit. arrow fence; local militia” (THARGYAL 2007:186); Tabo “backing, support”, Western Drokpas
“persecutor” (CDTD:7900, s.v. ra mda’).
YeŚes:510a: ham ci ya, nuo huor, ’el pe ge su, ’u mug le hu; dpuṅ bsgrigs nas grogs byed pa (s.v. ra mda’); p.513b: ham sal ga,
de ma ne hu, tsa ra la hu, pa tsa ’aṅ pel de hu, ’u mug (s.v. ram mda’); BYMD:113r1: ömüg, nökür (s.v. ra mda’); SR.2:875.3:
sānāthya; dpuṅ bsgrigs nas grogs byed pa; ömüg qamsalγ-a (s.v. ra mda’); GC:814a: zla grogs dpuṅ gñen byed pa (s.v. ra
mda’); BTC:2636b: 1dpuṅ rogs sam zla bo. 2rjes ’ded (s.v. ra mda’); BYD:523a: dpuṅ bsgril nas grogs byed pa (s.v. ra mda’);
p.525b: dgra bo rjes ’ded byed mkhan (s.v. ram ’da’).
BSODDBAṄ.1992:78n106: ra mda’ yi ’bri tshul gźan źig. dgra bo rje ’ded byed mkhan. a mdo daṅ khams khul gyi yul skad red;
DUṄDKAR:1906b: rgyab skyor bcol ba’am rogs ram bcol ba la zer (s.v. ra mda’ sbran).
Cs:230a: grogs, a companion, assistant (s.v. ra mda’); Sch:539a: ein Gehilfe, Gefährte, Helfershelfer; Schr:310a: aid, help,
relief, succour, assistance, protection (s.v. ra mda’); J:520b: help, assistance; D:1160a: 1= zla or grogs friend, companion,
assistant, helper; 2= rogs ram help, assistance (s.v. ra mda’); Desg:929a: I= grogs compagnon, aide, secours; IIpoursuivre;
B:632a: friend, companion; helper, assistant; assistance, help (s.v. ra mda’); R.9:10b: I.1помощь; содействие; help; assistance;
2
помощник, подручный; helper, assistant; 3друг; friend; IIпреследование, погоня; chasing, pursuing (one who is running
away) (s.v. ra mda’); Gs:1017c: 1a traditional defense system in which each household must send an armed man on
horseback to chase bandits; 2reinforcements, auxiliary, supplementary troops or militia (s.v. ra mda’); ZSDB:297: trace,
tracking (s.v. ra mda’).

onomastic feature not encountered in case of other names of historical royal persons but attested for legendary kings as
listed already in OT genealogies (cf. also schematic names of quasi-historical rulers of Tibet provided in later native
sources as juxtaposed in HAARH 1969:45ff., and the names Sroṅ ṅe and ’Khor re (alias Ye śes ’od?) from the later royal line of
Pu hraṅ; KARMAY 1998:3) - we can risk an hypothesis that those were mere legendary characters.
Although this hypothesis seems to be the most convincing one, I refrain from accepting it definitely for two reasons: 1all
the sources speak unanimously of yul yab; 2*yul yar would presume an additional morphological change from *-yar to -yab.
2
< *yul chab gyi ya bgo. According to this hypothesis, the second constituent of the compound yul yab would be a clipping
from the original ya bgo.
 372

DTH:62: Ram ʼdaʼ (place name - JB); TAUBE.1980:130: Hilfe; BECKWITH.1987:129n124: the Chinese forces (for rgya’i ram ’da’ - JB);
TOH.2002:393: assistant; mda’ is here related to zla in zla rogs/grogs “companion, assistant”; n.2: The Qing official title 土司安
撫使 (Manchu: aiman-i toktobure bilure hafan) was rendered by Tib. ’jags byed rams (read: ram, cf. rogs ram ‘assist’) zla “a
deputy assisting [the local chieftain in] the preservation of peace”; DOTSON.2009:126: Ram ʼdaʼ ji par (place name - JB).

[S] *ra ma ’da’ “to pursue/follow an advance guard”

[E] *ra ma ’da’ ba “one persuing an advance guard”
[M] (N) support force
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[R] dra cen
[A] The clause cited below from the Turfan collection demonstrates clearly that ram ’da’ was
originally a verbal phrase the second member of which should be traced back to a transitive verb,
cf.:
[[gaṅ kyis kyaṅ]A [ram]O ’da’] myi nus pas (T III Ili Köl A3; trslr. after TAUBE 1980:130, text 97)
“Since no one is able to ’da’ ram [...]”1
Now, DAS, without, however, naming his sources, glosses ra mda’II with “pursuing one who is running
away, chasing” (D:1160a) for which one should cite also Western Drokpas ra̱mtā “persecutor”
(CDTD:7900), Zilphukhog ramda “lit. arrow fence; local militia” (THARGYAL 2007:186) as well as the
gloss “trace, tracking” (ZSDB:297). BSOD NAMS SKYID and DBAṄ RGYAL (1992:78n106) explain ram ’da’
from an unspecified Khams and Amdo dialects as “ra mda’ yi ’bri tshul gźan źig. dgra bo rje ’ded
byed mkhan” and are followed by HUANG and MA (2000:75) who state that the term denoted a type of
troop (apus DOTSON 2009:126n327). Additionally, TSHE RIṄ DBAṄ RGYAL glosses sbron pa with “ra mda’;
hutiḥ; maṃtrana; nimaṃtrama” (Ts:126v1). On these grounds, as well as taking into account the
above analysis of the underlying verbal phrase, I propose to reconstruct the second element as
cognate to CT verb bda’ “II= ’ded pa, 1to drive, to drive out; to chase, to put to flight; 2to carry away,
along, or off, to hurry off; 3to call in, collect, recover; 4to reprove, rebuke, accuse” (J:269a).2

As concerns the first constituent of the compound, it might be helpful to cite some CT formations
that contain the syllable ra and seem to be semantically related to our compound, cf.: khyi ra “Jagd,
bes[onders] Einzelj[agd], Anstand u[nd] d[er]gl[eiche]” (Jä:48a), “chase, hunting, esp[ecially] of
single huntsmen, not of a party; stable-stand” (J:46b), Trangtse, Tabo, Nubri, Southern Mustang,
Dingri, Shigatse “hunt” (CDTD:848); ña ra “care” (J:184b; ña ra byed pa “hüten, bewahren”, Sch:187a),
“1fishing grounds; 2fishery; 3keeping sth. for sb., looking after, taking care of sth.” (Gs:408b), Nurla
“with tʃo to keep” (CDTD:2888); phag ra “parapet” (J:339b), Balti “shed, shelter, place, where so. can
be protected”, Kargil, Tshangra “protection” (CDTD:5071); bya ra “heed, care, caution” (Cs:94b), “this
word belonging to the language of the people and to later literature, is not so much an abstract, as a
concrete noun, signifying a watchman, superintendent (chiefly by day, cf. mel-tshe night-watch); it

1
TAUBE’s translation: “[...] kann von niemandem Hilfe gebracht werden.” Unfortunately, the text is badly damaged not
allowing for a more thorough discussion of the passage.
2
An hypothesis is put forward that OT ’da’- as attested in ram ’da’ - is the original V1 stem of the paradigm *V1 ’da’, V2 bdas,
V3 bda’.
 373

denotes more particularly that individual of a community, who has to see to it, that the compulsory
post-office duties be punctually performed, and that messages from the lord or magistrate of the
place be duly dispatched and forwarded to their place of destination” (J:374a).1 These compounds
share two characteristics: 1they contain the morpheme -ra; 2they all, in one or the other way,
express the notion of “keeping; observation” or “following”.

However, all the documented variants of the analysed compound attest to a word internal labial
nasal sound. If the reconstruction of the second element as cognate to or derived from bda’ is
acknowledged, we have to reckon with the final -m of the first syllable. S.v. dra cen a few further
lexemes have been presented that were assumed to belong to one word family with dra ma. Among
them we find also words with closed syllables. Those are ’dram pa and ram. The ideas connoted by
those as well as by ra can be traced back to the sememe *“looking after, watching over; following
sth.”. It is assumed that, in the process of lexicalisation and probably following its usage in
compounds, *ra ma has been clipped to ram.2

The reconstructed phrase greatly resembles in its semantics the otherwise well attested collocation
dra ma ’draṅ (for details see s.v. dra cen). ’da’ in ram ’da’ could have the meaning of “to pursue” for
which compare also the later and possibly suppletive verb ’ded “1va. to follow; 2va. to drive, herd
(animals), to cause to move forward; 3va. to chase, to go after, to pursue” (Gs:576b). In the context of
warfare *ra ma ’da’ could originally have denoted forces that were responsible for the reconnaisance
and watching for enemies’ advance guards. In the process of lexicalisation the original *ra ma ’da’
*“to pursue the ra ma” could have developed to *ram ’da’ with the classically attested meaning “help,
assistance” via *“support forces” - the rendering proposed for the OT attestations. However, further
studies (including material from other TB languages) are needed in order to fully elucidate the
semantics of the morpheme *ra. One could tentatively speculate about its historical relations to
Chepang ram- “vt. forage, go around (with purpose, seeking or gathering something)” (CAUGHLEY
2000:225b); the reconstructed meaning *“to go around” would allow to include also CT ra ba
“1enclosure, fence,wall” (J:521a) into the same word family. On the other hand, *ra could at the same
time have developed the meaning *“to look after sth.; to watch”.3 To conclude, I propose to render

1
We should mention in this connection also two Lepcha compounds that, although not marked as such by MAINWARING and
GRÜNWEDEL, could in fact be Tibetan loanwords, i.e. ša ra-bo “a hunter” and nya ra-bo “a fisherman” (MG:33b, s.v. ra4).
2
ram is found glossed with “Hilfe” (CÜPPERS 2004:90). Further formations including this lexeme are: ram ’degs
“1supplementary, subsidiary, auxiliary” (Gs:1031a), “help, supplementary” (ZSDB:301); ram ’degs pa “assistant, aide, helper”
(Gs:1031a), “helper, assistant” (ZSDB:301; compare hereto also ra mda’ ’degs pa “to help”, J:278b); ram ’debs “помощь; help,
assistance” (R.9:42a); ram bu “helping, assisting” (Gs:1031a); ram śag “(rñiṅ) 1’byor pa; 2’gyod pa” (BTC:2667a); grogs ram
Dzongkha “help, assistance” (CDTD:1347); tha ram “2undisciplined, bad behavior” (Gs:484a; < *tha ma’i ram or *tha mal pa’i
ram); rogs ram “help, assistance” (Gs:1049a). CT rams “ein gelehrter Würdegrad” (Sch:541b) could also belong to this word
family. It is presumed that ram in the above listed compounds resulted from the truncation of the compound *ram ’da’.
3
Further cognates and derivatives encompass: OT [sla] ra ba “the first [month]” (cf. also sla tha chuṅ and sla ’briṅ po); ra ma
“ajā; 1nṛpaḥ; 2bhadantaḥ” (Negi.14:6111b), “adzā, adzikā” (Ts:165v1); ra ma mo “chef, maire de village” (Desg:929a). One
could consider including also OT ra bgo pa (ITJ 753:v21, 22, 24, 26; variant form rab mgo, ibid., l.v19) “ringleader” (DOTSON
2007b:14) into our list of the cognates: *[ra ma’i ’go] pa “the leader of the advance guard” > *[ra ’go] pa > [ra bgo] pa (b-
epenthesis); cf. ra bgo “senāpatiḥ” (Negi.14:6110b). The reconstructed meaning of ra ma as *”advance guard” can be
juxtaposed with the Lepcha 1ra “ra-m surging and tumultuous advance” (MG:330a).
 374

the reconstructed stem *ra ma tentatively with “advance guard” or “intelligence” that, as argued s.v.
dra cen, could subsequently have developed a more general meaning of *”[expeditionary] forces”.

The morphological change from the original phrase to the compound attested in CT as ra mda’ could
have proceeded along the following lines: *ra ma ’da’ ba > OT ram ’da’ (compounding) > CT ra mda’
(folk etymologisation to acquire morphologically transparent syllables ra- and -mda’).

[T] rgyaʼi dmag dpon ʼbaʼ tsaṅ kun / kog yul gyi rgyaʼi (5) byim po draṅste / dbon ʼa źa rje daṅ blon maṅ pho
rje gñis gyis mkhar jid par la brgalde / rgyaʼi ram ʼdaʼ jid par du / phud (6) gon mkhar pho cer draṅste / rgya
phal cer bkum / (Or.8212.187:4-6)
“Chinese general ’Ba’ tsaṅ kun led Chinese byim po of Kog yul; both, the nephew, the lord of ’A źa,
and councillor Maṅ pho rje, fought against the stronghold Jid par; [one] led Chinese support forces
to Jid par, to a great Phud gon mkhar; [one] killed most Chinese.”

122 riṅ lugs

[V] raṅ lugs (PT 1101:9; Or.8210/S.2228:a11; Kozlov 4:7; scribal error/text damage?)
riṅ lus (Or.15000/490:3; scribal error)
riṅ (ITN 789:r1; scribal error)
YeŚes:516b: ’u niṅ yo so, tsad yo so, hu’u li; Ts:169r3: mata; SR.2:919.1: qauli; yosu; ǰirum; nom-un yosu; öbedegsi yosu; egüri
yosu; šasin yosu1; GC:832a: yun riṅ du gnas pa’i lam srol; LCh:752c: mata; BTC:2695a: 1riṅ du gnas pa’i lugs srol lam riṅ nas
chags pa’i lugs srol; 2lta ba ste go rim ldan źiṅ cha lag tshaṅ ba’i bsam rgyun daṅ bźed srol; 3chos lugs kyi go miṅ źig; 4bsam
pa’i ’khyer so; 5spyi tshogs kyi lam lugs ṅes can źig gam chab srid dpal ’byor gyi ma lag ṅes can źig.
Cs:234b: the sect or followers of; Sch:546a: alte Sitten, Gebräuche, altes Herkommen; D:1182b: doctrine; one’s sect, religious
order, or school; old custom; Desg:941a: secte, sectateurs, vieilles coutumes; B:649a: sect, religious order; doctrine, -ism;
followers, members (of a sect, political party, etc.); old customs; R.9:78a: 1укоренившиеся обычаи (привычки); deeply
rooted customs (habits); 2доктрина; школа, направление; doctrine; school, sect; 3словообразовательний суффикс,
соответствующий суффиксу “изм”; word forming morpheme, corresponding to “-ism”; Gs:1039a: doctrine, principle, -
ism; ZSDB:304: doctrine, -ism.
DTH:47: décret; p.52: ordre; TLTD.2:16: seems in some places to mean “courier” or “commissioner”, elsewhere “usage” or
“decision”; TLTD.3:12: courier; p.59: the old usage; p.67: custom; RICHARDSON.1953:6: my helpers thought that it means only
“old customs”; LALOU.1955:194: coutumier; TUCCI.1958.2:56: transmitter; URAY.1960:49n35: order; URAY.1962b:358: decree;
RICHARDSON.1973:16n13: seems to have a wide range of meaning; in a large number of other instances it implies an official
function connected with the attesting of documents or with the communication of orders, or with records; the term is
found less often in mss in a religious context; in current Tibetan the word refers to tradition or doctrine;
RICHARDSON.1985:53n12: a code of rules, practice of justice; the title of a civil official administering that code and attesting
decisions in judical cases and business contracts – registrar, commissioner; one who maintains or transmits the “law” – the
doctrine – of the Buddha. There might be more than one riṅ lugs in a community; LI/COBLIN:290: lit. customs of long
standing; a religious doctrine or school; it was also used to refer to individuals who were presumably originally perceived
as followers or upholders of established customs or doctrines; in the secular sphere the riṅ lugs seem to have functioned as
commissioners or notaries; the riṅ lugs also served as religious functionaries; PETECH.1988a:296: 1costume antico (è anche il
significato moderno del termine; ma qui non pare applicabile); 2corriere o commissario; trasmettitore, rappresentante;
URAY.1990:420: transmitter; n.8: “emissary, commissioner” as an administrative term and “transmitter (of the doctrine)” as
an ecclesiastical one; COBLIN.1991c:75: a type of official or commissioner; RICHARDSON.1992:106: registrars; n.6: a court or
similar body for ensuring compliance with established precedents and practice. In a religious context it means an abbot or
monastic body responsible for the maintenance and transmission of the Buddhist doctrine, etc.; TAKEUCHI.1995:51: a

For the semantic development of the proposed word family of ra compare the derivatives of ñul “to wander or rove
about, to pass privily or steal through” (J:189a), ñul po “wanderer, vagabond” (Gs:418c) and ñul ma “spy” (Gs:418c), that
attest to the twofold semantic development of the stem that is documented in lexicographic sources as a synonym of ’dram
po (see s.v. dra cen).
1
CM qauli “usage, custom; law, rule, regulation, statute, decree; codex; punishment” (Less:946a); yosu(n) “generally
accepted rule, traditional custom, habit, or usage; etiquette; doctrine, dogma, principle; regime, system; policy; mode,
manner, method” (Less:435b); qauli yosu “law; rule and custom” (Less:946a); ǰirum “line (obs.); established order, system,
regime; code of laws; ideology; line of action; norm; often equivalent to suff. “-ism,” forming abstract notions”
(Less:1061b); nom “areligious book or scripture; book (in general); bteaching (often religious teaching); dharma; religion,
esp. Buddhism” (Less:590a); -un GEN; öbedegsi “best, most, highly; worthy, distinguished” (Less:627a); egüri “long time, long
age; old, ancient” (Less:302a); šasin “religion, teaching, faith, doctrine, precept” (Less:753b).
 375

commission; n.5: riṅ lugs seems to have several different usages in Old Tibetan texts. But the common feature to all the
usages may be phrased as “one who is authorized a power to perform various acts: namely, a commission or a
commissioner”; RICHARDSON.1998a:186: commissioner; p.187: [d]esignates, in a religious context, abbots who maintain and
transmit the doctrine; and in a secular context a body with judicial functions, the maintainers and interpreters of
established laws and traditions; WALTER.1998:311: a nominal compound of riṅ + lugs; lit. “the custom / system – lugs – of the
continuing sacral presence – riṅ (of the bTsan po)”, which would be equivalent to riṅ gi lugs; the entire government was in
some way considered an extension of the bTsan po, a part of his “person” which obtains through space and time (riṅ), for
the welfare of the entire state; riṅ lugs is thus an abstract nominal phrase, denoting not a group of people per se, or a
document, or laws, etc., but a selected set of officials who have, as a special responsibility, the particular duty of the
enforcement of laws which – coming from and representing the presence (riṅ) of the bTsan po – must be upheld to
maintain order, social, political, and cosmic; SCHERRER-SCHAUB.2002:288: representative; DOTSON.2009:59: representative of
the emperor, a functionary upholding the presence (riṅ) of the emperor; WALTER.2009:16: commissioner; p.172: the official
commission of monks which oversaw the behavior and responsibilities of the Sangha vis-à-vis the government of the
Imperium (for bcom ldan ’das kyi riṅ lugs - JB); HILL.2011:33: representative.

[S] *riṅs par zlugs “to inform so that [it] is quick”

[E] *riṅs par zlugs pa “one informing so that [it] is quick”
[M] (N) 1envoy; 2representative
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[A] Contextual analysis. First, we should take a closer look at various phrases in which riṅ lugs
occurs in OT documents. Those are grouped below according to the syntactic position of the
compound:
1. Subject:
[riṅ] lugs ni ’dun sar mchis (PT 1087:3) “riṅ lugs went to the assembly hall.”;
2. Agent:
riṅ lugs gyis bris (PT 1084:27-8; Or.15000/326:r2) “riṅ lugs wrote.”;
riṅ lugs gyis phul (PT 1203:r8) “riṅ lugs gave.”;
riṅ lugs ’ga’ źig gis dgug (Or.8212/1842:2) “Some riṅ lugs sent.”;
riṅ lus (read: lugs) kyis [...] bkug (Or.15000/490:3-5) “riṅ lugs called.”;
3. Object:
riṅ lugs daṅ dpaṅ chen dbyaṅste (PT 1084:17) “to decide riṅ lugs and great defender”;
riṅ lugs myi ’tshal (PT 1101:8) “to not wish riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs HUM la spriṅ (PT 2204c:2-3) “to send riṅ lugs to HUM”;
riṅ lugs bkyeʼ (ITJ 750:240-1, 307) “to send riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs bgyis (Vol.57, fol.220:4) “to act as a riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs gcad (ITN 627:r1-2) “to decide riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs [...] bsko (Skar 40; Źwa W 59-61) “to appoint riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs byed (Skar 41) “to act as riṅ lugs”;
4. Complement:
riṅ lugs su mchis te / (PT 1297.2:18) “went to riṅ lugs”;
5. Adjunct:
 376

riṅ lugsu phrog (PT 1088:5; PT 1101:9; PT 1166:5; PT 1297.1:v7; PT 1297.6:a5; Or.8210/S.2228:a11-2;
Ch.frag.82v:b7; Kozlov 4:7) “took to riṅ lugs”;1
riṅ [lugs] (2) la gthad (ITN 789:r1-2) “to deliver to riṅ lugs”;
6. Apposition:
pho ña riṅ lugs ltaṅ sogs (Or.15000/496:2) “messenger, riṅ lugs, porter”;
6.1. Title/Function followed by a proper name (PT 1002:5; PT 1079:5-6; PT 1084:6; ITJ 1359(A):2;
Or.15000/496:2);
7. Head of an NP:
lha ris thaṅ rtsis mdzad pa’i riṅ lugs (PT 997:6) “riṅ lugs who were making accounts of the tallies of
jurisdiction of the monastic estate”
’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) ’debs pa’i riṅ lugs (PT 997:7) “riṅ lugs who were issuing
tallies of jurisdiction [of] subjects and property in grain”
gstsaṅ ’bogs gi riṅ lugs (PT 2204c:2) “riṅ lugs of grain-bags”;
zlugs gyi riṅ lugs (ITJ 750:240) “riṅ lugs of information”;
ʼbrog sog gcod paʼi riṅ lugs (ITJ 750:307) “riṅ lugs that were deciding over summer pastures and
hay-lands”;
źiṅ ’god kyi riṅ lugs (Or.15000/326:r2; Or.15000/536:2; ITN 789:r1-2) “riṅ lugs of źiṅ ’god”;
bcom ldan ’da’s kyi riṅ lugs (PT 997:12-3; Lcaṅ 41-2; Skar 40, 41) “Buddha’s riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs thugs ches pa (Źwa W 59-60) “trustworthy riṅ lugs”;
8. Determiner of an NP:
riṅ lugs gyi sug rgya (PT 1078bis:37) “a hand-seal of riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs gyi g.yar sṅar (PT 1079:13) “in the presence of riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs rnams gyi bcad rgya (PT 1079:22) “bcad-seal of riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs daṅ / dpaṅ chen goṅ ma rnams daṅ / gña bo’i gña’ rgya (PT 1084:25-6) “witness-seals of
superior riṅ lugs and great defenders, and the witnesses”;
riṅ lugs stag bzaṅ tsi dam daṅ / g.yu bźer (3) brtan koṅ gi g.ya sṅar (ITJ 1359(A):2-3) “in the presence
of riṅ lugs Stag bzaṅ tsi dam and G.yu bźer brtan koṅ”;
riṅ lugs daṅ dpaṅ chen daṅ khon ta’ rnam kyi sug rgya (Or.15000/490:18) “hand-seals of riṅ lugs,
great defender, and the person concerned”;
riṅ lugs kyi (’)phrin byaṅ (PT 997:13; Vol.55, fol.20:4, 5) “a missive of a riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs kyi ’dun sa (Lcaṅ 42) “an assembly hall of riṅ lugs”;
riṅ lugs kyi rgya (Źwa W 62) “a seal of riṅ lugs”.2
Now, if we consider riṅ lugs under the aspect of the syntactic functions it can fulfill in a sentence, we
see that it is used in multiple positions. The most important for our discussion are those of agent

1
This phrase reminds one of the widely attested OT expressions blar gsol/bźes/phul.
2
Additionally, the compound is attested also in ITJ 1368:51, PT 1297.2:17 (riṅ lugs ke’u che’u tshe). The fragmentary
character of these passages does not allow us, however, to establish the exact syntactic function of the term.
 377

and object. To wit, riṅ lugs could write, give, send orders, and call but also make accounts and issue
tallies. When functioning as an object of a verb, riṅ lugs could be wished, sent, decided, appointed.
Besides, one could also act as a riṅ lugs. This short presentation demonstrates already that the term
obviously denoted a human being. The usage of the term when followed immediately by a proper
name proves that riṅ lugs was a kind of title or function in the administrative system of the Tibetan
Empire and could possess its own seal. The nature of this office is plainly demonstrated in the
phrase pho ña riṅ lugs ltaṅ sogs (Or.15000/496:2) “messenger, riṅ lugs, porter”.1

Morphological reconstruction: *riṅs par zlugsV1 pa > *riṅs zlugs (compounding) > *riṅ zlugs (elision of
the word internal voiceless fricative -s between voiced -ṅ and voiced fricative z-: -s > Ø / -ṅ_σz-) > riṅ
lugs (folk etymologisation by analogy with lugs and reduction of the word internal consonant cluster
through the elision of the fricative z-: z- > Ø / -ṅσ_l-). Following the line of the reasoning of the
previous section I propose to render riṅ lugs as *“courier” < lit. *”quickly informing (one)”. Of special
interest in the light of the reconstructed form is the phrase zlugs gyi riṅ lugs (ITJ 750:240) in which
the compound occurs in the direct proximity to its assumed cognate zlugs *”information” < V4 stem
of zlugs (V2 bzlugs, V3 bzlug, V4 zlugs; V1 = V4).2

Already during the period of the Old Tibetan, the compound seems to have shifted its meaning via
*“envoy” to *“representative”. The latter sense might have brought about the subsequent change in
the semantic class from HUMAN BEING to ABSTRACT NOTION (see the Lexicographic section above) after
the second element -lugs had been associated with the classical lugs “2way, manner, fashion, mode,
method; opinion, view, judgment, way of proceeding; established manner, custom, usage, rite”
(J:548a).3 Due to difficulties concerning the proper interpretation of many OT passages quoted
below, I decided to render riṅ lugs as “envoy” only in cases where a delivery of a message is of direct
concern. Otherwise, the term “representative” is used.

1
As concerns the semantic difference between riṅ lugs and pho ña, we observe that the latter term occurs in the OTA
always preceded by a determiner which is a name of a country or people that a pho ña represents, cf.: ce dog pan gyi po ña
(ITJ 750:125); rgya’i pho ña (ITJ 750:129, 143, 190, 253-4, 256, 259, 262, 265, 268, 272, 275, 277, 289, 295, 296-7; Or.8212.187:24,
46, 75); ’bug cor gyi pho ña (ITJ 750:215); stod phyogs gyi pho ña (ITJ 750:220; Or.8212.187:20, 40); dur gyis gyi po ña (ITJ 750:263,
297); mywa nag poe po ña (ITJ 750:289). Thus, a more accurate rendering of pho ña would probably be “emissary” or “legate”,
i.e., an ambassador of a foreign country.
For an interpretation of ltaṅ sogs see below.
2
As far as I was able to ascertain, zlugs is attested as a verb only once, in the following OT passage:
źaṅ legs sum brtsan daṅ / blon rgyal bzaṅ daṅ / źaṅ legs bzaṅ gis // kwa cu khrom kyi ’dun sa / tsheg pe’ur bsdud (5) pa’i lan gyi
dgun / bde gams gyi lha ris khab so bzlug ciṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) gdab par chad nas // (PT 1079:4-5; trslr. after RICHARDSON
1998a:184; for the amendment of thaṅ gdab compare the collocation thaṅ khram ’debs s.v. thaṅ khram.)
“In the winter, at the time when Źaṅ legs sum brtsan, councillor Rgyal bzaṅ, and Źaṅ legs bzaṅ gathered [the council] at
Tsheg pe’u, [in] the assembly hall of the khrom of Kwa cu, the monastic estates of Bde gams were decided so that, while
khab so were informed, tallies of jurisdiction were issued.”
Besides, zlugs occurs also as a part of the compound zlugs byaṅ (PT 997:15), lit. “information tablet” (RICHARDSON 1992:107:
“written report”; cf. (’)phrin byaṅ) and in the verbal phrase zlugs mdzad, cf.:
slan chad lo bdun źiṅ zlugs mdzad pa yaṅ (12) thaṅ (read: thaṅ yig) ’di la brgal tu stsal par bkas bcad (PT 997:11-2; trslr. after
RICHARDSON 1992:108)
“[One] decided by an order that later on also the information prepared during seven years shall be given to be
transferred to this record.”
3
The problem with the previous attempts made at explaining the compound in question is that none of them elucidates
how the presumed change of the semantic class ABSTRACT NOTION for lugs- (the point of departure for all earlier analysis) to
HUMAN BEING took place.
 378

The proposed reconstruction of the compound can be compared with other OT formations, e.g., baṅ
chen, rkaṅ mgyogs, and riṅs pa, all of which are metaphoric or metonymic expressions based on
similar conceptualisation of a courier as someone who moves quickly, cf. also:
deṅ pho ña źig riṅs par ʼoṅ ba sñam // (PT 1287:76)
“[He] thought that messengers go swifty those days.”1

[T] 1 mṅan mched brgyad las bźir bcos paʼi zlugs gyi riṅ lugs (241) bkyeʼ / (ITJ 750:240-1)
“The envoy was sent with (lit. of) the information [concerning] the reduction of the [number of]
grand mṅans from eight to four.”
bka’ riṅ lugs ’ga’ źig gis dgug chiṅ (Or.8212/1842:2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:14, text 46)
“The orders were sent by some envoys.”
pho ña riṅ lugs ltaṅ sogs ldoṅ phreṅ ’dor ’gu daṅ ṅo mkhan [---] (Or.15000/496:2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1998.2:211, text 613)
“messenger, envoy, porter2, among others, Ldoṅ phreṅ ’dor ’gu, and the guide [---]”
riṅ lugs kyi ’phrin [by]aṅ (5) [d]aṅ / chad pa’i gźi / bde gamsu mchis nas / bdagis bla ’og du gsol (Vol.55,
fol.20:4-5; trslr. after TLTD.2:56)
“After the missive (lit. message tablet) of an envoy and the ?statut? of a punishment arrived in Bde
khams, I submitted [it] to superior and inferior officials.”
riṅ lugs kyi ’phrin byaṅ khamsu mchis (Vol.55, fol.20:5; trslr. after TLTD.2:56)
“The missive of an envoy arrived in [Bde] khams.”
2
lha ris thaṅ rtsis mdzad pa’i riṅ lugs spyi la mchis pa // ban de ’bre gźon nu blo gros daṅ / ru dpon roṅs po
lha ’dus (7) kyi g.yar sṅar // ’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ thaṅ (read: thaṅ khram) ’debs pa’i riṅ lugs / naṅ khor gśen
rma sbyin daṅ ru ’theb ta ne (8) cuṅ daṅ stoṅ pon ro ’bye stag slebs daṅ / lo stag legs daṅ gñan rgyal bzaṅ
lastsogs pa’i (9) grar // kwa cu lha ris kyi khab so / sṅon gźi ’dzin ban de man ’ju śi ris thaṅ (read: thaṅ
khram) btab (PT 997:6-9; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1992:107-8)
“In the presence of ban de ’Bre gźon nu blo gros and the head of the Horn, Roṅs po lha ’dus, the
representatives who were making accounts of the tallies of jurisdiction3 of the monastic estate and
who were in the fore, the khab so of the monastic estate [of] Kwa cu, the earlier resident ban de Man
’ju śi ri, issued a tally of jurisdiction to the school of representatives who were issuing tallies of
jurisdiction [of] subjects and property in grain, naṅ khor Gśen rma sbyin, ru ’theb Ta ne cuṅ, the head
of the Thousand-District, Ro ’bye Stag slebs, Lo stag legs, Gñan rgyal bzaṅ, among others.”
pho graṅ (read: braṅ) nas // bcom ldan ’das kyi (13) riṅ lugs kyi phrin byaṅ mchis pa las ’byuṅ ba’ // thog ma
mṅan meg lde bźag lde la ’baṅs daṅ dkor stsaṅ (14) daṅ khab rdzas lastsogs pa thaṅ (read: thaṅ yig) tu gtad
(PT 997:12-4; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1992:108)
“What occurs from the message-tablet of the representatives of Buddha that came from the court: at
first, subjects, property in grain, and household objects, among others, were put in the record for
the mṅan Meg lde bźag lde.”

1
For a short discussion of OT terms denoting different kinds of messenger see TLTD.2:333-4.
Alternatively, one could propose to reconstruct the compound as *riṅs paN zlugs paVA, lit. “an informing courier”.
However, the latter rendering would contain a tautology since a courier is ex officio a person responsible for delivering
messages.
2
Lit. “bale-shoulder“, a metonymic expression for someone who carries goods on his shoulder. One could also propose an
alternative, although less plausible, interpretation, namely, “one gathering bales” < *ltaṅ sog(s) pa. In this case, the original
sog might have been replaced by a more intelligible sogs known from the phrase las sogs/stsogs pa.
3
thaṅ rtsis is assumed to be a compound formed from the NP *thaṅ khram gyi rtsis.
 379

khams śul (read: yul) gyi riṅ lugs ban de sna nam blo gros dbaṅ po daṅ // (6) myaṅ stag dgra rdog rje daṅ /
gźi ’dzin ban de thub brtan (PT 1002:5-6)
“representative ban de Sna nam blo gros dbaṅ po and Myaṅ stag dgra rdog rje, and the resident ban
de Thub brtan from Khams-land”
riṅ lugs gyi sug rgya daṅ / khri zla blon btshan sum brtsan gyi bchad rgyas btab nas / (PT 1078bis:37)
“[One] furnished [it] with a hand-seal of a representative and a bchad-seal of Khri zla blon btshan
sum brtsan.”
śa cu man cad / sug cu yan cad / riṅ lugs ban de dpal (6) gnas daṅ / slob dpon ban de’i lha’i dbyaṅs / daṅ / śa
cu’i rtse rje blon rgyal khri daṅ / blon lho bzaṅ daṅ / śud pu blon rgyal sgra legs zigs daṅ / rtsis pa (7) lci sa
klu brtan las stsogs pa mchis pa’i tshe // lu lu źes brgyi’sba ma gumste / myiṅ brjes nas // (PT 1079:5-7;
trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184)
“At the time when the representative, ban de Dpal gnas, the teacher, ban de Lha Dbyaṅs, rtse rje of Śa
cu, councillor Rgyal khri, councillor Lho bzaṅ, śud pu, councillor Rgyal sgra legs zigs1, accountant Lci
sa klu brtan, among others, came [from all around between] Śa cu and Sug cu, the mother called Lu
lu died; [one] changed the name.”
riṅ lugs gyi g.yar sṅar // [...] la stsogste rmas na yaṅ // (PT 1079:13-6; trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:184-
5)
“Having gathered in the presence of the representative, [...] enquired.”
riṅ lugs rnams gyi bcad rgya daṅ (23) gnas brtan daṅ / mṅan bla za (?) ’og gi sug rgyas btab (PT 1079:22-3;
trslr. after RICHARDSON 1998a:185)
“[One] affixed the bcad-seal of the representative as well as the hand-seals of the elder monk and
superior and inferior mṅans.”
riṅ lugs stag lo maṅ ka sa daṅ (7) dpaṅ chen spoṅ po ña goṅ da[ṅ] / diṅ chin cin daṅ // caṅ lha spyin daṅ /
caṅ phan legs (8) daṅ / jin hig tshe daṅ / caṅ tshin dze’u la stsogs pa’i mdun du deṅ ’do’i pyugs rdzi / (9) ho to
to bzuṅ ste rogs bu ’di su la mchis źes rmas pa las (PT 1084:6-9)
“Having seized Ho to to, the shepherd of Deṅ ’do, in front of the representative Stag lo maṅ ka sa,
great defenders Spoṅ po ña goṅ, Diṅ chin cin, Caṅ lha spyin, Caṅ phan legs, Jin hig tshe, and Caṅ
tshin dze’u, among others, ‘Whose is this small companion2?’ [they] asked.”
riṅ lugs daṅ dpaṅ chen dbyaṅste bdus (read: btus?) / (PT 1084:17)
“[One], having decided the representative and the great defenders, gathered.”3
ho to to’i sug rgya daṅ / riṅ lugs daṅ / dpaṅ chen goṅ ma rnams daṅ / gña bo’i (26) gña’ rgya btab pa’ / (PT
1084:25-6)
“what [one] furnished with the hand-seal of Ho to to and the witness-seals of superior
representatives and great defenders, and the witnesses.”
riṅ lugs gyis (28) bris te btab ste śa śa’i ’dra rgyas btab [pa]’ // (PT 1084:27-8)
“what the representative, having written and furnished, furnished with the ’dra-seal of Śa śa”

1
According to THOMAS (TLTD.3:185b), śud pu was a name of a tribe in Tibet. RICHARDSON interprets the term as referring to a
“noble familly connected with the ’A źa kingdom” (1998a:187n9). However, all the attested occurrences (where śud pu is
followed by a proper name) demonstrate that the term could in fact have been a title. In our passage this is made even
clearer when one compares, e.g., the phrase [śa cu’i rtse rje]TITLE blon [rgyal khri]PN with [śud pu] blon [rgyal sgra legs zigs]PN; both
consist of two parts divided by the word blon “councillor”, the former part contains a title (as is obvious from śa cu’i rtse
rje), the latter, the proper name. Thus, it follows that śud pu should be construed as some kind of function the exact nature
of which remains unknown.
2
Or should one read *rog bu “a small rogue”?
3
For the proposed translation of dbyaṅs compare źal ce dbyaṅ explained as “źal ce dpyaṅs khrims thag bcad pa”
(DSM:764a).
 380

[riṅ?] lugs ni ’dun sar mchis (PT 1087:3)

“As regards representatives, [they] went to the assembly hall.”
r[i]ṅ lugsu phrog na yaṅ źal ce (read: cu) tshig chig kyaṅ myi mchis par (6) [b]gyis (PT 1088:5-6; trslr. after
TAKEUCHI 1995:202)
“In case [one] took [these] to the representative, [the borrower] would not let even a word of
quarrel to have appeared.”
riṅ lugs myi ’tshal (9) bar raṅ (read: riṅ) lugsu phrogs na yaṅ źal mchu ma mchis par bgyis (PT 1101:8-9;
trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:221)
“In case [one ] took [these] to representatives without wishing representatives, [the borrower]
would not let any lawsuit to have appeared.”
dam rgya ’dis riṅ lugs bgyis te phrogs kyaṅ źal mchu / (6) tshig cig kyaṅ myi mchi’ bar bgyis (PT 1166:5-6;
trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:178)
“Although having made the representative with a seal1, [one] took [it], [the borrower] would not let
even a word of quarrel to appear.”
stsaṅ ’bogs riṅ lugs gyis phul ba’i sdom daṅ sbyar na khre khal phye daṅ gsum śor pa ston sgye’u kas ’bul bar
bcad (PT 1203:r8; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:232)
“When [one] compared ?grain-bags? with the summary that the representative had given, [one]
decided that in the autumn porters shall give [back] two and a half khal millet that was lost.”
riṅ lugsu phrogs na yaṅ źal cu tshig kyaṅ myi mchis bgyis / (PT 1297.1:7)
“In case [one ] took [these] to the representative, [the borrower] would not let any words of quarrel
to have appeared.”
bdag riṅ lugs su mchis te / (PT 1297.2:18)
“me, having gone to the representative [...]”
[riṅ lu]gsu ’phrog[s] na yaṅ źal (5) mcu tshig chig myi mchi bar bgyiste // (PT 1297.6:a5; trslr. after
TAKEUCHI 1995:212)
“In case [one ] took [these] to the representative, [the borrower] would not let even a word of
quarrel to appear.”
blon rma bźer gis / (2) / gstsaṅ ’bogs gi riṅ lugs blon dge bzaṅ daṅ / gstsaṅ spyan daṅ [---] (3) [---] [la
stso?]gs pa la spriṅ ṅo // (PT 2204c:1-3)
“Councillor Rma bźer is sending a representative for (lit. of) ?grain-bags? to councillor Dge bzaṅ,
grain inspector, and [...], among others.”
(307) pagi lo la / btsan poe po braṅ na mar na bźugste / ʼbrog sog gcod paʼi riṅ lugs so sor bkye / (ITJ 750:307)
“[It fell] on the year of the swine: the court of the btsan po stayed in Na mar; the representatives that
were deciding over summer pastures and hay-lands were sent separately.”
riṅ lugs stag bzaṅ tsi dam daṅ / g.yu bźer (3) brtan koṅ gi g.ya sṅar śog śog mnos pa’i dkar chag (ITJ
1359(A):2-3; trslr. after TLTD.2:81)
“a register of paper reckoned in the presence of representatives Stag bzaṅ tsi dam and G.yu bźer
brtan koṅ”
raṅ (read: riṅ) lugs su [gźubsu?] khyim rdza[s] daṅ lag spyad rad gos yan (12) chad ji la bab kyaṅ ruṅ ste /
dṅos [---] te / phrogs kyaṅ / źal mchu ma mchis (Or.8210/S.2228:a11-2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:310)

1
Contrary to DOTSON (2007b:37: “a swearer’s seal”) and TAKEUCHI (1995:179: “bond”), I understand dam rgya as a synonymic
compound formed from dam kha “a seal, stamp” (J:250b) and rgya “seal, stamp, mark, sign, token” (J:104b).
 381

“In case [one ] took household goods, tools, rad-clothes, whatever there may be, [...] to the
representative, there should not be a quarrel.”
dbaṅ po daṅ źiṅ ’god kyi riṅ lugs kyis sug las ’tshal ba’i rtsis mgo myiṅ smrar bris pa (Or.15000/326:r2; trslr.
after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:139, text 427)
“an initial account of demanded work written by the owner and the representative of źiṅ ’god in
order to pronounce the names”
riṅ lus (read: lugs) kyis / rlaṅ spun po spun daṅ sṅo[n] (4) po spun daṅ phyis spu (read: spun) klu ’dus daṅ
daṅ ’be myes mthoṅ daṅ rlaṅ phra[n] ’phan legs (5) la stsogs pa’ / glar bkug nas (Or.15000/490:3-5; trslr.
after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:206, text 606)
“The representative called Rlaṅ spun po spun, elder brother and younger brother Klu ’dus, Daṅ ’be
myes mthoṅ, Rlaṅ phran ’phan legs, among others, ?summoned for/bent to? wages.”
riṅ lugs daṅ dpaṅ chen daṅ khon ta’ rnam kyi sug rgyas btab (Or.15000/490:18; trslr. after TAKEUCHI
1998.2:206, text 606)
“[One] furnished [it] with the hand-seals of the representative, great defenser, and the ?person
concerned?.”
źiṅ ’god kyi riṅ lugs daṅ mkhar bźi bla daṅ / nob che[---] (Or.15000/536:2; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1998.2:227,
text 655)
“The representative of źiṅ ’god, superiors of four strongholds, and [...] of Nob chen”
dam rgya phyi mo gcig bgyis pa des riṅ lugs bgyis (Vol.57, fol.220:4; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:175)
“[One] acted as a representative with one later seal that [one] had prepared.”
riṅ lugsu phrog na yaṅ źal cu tshig kyaṅ myi mchis bgyis (Ch.frag.82v:b7; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:199)
“In case [one ] took [these] to the representative, [the borrower] would not let any words of quarrel
to have appeared.”
raṅ (read: riṅ) lug[su] śog rgya ’di su [chad par ’phrogs] (8) na yaṅ źal mchu ma mchis par bgyis (Kozlov 4:7-
8; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:205)
“In case [one ] took [these] to representative, so as it is decided in this ?contract? (lit. paper-seal),
[the borrower] would not let any lawsuit to have appeared.
khyed kyis riṅ lugs (2) gcad du gda’ (ITN 627:r1-2)
“It is possible to decide the representative by you.”
tshal byi dmag pon daṅ // źiṅ ’god kyi riṅ (read: riṅ lugs)1 (2) la gthad pha’ (ITN 789:r1-2)
“what is to be delivered to the army commander of Tshal byi and the representative of źiṅ ’god”
(40) gtsug lag khaṅ gi rkyen bcad pa’i dkar (41) cag daṅ / bsṅos yig bla dpe ni // bcom ldan (42) ’da’s riṅ lugs
kyi ’dun sar bźag // (Lcaṅ 40-2)
“[One] laid down the register of the decided support of the temple, as well as the document of
dedication, the main copies, in the assembly hall of Buddha[’s] representatives.”
de’i naṅ nas (40) nus pa las // bcom ldan ’das kyi riṅ lugs rtag du bsko (41) źiṅ // bcom ldan ’das kyi riṅ lugs
byed pa’i rnams chos ’khor (42) nas bya’o cog gi bka’ la yaṅ btags ste // chos ’khor gyi las daṅ (43) dbaṅ byed
ciṅ / dge ba’i bśes ñen byed par bsko’o // (Skar 39-43)
“From among able ones amidst those, a representative of the Victorious One shall always be
appointed and those acting [as] representatives of the Victorious One, being attached to the orders

1
riṅ is the last syllable in the verse and it seems probable that the omission of lugs was enforced on the scribe by the very
shape of the wooden slip.
 382

of those acting by means of the Wheel of the Dharma, shall be appointed to execute deeds and
power of the Wheel of the Dharma and to act as virtuous bśes ñen.”
gtsigs kyi mkhar bu ’di / nam źig (59) dbye dgos na yaṅ // sras dbon chab srid kyi mṅa’ gaṅ mdzad pas riṅ
lugs (60) thugs ches pa gtsigs bdag ’draṅ ba gsum yan cad (61) bskoste / lag sbrel la dbyuṅ źiṅ / phyir yaṅ ’di
bźin phyag rgya (62) daṅ / riṅ lugs kyi rgyas btab ste / gźag par gnaṅ ṅo // (Źwa W 58-62)
“Should it ever be necessary for this chest [containing] the decree to be opened, children and
grandchildren, who execute whatever power over (lit. of) chab srid, having appointed up to three
trustworthy representatives who would lead the custodian of the edict, are allowed to take [it] out
onto [their] joined hands and, having furnished [it] again in this way with an official seal and a seal
of the representatives, to deposit [it back in the chest].”

123 ru lag
BTC:2708b: lte ba brad kyi dur ba sna la bźag nas śar ’jam na bkra daṅ. lho bal po glaṅ sna. nub la kem g.yag mig. byaṅ bye
ma la sṅon bcas so so’i bar du soṅ ba’i sa yul gyi miṅ rñiṅ. bar dbus gtsaṅ ru bźi’i naṅ gses śig; BYD:532a: ru tsho’i yan lag.
DUṄDKAR:1945a: śar phyogs kyi mtshams ’jam na bkra. lho phyogs kyi mtshams bal po glaṅ sna. nub phyogs kyi mtshams la
kel g.yag mig. byaṅ phyogs kyi mtshams bye ma la sṅon bcas su rtsis pa’i dkyil la zer źiṅ de ni g.yas ru’i yan lag yin pas na
ru lag zer.
Gs:1043b: one of the four ru of dbus gtsaṅ.
THOMAS.1933:380: brigade-division; TUCCI.1949:738: a supplementary wing; TLTD.2:418: brigade-division; TUCCI.1956:81-2n1:
supplemetary banner; URAY.1960:43: We believe it to be more correct to regard the name Ru lag as denoting a unit of the
same order of magnitude as the other three horns, and this brings us to Tucci’s translation “supplementary wing”; p.44:
the word lag in Ru lag and yan lag in Yan lag gsum pa’i ru seems to indicate that we have to do with formations connected
to, though in some respects detached from, the “main body” of the system of horns; Ru lag had originally been a unit
independent of the other three horns; only “Three Horns” are mentioned in earlier times; p.49: became part of Tibet
proper as late as A.D. 719-733, and this was how the Three Horns became Four Horns; p.53: we may identify the Great Rtsaṅ
with the territory of Ru lag; YAMAGUCHI.1975:21n6: ru lag means lhag ma’i ru “extra wing”. This is also equivalent to “the
second” as against “the original”. That which deviates from “the second” is called yan lag and “the third”, i.e. gsum pa.
Accordingly, ru lag was already undoubtedly in existence when sum ru was established; YAMAGUCHI.1992:69: auxiliary wing;
DOTSON.2009:295: Branch Horn.

[E] *ru (gsum) gyi yan lag “units of outer order of (Three) Horns“
[M] (N) dependency of the (Three) Horns
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[[N+(NUM)]+[N+N]]
[R] gtsug lag
[A] ru lag is mentioned only once in OT records, namely, in the OTA for the year 709/10. Previously
to that date we read only about dbu ru (in: dbu ru śod, ITJ 750:86, 233) and g.yo ru (ITJ 750:107, 172). ru
gsum appears for the first time in the year 712/3 and then subsequently in the entries for 718/9 and
719/20. From 733/4 onwards only ru bźi is mentioned (744/5, 746/7).

Although the compound functions as a proper name, similar as in case of ru gsum, ru bźi, or g.yo ru, it
was originally coined as a common noun. The following morphological reconstruction is proposed:
*ru (gsum) gyi yan lag > *ru yan lag > ru lag. *ru yan lag is actually attested in an assimilated form as ru
yaṅ lag, cf.:
mdad daṅ baṅ so’i rkyen ru yaṅ lag smad man chad la / drugi rkya gchig la dṅul sraṅ drug las [ma?] bab
(Or.15000/497:r4)
“The support for (lit. of) the funeral ceremony and burial mound did not come down to the lower
ru yaṅ lag from six silver sraṅ for one Turkic horseman.”
 383

dbus pa ru yaṅ lag pa khrom [---] (ITN 844:2)

“one from Dbus belonging to ru yaṅ lag, [from] the colonial government [...]”1
Although both passages attest to the variant ru yaṅ lag, it is assumed that the etymological form was
*ru (gsum) gyi yan lag.2 First of all, *yaṅ lag as one word is not otherwise documented in OT sources.3
As opposed to that, we find yan lag in, e.g., PT 16:31r1, PT 1082:24, 29, PT 1283:46, 49, 157, 159, ITJ
740:268. Furthermore, the variant -yaṅ lag can easily be explained as resulting from the regressive
partial assimilation of the final dental -n to the final guttural -g: -n > -ṅ / -a_σ-ag.4

In accordance with its etymology, I translate *ru (gsum) gyi yan lag literally as “units of outer order of
(Three) Horns” assuming that it denoted dependencies or branches of already existing Three Horns.
From Or.15000/497, we learn about the existence of a lower part (smad) of ru yaṅ lag which would
correspond to the known division of the remaining Horns into Lower and Upper (see the Map 5 in
DOTSON 2009:198). This, however, does not have to mean that they formed an unified administrative
unit. At least not at the very beginning of the Three-Horn-system.

It is plausibel to assume that the proper name of the region was *ru yan lag. The attested ru lag could
have come into being after the assimilated form ru yaṅ lag was falsely re-interpreted as ru+yaṅ#lag
and the morpheme yaṅ identified with the grammatical morpheme yaṅ/kyaṅ/’aṅ. A supplementary
explanation of the form ru lag is given in the chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.

[T] ʼdun ma ʼon caṅ dor ʼduste / ru lagi źugs loṅ dmar pho brtsis / (ITJ 750:173)
“The council, having gathered at ’On caṅ do, counted red źugs loṅ of the dependencies of [Three]
Horns.”

124 lug rtug

DSM:917b: ’bras bu ma bton pa’i lug thug; BYD:547b: lug thug gam. pho lug daṅ lug gi ril ma.
DUṄDKAR:1983b: ’bras bu ma bton pa’i lug thug gi miṅ.
BDN:53n2: lug gi ril ma yin pa ʼdra; BTK:117n6: lug thug la’o; STK:162-3n3: lug ril daṅ lug pho rlig ril źes bkral yod la. ʼdir
(PT 1287:304 - JB) gna’ bo’i thabs jus śig brjod pa ste lug thug gis lug khyu’i sna ʼkhrid pa ltar myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ gis
sum pa mtha’ dag slar yaṅ ʼbaṅs su bkug pa la zer ba e yin nam sñam.
DTH:130: les crottes de mouton; DOTSON.2013a:326n6: I read lug rtug as lug thug, meaning “ram”.

[E] *lud daṅ rtug “manure and dung”

1
The translation should be treated as conjectural due to the fragmentary character of the document.
2
The argument put forward by URAY (1960:44) that one would rather expect *ru yan lag to have been abbreviated to *ru
yan instead of ru lag, although not unimportant, cannot be maintained due to the fact that *ru yan would certainly be less
transparent and more ambiguous (could be construed as, e.g., *ru yan chad). For further elucidation of the term see the
chapter Compounding in Old Tibetan.
The designation yan lag gsum pa’i ru, lit. “a horn [consisting] of three branches”, mentioned in Chos ’byuṅ mkhas pa’i dga’
ston by DPA’ BO GTSUG LAG PHREṄ BA (apus TUCCI 1956b:79 and URAY 1960b:44) has in all probability come into being by the
conflation of two originally independent terms: sum ru (< *sum pa’i ru; cf. ITJ 750:141, Or.8212.187:35) and *ru gsum gyi yan
lag. This process was facilitated by the fact that they share with each other two syllables: ru and sum (CT gsum is commonly
written in OT sources as sum). In this way, through purely linguistic operations, one has created a new ‘administrative
unit’ that, as it seems, never existed. Cf. also TUCCI who reads sum pa’i ru instead of the attested yan lag gsum pa’i ru (ibid.).
3
The compound is attested in later lexicographic sources (see IW, JV, BYD) but the glossed meanings attest to it as being
an assimilated form of yan lag.
4
Compare also TLTD.3:178a where THOMAS equates yaṅ lag with yan lag translating the latter term as “subordinate
member”. For a thorough analysis of -lag as a second member of compounds see s.v. gtsug lag.
 384

[M] (N) dung

SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[A] Two passages from PT 1287 quoted in the Text section relate the same story that shall portray
the wisdom of the councillor Myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ. We learn, thus, that he was given an order
to subjugate the region inhabited by Sum pas but could not resolt to military means due to the fact
that the people did not cause any troubles (tshegs). He used a stratagem that apparently allowed him
to subjugate the whole population of Sum pas. The core of the trick is contained in the phrase lug
rtug. Unfortunately, the context does not enrich our knowledge on the nature of the stratagem. We
only know that it was a peaceful means by which Tibetans gained control over Sum pa people. It
seems, however, that an important part of the subjugation was the promulgation (brjod) of the
stratagem (sgyu) that in the first passage is clearly a direct object of the verb brjod.

This scanty information forces us to concentrate in our analysis mainly on the syntax of the clauses
dpyaʼ phab lug rtug gi sgyu // [...] brjod de and lug rtug gis sgyu phab ste / [...] brjod. In the ST Treaty
inscription (W 69), we read dku sgyu ci byas kyaṅ indicating that dku and sgyu (in a coordinate
compound) were used with the verb byed and not ’bebs as in the second fragment.1 Moreover, the
phrase sgyu brjod in which sgyu is a direct object leads us to the constatation that it was the
revealing to the public of the stratagem (real or invented) that enabled the subjugation of Sum pas.

With regard to the stratagem itself, we can now juxtapose the phrase dpya’ phab lug rtug gi sgyu with
the compound dpya’ sgyu attested in the OTC (l.449), the underlying minimal structure of which can
be reconstructed as *dpya’i sgyu, lit. “trickery of taxes”, i.e. “tax fraud”. If that is the case, the proper
analysis of the former phrase would be: [dpya’ phab] [lug rtug gi sgyu] < *dpya’ phab pa’i [lug rtug gi
sgyu], lit. “a trickery of lug rtug for (lit. of) the imposed taxes”. Basing my hypothesis on these
premises, I assume that Myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ accused Sum pas of a tax fraud. The allegation
concerned in all probability paying lug rtug instead of taxes. Although some authors (see the
Lexicographic section) have proposed to read *lug thug instead of the attested form lug rtug, the
latter term, being the lectio difficilior, should rather be taken as our point of reference.

Now, two hypotheses can be proposed regarding the proper understanding of the examined
compound:
1
lug rtug < *lug gi rtug, lit. “sheep dung”;
2
lug rtug < *lud daṅ rtug (-d > -g / -u_σ-ug: assimilation of the syllable final -d to the word final -g
enhanced by the similarity of rimes), lit. “dung”.
Although I am not able to present any irrefutable linguistic arguments for or against any of these,
the second hypothesis appears, however, to be more convincing. First of all, the lexicographically

1
Cf. also dku myi byed (PT 1046B:12), dku ched po byas (PT 1287:69), and dku daṅ gnod pa byed (Źwa E 28-9). Unfortunately, I
was not able to trace in OT sources any similar expressions containing the word sgyu. sgyu byed, “1māyāvī; 2śāṭhyam”
(Negi.2:843b), with its conjugated forms is attested in canonical texts; for examples see the RKTS. As opposed to that, no
instances of the phrase *sgyu ’bebs or any of its possible variants could be found in the same database.
 385

attested term for sheep dung is lug ril “tirdles, sheep-pellets” (J:530b), “sheep dung” (Gs:1076c).
Secondly, if the alleged fraud concerned paying dung instead of imposed taxes, why should it be
relevant whether it was sheep dung or of any other animal?

[T] sras khri sroṅ brtsan gyi riṅ la // myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ gis // sum khams (85) thams śad ʼbaṅs su
dgug par bkaʼ stsol to / / myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ gis // ʼdzaṅs kyi (86) blo sgyu gñis kyis // myi rta gñis
tshegs ma byuṅ bar // dpyaʼ phab lug rtug gi sgyu // lce thor to (87) la brjod de // ʼbaṅs gñug ma bźin du
bkug ste ʼuṅ tsam mo // (PT 1287:85-7)
“During the life of the son Khri sroṅ brtsan, [one] ordered that the whole Sum pa region shall be
bent to subjects by Myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ. Myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ, by means of both, counsel
of [his] wisdom and cunning, having promulgated on the tip of the tongue a deceit of dung [given
instead of] the imposed taxes (without there being any troubles to either men or horses) [and]
having gathered subjects like natives, was like that.”
ʼuṅ gi ʼog du myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ gis / sum pa mthaʼ dag dmagis gdab myi (304) dgos par / lug rtug gis
sgyu phab ste / lce ʼi thor tho la brjod nas / khyim graṅs ma śor par (305) yoṅs kyis ʼbaṅs rnal mar bkug go //
(PT 1287:303-5)
“Afterwards, Myaṅ maṅ po rje źaṅ snaṅ, not wanting to conquer all Sum pas militarily (lit. with the
army), used a trickery with dung [and] promulgated [it] on the tip of the tongue. Hence (nas), [he]
gathered [Sum pas] as native subjects entirely without counting the number of houses.”

125 sa dog
[V] sa ga dog (PT 1038:13-4; paraphrase; voicing)
sa dogs (PT 1285:r105; dittography)
dog (PT 1287:236, 422; truncation)
SR.2:1125.4: čiqul γaǰar (“tight or narrow place”, Less:193a); BYD:567a: sa gźi.
Sch:591a: eine schmale enge Stelle; R.10:20a: теснина; gorge, ravine.
DTH:86: la terre; THOMAS.1957:29: narrow, dark earth (for sa dog rum - JB); URAY.1966:250: earth; HAARH.1969:313: sa dog and
sa bdag therefore express the same idea, the power or powers of the earth, in its abstract and its concrete form; sa bdag
indicates merely a later and modified idea of those chthonic powers which were meant by the expression sa dog. These
powers, from which the sa bdag of the later time developed, were the powers of the world of the dead, and the dog yab were
the personified representatives of the world of these powers; p.417: the Powers of Earth (sa dog); MACDONALD.1971:217: la
terre; KARMAY.1998:286: earth (for sa gdog drug - JB); MARTIN.2010:136a: compacted earth (s.v. ne slas dog la); ZEISLER.2011a:173:
the earthly narrowness; DOTSON.2013a:263: the narrow earth; ZEISLER.2015:758: the earthly narrowness; p.759: the six
spheres of the Libra constellation (for sa ga dog drug - JB).

[E] *sa dog mo “narrow space”

[M] (N) 1valley; 2earth
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] skya sa / sṅo sa / rje sa / dog mon / dog yab / dog srin
[A] There is a consent among scholars concerning the underlying structure of the compound that
is assumed to have been *sa dog mo, lit. “narrow space”.1 The nominal particle -mo in the
reconstructed dog mo is attested in PT 1052:r30 as well as in ITJ 739:1v1 and 8r5 (see OTDO).

As opposed to scholars who have previously analysed the relevant passages, I propose to interpret
the compound as being a metaphoric expression denoting originally *“a valley”.1 Central Tibetan

1
As against this reconstruction, DAS glosses sa cha dog with “narrow-place” (641a, s.v. dog paII). However, as far as I was
able to ascertain, the compound sa cha is not attested in OT sources and must be of later date.
 386

valleys were the cradle of the Tibetan civilisation, i.e. the place where the Tibetan dynasty came
from - an event recalled in PT 1038 and PT 1286. From PT 1038:13-4 one could infer that at some
point Tibet or at least its central part was referred to as “a land of six valleys”.2 Moreover, we read in

1
Cf. also ZEISLER’s remark: “One can observe, in the first parallel passage (i.e. PT 1286:30-2 - JB), a contrast between
gnamlhab, the wide space of the heavenly realms and the sadog, the comparatively narrowness and crowdedness on earth,
reflecting perhaps the contrast between the wide steppe as the original homeland of the ruler and the narrow valleys and
side valleys in Central Tibet.” (2011:174). Indeed, the two expressions parallel each other: gnam lhab, lit. “broad sky” ~ sa
dog, lit. “narrow earth”.
2
The variant sa ga dog drug reappears in Dbu nag mi’u ’dra chags in the clause sa ga dog drug du phyin nas (apus KARMAY
1998:276, fol.15b) where KARMAY interprets it as designating the earth (1998:266). The latter reading has received more
attention from ZEISLER (2011:174-5) who argues that the phrase at the break of ll.13 and 14 in PT 1038 should in fact be read
sa ga dog drug as against the previous reading sa gdog drug. Separating sa from the following syllable is in so far justified as
it is followed by a clearly visible tsheg. Although I agree with ZEISLER with regard to the reading sa ga dog drug, I find it
problematic to interpret sa ga here as referring to the Libra constellation. First of all, the problem occurs as to how to
interpret dog drug? ZEISLER translates it as “six-fold” or “six ?spheres” (ibid., p.174). From what we know about formation of
proper names in OT, the phrase sa ga dog drug would have to be rendered literally as “sa ga of six dog” - dog drug being an
exocentric compound [N+NUM] that functions as an attribute to sa ga. The most intuitive solution would be to interpret a
constellation in terms of stars that form it. However, Libra constellation consists of five main stars. The second problem
concerns the syntax of the sentence in which sa ga dog drug occurs. To wit, as the following parallel clauses demonstrate a
verb is clearly missing in PT 1038:15 after blar:
’greṅ mgo nag gi rjer myi rjer lha las gśegs te / (PT 16:34v1)
“[He] came from among gods as a lord over (lit. of) black-headed upright ones, as a lord over (lit. of) men.”
khri ñag khri btsan poʼ // (32) sa dog la yul yab kyi rje / dog yab kyi char du gśegs so’ // (PT 1286:31-2)
“Khri ñag khri btsan po came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over (lit. of) living space, as the rain from (lit. of) the
sky.”
ʼgreṅ mgo nag gi rje / dud rṅog chags kyi rkyen du gśegsʼo (PT 1287:62)
“[He] came as a ruler of black-headed men (lit. upright ones), as a support for maned animals (lit. bent ones).”
rguṅ (dguṅ) rim pa bcu gsum mar ’das ’oṅ / sa ga dog drug du (tu) phyin nas (Dbu nag mi’u ’dra chags 15v6; trslr. after KARMAY
1998:276)
“[He] passed down the thirteen-layered-sky [and] came to six valleys.”
Accordingly, the clause from PT 1038:13-5 should be reconstructed as:
[khri bar la bdun tshig / śes bgyi]S // [gnam gi lha las]AD1 / [sa ga (14) dog drug du]AD2 // [ʼgreṅ ʼgo nag gi rje myed gi rje // dud
rṅog chag (15) bla myed kyi blar]PRED TO COME
“[The so called Khri bar la bdun tshigs]S CAME [from gods of the sky]AD1 [to the six valleys]AD2 [as a ruler of black headed
ones, that had no ruler [above them], as a superior of maned animals, that had no superior [above them]]PRED.”
The terminative particle in sa ga dog drug du marks the goal towards which an action heads. *“Coming down to a
constellation” or as ZEISLER puts is “[he descended] to the six ?spheres of the Saga (Libra) constellation” contradicts other
passages in which one reads that an anthropomorphic being comes down on earth (sic!) to rule over living beings. Now, it
may be helpful to introduce yet another passage, namely:
pha hi de chen po gnam ka loṅ sum na bźugs / pha la ñan / (6r247) du btsugso / ma pra dag btsun mo sa ga gdiṅ drug na bźugs la
(read: ma la) ñan du btsugso / (ITJ 734:6r246-7)
“Father Hi de chen po dwelled in the sky of three loṅs (?). [One] placed [it?] before the father as a ñan. Mother Pra dag
btsun mo dwelled on earth of six gdiṅ (?). [One] placed [it?] before the mother as a ñan.”
(For the tentative rendering of the phrase ‘HUMAN BEINGALLAT ’dzugs’ as “to place sth. before” see the example in JÄSCHKE: mi la
phor pa “to place a drinking-bowl before a person (more genteel than bźag pa)”, 465b, s.v. ’dzugs pa.) In this passage gnam ka
loṅ sum is clearly juxtaposed with sa ga gdiṅ drug. We observe that sa ga corresponds to gnam ka and both are additionally
qualified as gdiṅ drug and loṅ sum respectively. It is obvious that sa ga stands here for sa “earth” and the second syllable, ga,
should be interpreted as a pleonastic morpheme analogous to -ka in gnam ka. It seems reasonable to assume that sa and
gnam have been replaced by sa ga and gnam ka to meet stylistic needs and to conform to the quadrisyllabic pattern of other
(quasi-mythical) typonyms, like mchims yul dgu sul, rṅegs yul gru bźi, etc. To this usage of the nominal particle ka/ga we
could add further examples from OT sources: bod ka in bod ka g.yag drug (see also below), byaṅ ka in byaṅ ka snam brgyad, or
lho ga in lho ga laṅ drug (see OTDO). The latter formation attests additionally to the voicing of ka when preceded by an open
syllable - a situation analogous to sa ga < *sa ka. The suffix ka/ga, as occurring in OT material, has been discussed by THOMAS
who interprets it as “[a]n [a]djective-forming [s]uffix ka/ga, ‘belonging to’” (1957:*29). As opposed to THOMAS, I deem the
suffix as attested in the above examples to be a purely pleonastic morpheme used to fill in an empty slot in metrical
passages or to form disyllabic lexemes in conformity with the tendency of the language (see the chapter Compounding in
Old Tibetan). To conclude, there seems to be no reason for reading sa ga as the name of the Libra constellation in the above
cited examples. Compare also the analogous formation sa cha dog quoted above from DAS.
To return to my reading of sa ga dog drug as a prosodic paraphrase of the original *sa dog drug “six valleys”, ZEISLER
(2011:176) proposes to amend the phrase yul bod ka g.yag drug (PT 1038:16-7) as *yul bod ka g.yaṅ drug “the country Bod ka of
six valleys/precipices” (trsl. - JB). *g.yaṅ drug, lit. “six precipices”, would exactly parallel my reconstructed *sa dog drug and
prove that Bod (ka) was once referred to as a land of six valleys. The change from *g.yaṅ drug to g.yag drug could be
 387

PT 1287, that broadening of the space of sa dog (abbreviated here to dog) meant gaining additional
soil for tillage. Hence, sa dog denoted only certain parts of the natural environment and not the
whole space. Besides, why should one call earth “a narrow one”?

sa dog occurs in OT sources also as a part of the compound sa dog rum, cf.:
yab sten rgan (v28) ñer pa ni sku mgur cu man cad sa dog rum du byiṅ ’gis ma mchis (ITJ 731:v27-8)
“As regards the father Sten rgan ñar pa, because from [his] neck downwards [he] had sunk into
the abyss [of] the valley, [he] ceased to exist (lit. was no [more]).”
and dog rum (metr. for sa dog rum):
[rtsa?] bzaṅs ni dog rum yan (PT 1052:r113)
“As regards good grass, the core of the valley is [still] unoccupied.”

(4v10) dog rum ni mtha’ myi g.yo’ (ITJ 739:4v10)

“As concerns the core of the valley, [its] ends are immovable.”
In addition, sa dog has been identified in the present work as forming also part of other compounds,
cf. s.vv. dog mon, dog yab, and dog srin. It can be reconstructed in the underlying structure of dog me (<
*sa dog me) as well (cf. ITJ 739:1v6 cited s.v. mthiṅ braṅ).

It seems that already during the period of the OT, the meaning of the compound underwent
generalisation from the original *“valley” to *“earth”. This shift might have been triggered by the
changing narration of the expanding Empire; the perspective on the genealogy of the royal line has
shifted from perceiving the progenitor of the line as a ruler who came down to wield power over six
(Central Tibetan) valleys to a ruler over the whole (known) world.1

[T] 1 (13) khri bar la bdun tshig / śes bgyi // gnam gi lha las / sa ga (14) dog drug du // ʼgreṅ ʼgo nag gi rje
myed gi rje // dud rṅog chag (15) bla myed kyi blar / blon po lho rṅegs / bon po mtshe gco / phyag (16) tshaṅ
śa spug // myi rje lha daṅ bdud / du brgyis (read: bgyis) nas // yul bod ka (17) g.yag drug du byon (PT
1038:13-7)
“The so called Khri bar la bdun tshigs, from gods of the sky to the six valleys, as a ruler of black
headed ones, that had no ruler [above them], as a superior of maned animals, that had no superior
[above them], having made to the rulers of men - [officiators of] gods and demons - the councillors
Lho and Rṅegs, bon po Mtshe and Gco, phyag tshaṅ Śa and Spug, came down to the country Bod ka,
[the land] of six precipices.”2
ʼol zaʼ lcham bus bltas (r105) śiṅ gzigs naʼ / brag rgyal thaṅ poʼi / yul ṅan sa dogs (read: dog) ste / ʼol bu dgaʼ
daṅ na / pha yul phrog sñam ste / yab yul phrog sñam ste / (PT 1285:r104-5)

accounted for as a case of regressive assimilation according to the pattern (2) as discussed in the chapter Compounding in
Old Tibetan.
1
As in so many other cases, also this OT lexical unit has shifted its semantic class after the political situation of Tibet had
changed in the middle of the ninth century causing, among others, the reorganisation of the whole lexicon. To wit, we
encouter sa dog in later times as forming part of the name of the Bon earth deity Sa bla dog rum (TUCCI/HEISSIG 1970:241) - a
conflation of two terms: *sa lha (> sa bla) and *sa dog rum.
2
I translate the sentence without accounting for its obviously distorted syntax on which see above. On the tentative
reconstruction of the phrase yul bod ka g.yag drug see above.
Worth emphasising is the recurrence of the number six in this passage: six valleys, six precipices, six clans (Lho, Rṅegs,
Mtshe, Gco, Śa, Spug).
 388

“When Lcham bu, the lady from ’Ol[-clan], got an insight, [she] thought that the bad land of Thaṅ po,
the ruler of Brag, was a valley [and that she] was deprived of [her] fatherland in ’Ol bu dga’ daṅ.”
re śig (r147) re śig naʼ / tha ṅa bal mo thaṅ źig / nags yul / deṅ baʼ / yul ṅan sa dog ste1 // pha la thugs chad
yab la thugs chad de / sbal (read: bal) dug glaṅ mchin (r148) ma ñin sum byib du byib / (PT 1285:r146-8)
“One day, one day, Tha ṅa bal mo thaṅ, [thinking that] the bad land [of] Deṅ ba, the land of Nags,
was a valley [and] despairing over [her] father[land]2, kept secret three days long the poison of Bal,
the one [made of] ox-liver.”
skyi nas ni ña ʼdon pa / “The one who draws fish from Skyi[-chu river],
(235) dbyi tshab ni paṅs to re // Dbyi tshab paṅs to re,
klum na ni chab gchod pa / the one who divides waters in a dale,
tseṅ sku ni smon to re / Tseṅ sku smon to re,
khur ra ni rags thogs śiṅ (236) the one who, while carrying loads and fences [for]
dykes,
dog gi ni sa skyed pa // extends lands of valleys,
paṅ sum ni ʼdron po źig / Paṅ sum ’dron po -
thaṅ la ni rtse bchad chiṅ / [they] cut the summit [of] Thaṅ la and
śam po ni rmed duʼ / (237) bsnan // (PT 1287:234-7) added [it] to plough Śam po.”
je ñe je ñe na / “When nearer, ever nearer,
gla skar ni brag daṅ ñe / Gla skar lies near the rocks.
brag skar ni si li li // The stars of the rocks sparkle, sparkle.
sdur ba ni chab daṅ ñe / Sdur ba lies near the lake.
gyur sram ni pyo la laʼ // [Its] otters slip, slip away.
(422) ñen kar ni dog daṅ ñe / Ñen kar lies near the valley.
ʼbras drug ni si li li // [Its] six crops rustle, rustle.
mal tro ni klum daṅ ñe / Mal tro lies near the dale.
skyi bser ni spu ru ru // (PT 1287:421-2) [Its] cold winds blow, blow.”
2
(30) lha gnam gyi steṅ nas gśegs paʼ // gnam lhab kyi bla na // yab lha bdag drug bźugs pa ʼi sras / gcen
(31) gsum gcuṅ gsum na / khri ʼi bdun tshigs daṅ bdun / khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras / khri ñag khri btsan poʼ
// (32) sa dog la yul yab kyi rje / dog yab kyi char du gśegs so’ // (PT 1286:30-2)
“The ones who came down from the heights of the gods’ sky: the sons of Yab lha bdag drug, who
dwells in the heigths of the broad sky, together with Khri ’i bdun tshigs, [who was] between the
three elder brothers and three younger brothers, [were] seven. The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Khri
ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over (lit. of) living space, as the rain
from (lit. of) the sky.”
(43) khri ʼi bdun tshigs kyi sras // lde ñag khri btsan po / sa dog la yul yab kyi rje dog yab kyi char du gśegs
nas // (PT 1286:43)
“The son of Khri ’i bdun tshigs, Lde ñag khri btsan po, came [down] to (lit. on) earth as the lord over
(lit. of) living space, as the rain from (lit. of) the sky.”3

1
Perhaps one should read dogste, but the tsheg between d and s is clearly visible.
2
Basing my reconstruction on the l.105 as cited in the preceding quotation, I read pha yul and yab yul instead of pha and
yab that are attested in the manuscript.
3
Another occurrence of the compound in question is attested in PT 1290: sa dog las [---] myi gsum gyi kha nas kyaṅ chad do //
(l.v12). However, I refrain from translating it due to the fragmentary character of the passage.
 389

126 (se) gru bźi

[V] se ’brum bźi (PT 1068:115, 121; PT 1134:56-7; folk etymology)
se mo gru bźi (PT 1134:10, 23, 29-30, 32, 38-9, 39, 65; folk etymology)
se cuṅ gru bźi (PT 1194:3; paraphrase)
se mo kru bźi (PT 1285:v102; folk etymology, scribal error)
DUṄDKAR:2073a: dus rabs bcu gñis pa’i ’gor bris pa’i chos lugs dril bsgrags byed pa’i gtam dpe phyogs bsdus naṅ. sṅar byaṅ
gi ’brog pa’i sa khul du se mo gru pa zer ba’i luṅ pa gcig yod pa de’i ’brog pa rus rgyud mi ’dra ba khag gñis phan tshun dgra
śa len res byed kyi yod par bśad ’dug (s.v. se mo gru bźi).
LALOU.1952:358: charnier; STEINRA.1971:494n44: (thag brgyad and gru bźi - JB) sont plutôt des métaphores pour une aire
délimitée; STEINRA.1988:45: la tombe (for se mo gru bźi - JB); BELLEZZA.2008:400: tomb; p.490n451: se mo gru bźi, the quadrate
tomb or tomb superstructure; p.511: four sides of the tomb enclosure; DOTSON.2013a:132: four-corned se.

[S] *gru bźi “four-corners”

[E] *gru bźi “having four corners”
[M] (A) having four corners; se gru bźi: (N) grave
SEM
[C] possessive exocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+NUM]
[A] I assume se gru bźi to have been originally an NP formed analogously to rgyal thag brgyad (i.e.
Head Noun#[Head NounσNumeral]; see s.v.) with which it also co-appears in the context of funeral
rituals. As a descriptive phrase it functioned to substitute a taboo word denoting *“a grave”. The
phrase se gru bźi has undergone further morphological and semantic changes as it started to be re-
defined for new religious needs, for instance, being incorporated into place names in mythical
geography1. Contrary to thag brgyad, gru bźi still forms an independent word in CT being used either
as an adjective “of four corners; quadrangular”2 or as a noun “quadrangle, square”.

se- is reconstructed as a truncated variant of *se’u - an assumed diminutive formation derived from
so *“spot”3 and used to avoid in ritual context taboo terms denoting all kinds of places related to
funeral, like grave, tomb, etc. An indirect evidence for such an understanding could be contained in
another variant of the discussed phrase, namely, se cuṅ gru bźi (PT 1194:3). The latter formation
could point to the fact that the diminutive value was still accounted for and expressed here by
paraphrasing *se’u with the additional morpheme -cuṅ “small”.

The highly distorted syntaxt of the most fragments cited in the Text section as well as their
problematic orthography prove that these texts were written longer time after the rituals, which
they describe, had ceased to be performed. The understanding for single technical terms had by
then disappeared and the process of re-defining the rites in a new religious context has already

1
Cf. gnam gru bźi pa sde brgyad (ITJ 742:15), lit. “the sky [that has] four corners [and] eight divisions” (NISHIDA.A 2011:324:
“the Four Devas and the Eight Classes of Deities”), and miscellaneous variations on proper names: yul rṅegs yul se mo gru bźi
(PT 1060:79) “the land Se mo gru bźi, the land of Rṅegs”; yul ’ga’ śul gru bźi (PT 1039:12) “the land Gru bźi, the land (yul > śul:
y- > ś- / -sσ_) of ’Ga’”; rṅegs yul/smo/śul gru bźi (PT 1285:r24, 90, 178; smo probably < *se mo; yul > śul / -sσ_) “Gru bźi, the land
of Rṅegs”; yul rṅegs yul gyi gru bźi (PT 1286:13-4; PT 1290:r5, v7) “the land Gru bźi of the Rṅegs’ land”; yul dags kyi gru bźi (PT
1286:18) “the land Gru bźi of Dags[-land]”; yul rṅegs yul gyi gyu bźi (PT 1290:r5, 6) “the land Gyu bźi of Rṅegs’ land”.
2
Apart from se, it qualifies in OT records also sman bśos (ITJ 739:2v1) “medicinal cakes” (BELLEZZA 2008:228n67).
3
so is assumed to have originally meant *”spot” from which formations have been derived like, for example: so “1tooth;
2
tooth of a saw, wheel, comb; 3edge of a knife” (J:578s); so pa “keeper, guard, watchman, spy, emissary” (J:578a; lit.
*”spotter”); so phag “brick, tile; also collective noun, brickwork, tiling” (J:578b); so rog (Or.15000/256:r4) “fellow watchman”
(TAKEUCHI 1995:321); so so “distinct, singly, individually” (J:578b; *”spotty, punctual”).
 390

begonnen. This is evidenced by the variants attested below; in, e.g., se ’brum bźi the syllable gru has
been replaced by ’brum “grain” (J:401b) under the influence of the compound ’brum bźi “four grains”
that is also mentioned in funeral rituals (e.g. PT 1042:19, 70). In various passages (and in the phrase
se gru bźi), se, obviously obsolete already, has been substituted by se mo - folk etymologisation
triggered possibly by the word se mo (do), “a kind of ornament” (J:575b), glossed already in the
Mahāvyutpatti with “ardhahāraḥ” (6012).

The scanty information we acquire from the OT documents concerning se gru bźi allows us to sketch
out the following picture of it: a quadrangular structure erected above the ground (sa la) in a valley
in preparation for a funeral ritual, directed with its sides according to the four cardinal points,
having at least one gate, namely, one facing the west, through which animals (e.g., sheep mount,
skyibs lug) could be brought in. Its construction was accompanied by placing a four-steps tree on it
and spreading an eight-threaded net (see s.v. rgyal thag brgyad), probably on a stake or a tree. We
learn, beside, that crossing (bgrod) se gru bźi could be either good or bad. Unfortunately, it still
remains unclear under what circumstances and for whom it was construed as good or bad.

[T] bśan lug brtsi ba ni / se gru bźi la / (92) lug bźi // rgyal thag brgyad la lug bźi // ʼdi rnams ni graṅs la
ma gtogso (PT 1042:91-2)
“As regards bśan-sheep that were counted: four sheep for the grave, four sheep for the eight-
threaded net - these did not belong to the amount.”
ʼor gyer gyis kyaṅ / gtar lcags lags par bgyis la // se gru / (118) bźiʼi nub phyogs kyi ʼbrum phye la / seʼi goṅ
du dbyam phyiṅ khra bo btiṅ la // skyibs lug ʼdir draṅs (PT 1042:117-8)
“Also the ’or gyer prepared well the bleeding instrument, opened the core of the western side of the
grave, spread a piebold felt mat over the ?burying place?, and led the sheep mount there.”
’brum (read: luṅ) du ni se (115) btsugs / se ’brum bźi bcas (PT 1068:114-5)
“[One] located the [resting] place in the valley [and] prepared the grave.”
se ’brum bźi ni bgrod rgyal thag brgyad ni gzigsde (PT 1068:121)
“Having crossed the grave, [they] regarded the eight-threaded net.”
khyod gyaṅ / se mo bgrod / noṅs śiṅ rta sbraṅ kham po lta(10)r / gźa riṅ du se mo / gru bźi na lu sa (read: lus)
re se mo bgrod legs / gru bźi bgrod legs (PT 1134:9-10)1
“While you commit a fault crossing the grave, [you] are always left behind in the grave like a
brownish horse-fly. Crossing the grave is good.”
se mo bgrod noṅste / gru bźi bgrod noṅste (PT 1134:23)2
“[One] commited a fault crossing the grave.”
se mo ni bgrod noṅste / (30) gru bźi ni bgrod noṅste (PT 1134:29-30)
“[One] commited a fault crossing the grave.”
se mo ni / rgyand du lus / gru bźi ni / rgyandu lus / mdzad (PT 1134:32)
“[One] leaves the grave as an ornament.”

1
The beginning of this sentence is incomplete. The second part of the sentence contains a hyperbaton: se mo bgrod legs /
gru bźi bgrod legs < *se mo gru bźi bgrod legs. se mo gru bźi is divided in a similar way in some of the following passages as well.
2
I assume noṅs here to be an antonym of legs from the previous sentence.
 391

se mo bgrod noṅs (39) gru bźi bgrod noṅs / śiṅ / se mo na / lus sa re / gru bźi na lus sa re (PT 1134:38-9)
“While crossing the grave [you] commit a fault, in the grave [one] is ?certainly? left behind.”
luṅ na ni se bchaste / se gru / bźi la śiṅ taṅ (read: gdaṅ) bźi btsugs (PT 1134:51)
“Having prepared [the resting] place in the valley, [one] placed a four-steps tree on the grave.”
se ’brum (57) bźi ’i naṅ du lcags te ku ku daṅ zaṅs te ni pyo pyo gñis gya ma za (read: zaṅs) tiṅ ni dme (read:
dma’) gos nag po ni skula (read: sku la) (58) / mnabs (PT 1134:56-8)
“As concerns the large pan, a copper-brass vessel, [made of] both forged iron and molten copper
[put] in the grave, black petticoat was put over the body.”1
se mo ni bgrod legs te gru bźi ni bgrod legs te (PT 1134:65)
“Crossing the grave is good.”
rgya bon brim taṅ gis / rgyal tag brgya(120)d / ni / gnam las (read: la) / bre (read: bres) se gru bźi ni / sa la
/ bchas (PT 1134:119-20)
“Brim taṅ, the Bon po [priest responsible for the eight-threaded] net, spread the eight-threaded net
in the sky [and] prepared the grave on the ground.”
rgyal [thag] brgyad ni (19) bas la bchas / se gru bźi ni luṅ du brtsigs (PT 1136:18-9, 59)
“[One] prepared the eight-threaded net on purlieus [and] built grave in the valley.”
se cuṅ gru bźi bca[s] (PT 1194:3)
“[One] prepared the grave.”2

127 so nam
D Ladakhi “agriculture, husbandry” (NH:196a; LEU:287); Shigatse “farming” (CDTD:8847).
YeŚes:561b: ’a ci thuor, thu peg, thar ya (s.v. so nams); p.562a: ’a ci thuor hu, thar ya thu mu se, źiṅ las (s.v. so nam); Ts:185r1:
barttanaṃ, byabasitaṃ, padam (s.v. so naṃ); p.185v2: krīṣakaḥ (s.v. so nams); SR.2:1184.4: tsho tshis ni ’tsho thabs daṅ so
tshis bsgrub pa daṅ źiṅ sa; GC:914b: źiṅ las ’tsho thabs. so nams; LCh:814b: vyavasāya (s.v. so nams); BTC:2954b: źiṅ las;
Negi.16:7192a: 1= ’tsho tshis, vartanam, ājīvaḥ; 2vyākulikā; BYD:575b: źiṅ las.
Cs:297b: husbandry, agriculture (s.v. so nams); Sch:598b: od[er] so nams Landwirthschaft, Ackerbau; Schr:392b: agriculture,
husbandry; J:578a: agriculture, husbandry (s.v. so nam(s)); D:1282a: also so nam, commerce, business; husbandry (s.v. so
nams); Desg:1017b: agriculture; Gs:1133c: farming, agriculture; R.10:75b-6a: ; земледелие, сельское хозяйство; agriculture,
husbandry.
DTH:155: commerce conjugal (for so nam daṅ bu srid myi mdzad - JB); TLTD.3:188b: family; THOMAS.1957:152: agricultural and
water situation (for so nam daṅ chu srid - JB); DOTSON.2013a:291: matters.

[E] *so daṅ nam “fruit and produce”

[M] (N) 1progeny; fruit; 2abundance, prosperity
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNT(additively) coordinate; synonymic; STRC[N+N]
[A] Unfortunately for the analysis of so nam, most of the OT passages in which the compound
occurs come from ritual texts and concern highly obscure matters. The scanty information we
gather from them will be summarised in the following notes. In PT 1287, so nam is, beside bu srid, a
political means by which the Tibetan btsan po intended to subjugate Źaṅ źuṅ. It is obvious that the
CT rendering of the term as “agriculture, husbandry” does not fit well in the context; it is not likely
that a Tibetan princess (btsan mo) would be expected to partake in any form of farming or
cultivation. We know, however, that the most important obligation of Tibetan princesses sent to

1
For a detailed discussion of some of the more difficult terms occurring in this passage see s.v. zaṅs brgya.
2
se gru bźi occurs also in different variants in PT 1134:6, 8, and PT 1285:v102 but the sentences are too fragmentary not
allowing any reliable translation.
 392

foreign courts was to bring offsprings so that a kinship relationship of uncle-nephew (źaṅ-dbon)
could be established. Thus, we can infer that the meaning of so nam was closely related to that of bu
srid “posterity” (see s.v.). A similar conclusion can be drawn from ITJ 738 where so nam is mentioned
together with chu srid although the context of the statement remains uncertain. On the other hand,
the remaining passages connect so nam to broadly defined prosperity. PT 1283:457 relates so nam to
nor spyad “usage of wealth”, whereas PT 126 establishes connection between food and so nam -
wasting of food appeared together with deserting of so nam. Additionally, we learn that one could
have some control over so nam (PT 1283:248) and that it could be enlarged in size (ITJ 739).

Now, the morpheme nam(s) is attested repeatedly in OT sources in connection with progeny. To wit,
it occurs in what appears to be a highly lexicalised phrase bśos daṅ nams gyi sras (na) (PT 1068, PT
1134, PT 1136, PT 1285, PT 1289, ITJ 731, ITJ 732) or its variant bśos daṅ nams kyi bu (ITJ 731) in a
standarized statement of the following kind:
(r16) // yul smra yul thag brgyad na / pha daṅ yab gyi mtshan / smraʼ diṅ diṅ diṅs kyi rje / ma daṅ yum
gyi mtshan dbyal gun gun ma btsun (r17) bśos taṅ nams kyi sras naʼ / bu mo ruṅ (read: ru) byuṅ sras
lcham du / bltam myiṅ daṅ mtshan btags paʼ / thaṅ ṅa brla mar btags / (PT 1285:r16-7)
“In the land Thag brgyad, the land of Smra: the name of the father - man Diṅ diṅ, the lord of Diṅs;
the name of the mother - wife Gun gun ma, the lady. If a sras of bśos and nams: as a daugther
appeared, as a princess was born. The name attached [to her]: [one] called [her] (lit. attached as)
Thaṅ ṅa brla ma.”
The following phrases from the passage can be juxtaposed:
pha daṅ yab gyi mtshan
ma daṅ yum gyi mtshan
bu mo *ru* byuṅ sras lcham du bltam
myiṅ daṅ mtshan

We observe that the elements emphasised in one phrase are synonyms. By analogy one could claim
that also bśos and nams from the phrase bśos taṅ nams kyi sras na are synonyms. The comparison with
the aforementioned expressions as well as the structure of the phrase under discussion leave no
doubt that bśos and nams should be understood as nouns.1 In lexicographic sources on CT, bśos is
glossed as the V2 of bśo “2to lie with, to have sexual intercourse with; to engender, to generate, to
beget (v.a.)” (J:568a). In JÄSCHKE, the meaning is exemplified with the following phrase: phag rdzis bśos
pa’i bu “the son begotten by the swine-herd” (ibid.) which could be juxtaposed with OT phrases of
the structure ‘PNCOM PNTERM bśos pa’i sras PN’ (repeatedly in PT 1286), cf.: lde ñag khri btsan po daṅ / gnam
mug (45) mug du bśos pa ʼi sras // mu khri btsan po (PT 1286:44-5) “Mu khri btsan po, the son begotten

1
Compare hereto THOMAS’ translation “consorting and taking their pleasure” (1957:22) who understands nams as “aorist of
nom, ‘enjoy’” (ibid., p.34).
 393

to Lde ñag khri btsan po and Gnam mug mug”. The latter example corroborates the meaning of the
verb bśos in OT sources.1

Phrases that could form a connection between bśos daṅ nams and our compound so nam occur in the
following passages:
myi ṅan bu’i jo bo gseṅ lde ri lde rmaṅ gi groṅs (72) gi spur pha’i khol po rigs (read: rigs kyi) rta pos ’tshal
de / (73) mchis na ’u bu cag gñis ’tsho daṅ namso źes bgyis (74) de // tha ṅa puṅ mo taṅ slar du mchis na
spra źal thaṅ (75) ba ’byor ra rmu tsug gis pha’i khol po rigs gi / (76) rta pos groṅ gi spur ’tshal de mchis
nas // tha ṅa (77) puṅ mo taṅ gi mdad śid ni cher bgyis (PT 1040:71-7)
“Having searched on (lit. with) horses of father’s servants for the body of the deceased Gseṅ lde ri
rmaṅ, the lord of humble men, [they] came. Having said ‘We both are ’tsho and nams.’, [they] went
back to Tha ṅa puṅ mo taṅ, Spra źal thaṅ ba. ’Byor ra rmu tsug, having searched on horses of
father’s servants for the body of the deceased one, went. As regards the burial of Tha ṅa puṅ mo
taṅ, [they] prepared [it] excellently.”

’tshas daṅ nams phu mo gcen gyi mtshan (PT 1289:r1.6)

“the name of the elder sister [of] ’tshas and nams”

’tsho is glossed with “I.1to live; 2to remain alive; 3to last, to be durable; 4to feed, to graze; II.1to nourish;
to pasture, to feed; 2to heal, to cure” (J:460a). In addition, one should quote also the verb gso “(= ’tsho
ba) 1to feed, nourish; to bring up, nurse up, rear, train; 2to cure” (J:590b).2 ’tshas is not attested but
one finds tshas “2of a woman in child-birth: tshas kyis gso (?)” (J:447b) which is assumed to be related
to btsa’ “1to bear, to bring forth” (J:434b). Now, we have identified three deverbal morphemes, bśos,
’tsho, and ’tshas, occurring in similar or identical contexts that all connote giving birth and bringing
up, hence, the assumption that nams, being their synonym (see the discussion above), must have had
a similar meaning.3 However, if one considers their morphology, it becomes obvious that they derive
from different verb stems: bśos = V2 whereas ’tsho can only be V1.4 Taking into account that in a vast
majority of cases (the only attested exceptions are quoted above) nams occurs with bśos, one feels
justified to assume it to be a V2 form as well. As opposed to these, both morphemes in the compound
so nam lack -s. This leads one to the conclusion that the compound was formed from lexemes derived
either from V1 or V3 of the respective verbs.

1
As far as I was able to ascertain, bśo - V1 of the verb according to lexicographic sources on CT - is not attested in OT
documents. A further cognate of OT bśos could be cho as in cho ’braṅ and cho rigs.
2
One should mention in this connection the variant form ’tsho nam “so nam” (DSM:740a) attested independently in CT
sources. For canonical examples see RKTS.
Both verbs, ’tsho and gso, can be related to the reconstructed PTB stem *g-sow; http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-
cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/1865; 18.04.2015. The problematic reconstruction of the prefix *g- seems to be based solely on
the Tibetan evidence.
3
THOMAS equates bśos with bsos (< ’tsho) ascribing to the former the meaning “life” (1957:96). The same meaning he gives to
so (ibid., p.88, l.219) from ITJ 734:220.
4
I consider ’tshas to have resulted from confusing ’tsho with btsa’ or its derivatives.
 394

nam(s) is not attested anymore as a verbal stem in CT sources. It forms, however, part of the verbal
stems mnams and mnam, respectively V2 and V3 (cf. BTC:1530b) of nom “v.n. to be satisfied with; v.a.
to seize; v. snom pa” (Cs:80b). The latter form can be found in, e.g. gya nom pa “dbaṅ thaṅ che ba one in
abundance; in plenty; possessed of wealth and power” (D:234a; < *rgya nom pa) and modern nom pa
Bayan “goods, merchandise”, Labrang “property” (CDTD:4599), “wealth” (Gs:616a).1 More light can
be shed on the semantics of the lexeme when one includes TB material, cf.:
Chepang -naʔ “be abundant” (CAUGHLEY 2000:158b);
naʔ- “exist (of entity, in some location), be many, possess, produce offspring”
(CAUGHLEY 2000:158b);2
naʔ.ryas “adj[ectival] n[oun] woman due to give birth soon (in a day or two)”
(CAUGHLEY 2000:159a)
naʔ- “older sister” (CAUGHLEY 2000:158b);
Lepcha na “2to be superabundant, to be superflous” (MG:190b);
nám mă or nám nám “excessive, great quantities, exceedingly, very” (MG:190b, s.v.
2
nám).
On this evidence, I assume that so nam is formed from two deverbal lexemes that have been derived
from V3 of the verbs classically attested as ’tsho and nom.3 The underlying structure of the compound
can be reconstructed as *so daṅ nam. Accordingly, I interpret so as *“fruit; issue; life” (lit. “what
should be nourished”)4 and nam as *“produce” (lit. “what is produced”).

It appears that originally the compound connoted abundance of progeny or fruits, the meaning that
has subsequently undergone a semantic shift to denote means by which prosperity could be
reached, thus “agriculture, husbandry”. The semantic shift might have additionally been triggered
by the newly coined word bsod nams that, I assume, resulted from the folk etymologisation of so nam
in its derived figurative meaning *”abundance; prosperity”.5

1
The CT stem snom (v2 bsnams, v3 bsnam), “to take; to seize, to take up; to hold” (J:320a), might have resulted from the
generalisation of the meaning *“to get into possession of sth.” ~ INTR “to have/be in abundance”.
2
Cf. also Chepang luʔ naʔ “copulate” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/548; 24.03.2014).
MATISOFF (2008:197f.) has reconstructed the PTB root as *s-nyak ~ *s-nik ascribing the meaning “penis; copulate” to the
etymon.
3
As concerns the lack of any prefix in case of so-, compare hereto sos = V2 < ’tsho and gso.
4
Cf. CT so ba “coarse, thick-shelled barley, used for fodder” (J:578b) and the dialectal so ma: Southern Mustang “variety of
barley”, Themchen “hemp” (CDTD:8852). I assume that the given meanings have developed from the original *”fruit”.
For another occurrence of the same morpheme compare CT so tshis/tshigs “housekeeping, management of domestic
concerns, husbandry” (J:578b) possibly < *so ts(h)is *“brood calculation”, i.e., “husbandry” (cf. tshoṅ rtsis “inventory”,
CDTD:6867). I assume that the second syllable of the compound preserves the original, prefixless stem from which the CT
verb rtsi “1to count; 2to count, reckon, calculate” (J:439a) has been derived. The PTB root is reconstructed in STEDT as *r-
tsyəy “count” (http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/2738; 05.04.2014), although the reconstructed r-
prefix seems to be based only on the Classical Tibetan evidence again.
5
bsod nams was used to translate Skt. puṇya “the good or right, virtue, purity, good work, meritorious act, moral or
religious merit” (MW:632a), a word of uncertain etymology (MAYRHOFER.2:141-2) but connected by MONIER-WILLIAMS (see s.v.
puṇya) with the Skt. root √puṣ “to be nourished, to thrive, flourish, prosper” (MW:638b). Compare also the following
explanation of bsod nams given in Sgra sbyor bam po gñis pa “[...] dṅos su na gźan la phan źiṅ bsod pas gsos śiṅ bsnams pa’i
miṅ ste bsod nams su btags” (ISHIKAWA 1990:94, no. 280; emphasis added by JB). In addition, BALK quotes the following
explanation of gsod nams from Udānavargavivaraṇa: dge ba ni lus la sogs pa’i legs par spyad pa spyod pa’i skyes bus rigs pas ’oṅs pa’i
phun sum tshogs pa rnams źes bya ba ni de’i ṅes pa’i tshig go (BALK 1986:14) and rightly observes that “Das etymologische
 395

[T] 1 sṅa na śud ke za rtsal thiṅ śags mchis ste // btsan mo daṅ ni myi (400) bnal bar // lig myi rhya la śud
ke za rtsal tiṅ śags gnaṅ ste // btsan mo yaṅ lig myi rhya ʼi so nam daṅ bu srid myi mdzad chiṅ log / (401) śig
na bźugs par // ʼdir dral gyi sñan du gdaʼ ste // btsan mo de ltar log pa bgyis na // chab srid kyi dkrugs mar
ʼgyur [bas?] (402) de lte bu ma bgyid par // lig myi rhya ʼi so nam daṅ bu srid zuṅ śig ches // (PT 1287:399-
402)
“Previously, there was Rtsal thiṅ śags, lady [from] Śud ke[-clan]. Rtsal thiṅ śags, a lady [from] Śud
ke[-clan], was given to Lig myi rhya so that [he] did not [have to] sleep with the btsan mo. The btsan
mo, while not procreating nor receiving progeny with (lit. of) Lig myi rhya, returned. There, [she]
reported to (lit. said to the ear of) [her] brother that [she] was staying in Śig. [The btsan po] said to
the btsan mo, who returned, in this way: ‘On account of the fact (bas) that [this] will bring quarrel to
(lit. of) the chab srid, not acting in this way, take hold of Lig myi rhya’s progeny and posterity!’”
2
zas kyi gron che so nam stoṅ // (PT 126:65)
“The wasting of food was great, prosperity deserted.”
blon gdab (248) pa’i rigs gyi // so nam gyi dbaṅ bya ba’i myi rigso // (PT 1283:247-8)
“It is necessary to practice (lit. exert force of) prosperity of sorts of ?given counsels?.”
’dzaṅs smra legsna // srid gyi mchogo // nor spyad legs na ni // so nam gyi mchogo (458) gtam rñiṅ pa dag
las // yid la dran ba las gyaṅ / legs par smras na // kha ni / dpal gyi sgo (459) mo’o // (PT 1283:457-9)
“If the reputation of wisdom is good, [it] is the best of srid. If the usage of wealth is good, [it] is the
best of prosperity. If, after remembering those old proverbs, [you] related [them] well, as regards
[your] mouth, [it] is the gate to (lit. of) glory.”
so nam daṅ chu srid bar du yaṅ źugs źiṅ ’dug pas // (ITJ 738:2v16)
“Because [one], entering even between (or: mixing into) prosperity and chu srid, stayed [there] [...].”1
so nam ni rgya bskyed kyaṅ / rgya btags (8v5) ni skye rer zin / (ITJ 739:8v4-5)
“As regards prosperity, even though [one] enlarged [its] size, as concerns the size [one] attached [to
it], [one] took [it] for a ?single being?.”

128 bsar ṅa ba
DSM:1002b: ṅa rgyal che źiṅ rdzig ñams can; BYD:590a: smad ’tshoṅ ma’i miṅ.
BDN:394n2: gsor ṅa ba ste snun nam skor bas ’jigs par byed pa’i don; STK:196n27: khog la ṅa rgyal rgyas śiṅ phyi’i rnam
’gyur ’jigs su ruṅ ba’i don yin pa ’dra.
DTH:165: est funeste au léopard des neiges; n.4: [...] on pourrait entendre bsar ṅa comme signifiant: mauvais arrangement;
DOTSON.2013a:301: belligerent.

[S] *bsa’i rṅa “snow-leopard’s tail”

[E] *[bsa’i rṅa]+ba “one characterised by a snow-leopard’s tail”
[M] (A) awesome
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTdeterminative; STRC[NSOUR+N]
[A] As opposed to the authors who have previously analysed the formation is question and
connected bsar- to the verb gsor “va. to prepare, to make ready” (Gs:1162a; cf. also DOTSON
2013a:352n2), I propose to reconstruct its underlying structure as *bsa’ rṅa ba, lit. “one having a

Argument scheint in skyes bu und rigs pa zu liegen. Demnach sieht der Kommentator in puṇya eine Verschmelzung aus
pu(ṃs) und nyā(ya).“ (ibid.).
1
Due to the fragmentary character of the text it is not possible to satisfactorily interpret and translate the clause quoted.
For the phrase so nam daṅ chu srid bar du źugs one could cite the following expression from JÄSCHKE: *bár-la źúg-c̀e* “W. euph.
expression for: to commit adultery” (177b).
 396

snow-leopard’s tail”1; *bsa’ rṅa > *bsar ṅa resulting from the leftward consonant migration of the
morpheme r-. It is assumed that the term connoted a dignified but at the same time also terrifying
appearance of an animal or a thing, awesome like the tail of snow-leopards.2

[T] (483) ru thuṅ ni [bsar ṅa ba]ATTR / “[The] awesome short-horned [one]

khoṅ khyim ni spyan bu cuṅ / [is] a small spyan bu of khoṅ khyim.3
ris bkraʼ ni [bsar ṅa ba]ATTR / [The] awesome striped one
mon ka ʼi ni stag chig pa / [is] the tiger from Mon ka.
btsan te ni myi mkhas pa [Those] being mighty [but] not skilled
rgya drug (484) ni dguṅ mthaʼ rje // [are] the lords of the horizon, Chinese and Turks.
mgyogste ni myi mkhas pa / [Those] being swift [but] not skilled
śu ma ni rgyal ma gñis / [are] both, a śu ma and mare.
drag ste ni myi mkhas pa [Those] being strong [but] not skilled
mcho gar ni ʼbroṅ gi ru / [are] the white tips [of a bow strengthened] with
wild yak’s horn.
rno ste ni myi (485) mkhas pa [Those] being sharp [but] not skilled
mdo lcags ni steʼu ka ma / (PT 1287:483-5) [are] the iron arrowheads [called’ ‘(those) having
an axe-blade[-shape]’.”

129 lhag chad

[V] lhag cad (ITJ 750:226; deaspiration)
Corff.2:773a-b; 3580.1: zu kurz gekommen, verstümmelt (s.v. lhag char/chad can); SR.2:131.3: ilegüü dutaγu; LCh:846a:
1
anadhika; 2anūna (s.v. lhag chad med); BTC:3092a: chad lhag; Negi.16:7538a: anūnamanadhikam; anūnānadhikaḥ;
anyūnamadhikam (s.v. lhag chad med pa).
B:774b: balance, plus or minus; Gs:1180c: having extra inclusion and omissions, having too many and too few of sth.
DTH:46: couper la tête (for lhag cad brtsis ? - JB); TAKEUCHI.1995:156: either a surpass or a shortage; TOH.2002:398n11:
deficiency; DOTSON.2009:113: the surplus and deficit.

[S] *lhag par ’chad *”to be consumed so that it (i.e. the consumption) is exceeding”
[E] *lhag par chad pa “what is exceedingly consumed”
[M] (N) deficiency
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTconverbial; STRC[VV1+VV1]
[R] gum chad
[A] According to PT 1297.3, an occurrence of lhag chad on coat colour of a horse gave one a reason
to revoke a sale contract. Thus, it seems logical to assume that the compound in question had a

1
According to JÄSCHKE, bsa’ is a variant form of gsa’ “the snow-leopard” (587b).
2
Tail of snow-leopards, when compared with the length of the body, is relatively long. Additionally, it is “very thick due
to storage of fat and [...] very thickly covered with fur” (cited after: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_leopard#cite_ref-
15; 26.03.2014).
3
The second verse of this couplet is very problematic due to two highly obscure phrases: khoṅ khyim and spyan bu cuṅ.
Comparing this couplet with the following one we can surmise that it describes something that remains inside a house, i.e.
domestic (? khoṅ khyim) animal or appliances, “a small spyan bu”, that is given the attribute bsar ṅa ba (“awesome”) shared
with a tiger depictured in the next couplet. Similarly, if a tiger is a “striped one” (ris bkra, lit. “[having] variegated
pattern”), obviously itself a metaphor for a tiger. In that case, ru thuṅ would be a synonym of spyan bu. The main obstacle
in understanding this passage concerns the identification of spyan bu. Although by comparison with the next couplet one
could feel inclined to interpret the term as referring to an animal, however, if the orthographic form preserved in the text
is correct, then it seems highly improbable that an animal should be given a designation consisting of an honorific (!)
variant (spyan) of the word “eye”. Refraining from rendering any of the troublesome lexemes I would nevertheless suggest
to look rather for a some sort of utensil behind the spyan bu, maybe a kind of charm to ward off evil.
 397

rather negative connotation.1 This is confirmed by the following Sanskrit equivalents of Tibetan lhag
chad med pa, lit. “not having lhag chad”: “anūnamanadhikam; anūnānadhikaḥ; anyūnamadhikam”
(Negi.16:7538a), “1anadhika; 2anūna” (LCh:846a).2 Similar conclusion can be drawn from the gloss in
CORFF: *lhag chad can, lit. “having lhag chad” > “zu kurz gekommen, verstümmelt” (see the
Lexicographic section).

The proposed reconstruction is based on numerous examples of similar constructions of the type
‘lhag par+V’ attested in OT sources (see OTDO): *lhag par ’chad > *lhag ’chad (compounding) > lhag chad
(elision of the word-internal ’a chuṅ).3

[T] rta ’di dbyar s[p]u khruste mdo ris lhag (6) chad cig mchis na’ dpaṅ rgya phral la brje bar bgyis // (PT
1297.3:5-6; trslr. after TAKEUCHI 1995:155)
“If, having washed the coat of this horse in the summer, there has appeared (lit. come) any
deficiciency [concerning its] coat colour, one will have the contract (? lit. witness-seal) changed on
the spot.”
dgun ʼdun mkhar prag du / blon chen pho khri sum rjes bsduste / khab soe thugs ñen (226) gyi lhag cad brtsis
/ (ITJ 750:225-6)
“Grand councillor [Dba’s] khri sum rje [rtsaṅ bźer], having summoned the winter council in the
council Prag, calculated the deficiency in khab sos’ supplies.”

130 lhun stug

YeŚes:587a: lhun stug, ri rab, sa ’iṅ pa tha, sa’i haṅ ’u tsu suṅ suṅ thu, go’o sa’i haṅ cab ha laṅ tha’i ’i hi pa ’o loṅ (s.v. lhun
sdug); SR.2:1339.7: ǰuǰaγan abqulang-tu; sain abqulang-tu4; BTC:3108a: brjid ciṅ mdzes pa (s.v. lhun sdug).
Sch:628b: gross, majestätisch, prachtvoll, erhaben durch Grösse und Umfang; Schr:368b: a cloud; J:602a: very great, in
reference to mental darkness produced by sin; prob. also: considerable, sublime, grand (s.v. lhun thug); Desg:1075b:
l’obscurité (mentale) trés dense; R.10:231a: Isee above (lhun che ba “очень болшой; великий, величественный; very large;
great, majestic”, R.10:231a); IIглубокое умственное помрачение; seep (mental) obscurity. Gs:1183c: 1tall and majestic (for
mountains); 2sm. lhun mthug po (lhun mthug po “thick (usu[ally] for forests)”, Gs:1183c).
DTH:161: la valeur persister; DOTSON.2007b:5: abundant; DOTSON.2013a:296: abundant and undiminished.

[S] *lhun stug *”to condense a mass”

[E] *lhun stug pa “condensing a mass”
[M] (A) (made) grand
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTO-incorporating; STRC[N+VV1]
[A] The NP lhun stug po is attested in the canonical literature; for examples see RKTS. Likewise
classically attested formation lhun stug pa is derived from the compound lhun stug by means of the
nominal particle -pa. Another compound of structure and semantics apparently similar to lhun stug

1
It should be emphasised that the document mentions the condition in which a lhag chad would occur after a horse has
been bathed. “An increase” or “surpass” of coat after bathing does not sound convincing.
2
Although one finds also a different explanation, cf. “(or lhag med) without leaving a balance; all, entire, whole” (B:774b,
s.v. lhag chad med pa).
3
Besides, I presume that lhag chad underlies the compound dp(h)ya’ chad, “tax deficit” (TAKEUCHI 1995:223), < *dpya’i lhag
chad.
4
CM ǰuǰaγan “thick, dense; strong, massive, powerful; thickness” (Less:1081b); abqulang: ab- “ato take, grasp, get hold of; bto
receive, obtain, gain, procure, acquire; to collect (as taxes); to buy; to absorb, draw in; to adopt; to conceive; cto remove,
take off” (Less:1b-2a), -qulang “[suffix forming] nouns designating abstract ideas” (POPPE 1964:47, §157), -tu “[suffix
forming] nouns designating possession of or containment in something” (POPPE 1964:44, §140); sain “n., adj., adv. good
(both in physical and non-material sense), well; fine, nice; proficient; without trouble or danger; free from discomfort,
illness, etc.” (Less:660b).
 398

is dpal stug “majestic” (D:789b), glossed in Schmidt s.v. dpal rtug with “Majestät, volle Herrlichkeit”
(323b).

The meaning “thick” for -stug is corroborated by the following sample OT clause:
spu stug ni ’od ltar ’tsher // (ITJ 738:3v56)
“As regards a thick hair, [it] glances like a [ray of] light.”1

Still, two problematic issues have to be addressed here. First of all, the passage from PT 1287 quoted
below describes the contribution of Khri sroṅ brtsan and his councillor Mgar stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ to
the prosperity of the country. Their deeds are expressed by the predicates: bskyed, lhun stug, bsñams,
bskyuṅs, mchis, bskyal, spyad, byin, pye, bcugs, smad, mnan, bsñen, bstod, bkur, bkol (ll.448-51). We
observe that, excluding from our analysis for a moment lhun stug, all the other verbs are active,
controllable, and, with the exception of mchis, transitive. This observation brings us to the second
problem, namely, the difference between CT lhun stug and lhun (’/m)thug both of which are attested
in later lexicographic sources (see the Lexicographic section). stug is attested twice in OT documents
as a predicate although the contexts in which it occurs remain obscure.2

I propose to relate both forms, stug- and (’/m)thug-, to CT gtug “1to reach, to touch; to overtake, to
reach; to meet with, to join; 2to bring an action against a person, to sue” (J:207b); thug “1to reach,
arrive at, come to; 2to meet, to light upon; 3to touch, to hit or strike against” (J:232b); and rdug “2to
strike against, to stumble at” (J:285b). Thus, (’/m)thug- would be a derivative from a noncontrollable
verb with the etymological meaning *”having come together in a condensing manner; condensed”,
whereas stug- is assumed to be derived from a controllable verb, thus, *“having been put together in
order to condense; condensed”. Should this tentative analysis prove correct, then lhun stug and lhun
(’/m)thug would be O- and S-incorporating compounds with their etymological meanings being
*”condensing mass (by sb.)” (< *”to condense a mass”) and “condensing mass” (< *“a mass
condenses (by itself)”), respectively. In accordance with the above arguments, I propose to translate
lhun stug as *“(made) large, grand (by sb. else)” and lhun (’/m)thug as *“(having become) large, grand
(on its own)”.

[T] bla na rje sgam na / khri sroṅ brtsan / ʼog na blon ʼdzaṅs na stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ / (447) rje ni gnam ri
pyva ʼi lugs // blon po ni sa ʼi ṅam len gyi tshul // mṅaʼ thaṅ chen po ʼi rkyen du / ji daṅ jir ldan te / pyi ʼi
(448) chab srid ni pyogs bźir bskyed // naṅ gi kha bso ni myi ñams par lhun stug / (PT 1287:446-8)
“Above, if the lord is profound, [it is] Khri sroṅ brtsan; below, if the councillor is wise, [it is] [Mgar]
stoṅ rtsan yul zuṅ. As for the lord, [his] custom of the *mountain peaks* of the sky, [and] as for the
councillor, [his] nature of the ravines of the earth, ?adding everything to everything? as bases for

1
One should read *’od zer instead of the attested ’od that has resulted from metrical truncation.
2
Cf.: myi rab ’greṅ / ru cho / ’ban te ni groṅs gyis myed (43) stug ste ni rlag / gis / myed / rno ste ni / chagis / myed / (PT 1134:42-
3)
“The upright superior man Ru cho, being ’ban (should one read ’phan?), since [he] died, [he] is no more; being stug, since
[he] was lost, [he] is no more; being rno, since [he] was coming to a close (lit. was broken), [he] is no more.”
myi ’o chogi sñiṅdu myi stugste / ’phan pa las rmaṅ bar ’oṅ / (ITJ 740:149)
“Not being stug to the heart of men, ?comes from useful ones to do? rmaṅ.”
 399

(lit. of) great authority, extended chab srid of the exterior in four directions [and] (made) the
prosperity of the interior grand so that [it] was inalienable.”

131 lho bal

BYD:601a: sṅar bod rigs khoṅs su gtogs pa’i śa cu’i ’baṅs mi. bod rigs min pa’i mi rigs gźan źig.
RICHARDSON.1952:64: Tsha sprul Rin po che thinks that lho bal stands for lho pa “savages”; LALOU.1955:181: népalais;
RICHARDSON.1980:64: Nepal; RICHARDSON.1983:137: barbarian; foreign; STEINRA.1983:164: barbares; = Chin. jong-yi, man-mo;
p.206: Il se peut que le mot ne désigne pas seulement les Chinois, mais aussi (ou surtout) les populations étrangères (K’iang,
T’ou-yu-houen, Long) qui habitaient la région; TAKEUCHI.1984:986: In Pelliot tibétain 1085 [...] the word lho bal is used by the
Chinese to refer to themselves humbly; In Pelliot tibétain 1089 [...] lho bal councillors are described in contrast to Tibetan
councillors. Here lho bal is used to refer to ‘non-Tibetans’ in general; In India Office 598 lho bal is used by anti-Buddhist
Tibetan ministers to refer to itinerant monks from Khotan, Kucha, Kashgar, Gilgit and Kashmir in order to accuse them of
having brought about epidemics in Tibet; In Pelliot tibétain 1071 – a document concerning the penal code – lho bal captives
are listed as the lowest in rank; p.987: In Pelliot chinois 2139 lho bal is rendered into Chinese as jung-i 戎夷 ‘barbarians’; Y.
Imaeda has pointed out that in Pelliot tibétain 986 lho bal la tsogs is used to translate Chinese man mao 蠻貌 and ssu-i 四夷
‘barbarians’; a. the referent of lho bal is ‘non-Tibetans’ in general; b. lho bal is used either by Tibetans to refer to non-
Tibetans disparagingly or by non-Tibetans to refer to themselves humbly; c. it corresponds to Chinese terms which refer to
non-Chinese as ‘barbarians’; ‘foreign (i.e. non Tibetan) barbarians’; The meaning ‘barbarians’ suggests a connection with
the common Tibetan word glo ba > kla klo ‘barbarians’. Bal might have been a variant form of phal (ce) ‘troop, mass’.
Accordingly, lho bal can be considered an Old Tibetan form for *glo phal ‘mass of barbarians’; RICHARDSON.1985:111n3:
barbarian; STEINRA.1985:115: barbares, et spécialement les tribus de la région de Touen-houang; LI/COBLIN:106: barbarian;
RICHARDSON.1998c:154: barbarian captive (for lho bal btson - JB); DOTSON.2007b:9: barbarian.

[E] *lho phal po “a common traveller”

[M] (N) foreigner
SEM
[C] endocentric; SYNTattributive; STRC[N+A]
[R] pha los
[A] Following TAKEUCHI (1984, see the Lexicographic section), I relate lho- to the well known CT
word kla klo “1barbarian; 2in later times: Moslem, Mahometan; Mahometanism” (J:8a), Tholing,
Ruthok, Gar, Gergye, Purik, Tshochen, Lhasa, Gertse “backwardness”, Shigatse “barbarian”
(CDTD:75), that resulted from the reduplication of the stem klo “barbarian, infidel; fool” (CDTD:92).1
Tibetan lexemes klo and lho could be related to Chepang hlo- “vi. call on in passing, break journey,
drop in on, stop on way, diverge from journey to meet someone” (CAUGHLEY 2000:302a)2, thus the
proposed etymological meaning *“passenger, traveller”: *lho phal po “a common traveller” > *lho
phal (compounding) > lho bal (voicing between vowels: ph- > b- / -Vσ_V-).3

From the concise descripions of the contexts in which lho bal occurs that were delivered by STEIN
and TAKEUCHI (see the Lexicographic section), it appears that the compound, especially when used
self-referentially, denoted rather “foreigner” than “barbarian”. This assumption may be additionally
supported by the passage from the ST Treaty inscription. There, the Chinese ruler is said to be
“unlike other lho bal” - a clause followed by a positive opinion on his politics (srid), customs (chos),
1
WT glo as a designation of Mustang could possibly be related to glo “the side” (J:81b) which, in my opinion, is not cognate
with the discussed word family.
2
Cf. Dzongkha lhod “1reach, arrive” (file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/29-06-LHA.html; 14.09.2014) could be considered another member
of the family derived from the stem *lho by means of the (active voice?) suffix -d.
3
It is possible that the meaning “south” for lho is of secondary origin and, as in case of byaṅ, has replaced another term. It
might have occurred as a result of folk etymologisation in circumstances in which lho started to be used mainly for people
visiting Central Tibet from southern directions (the borderline nearest to the cultural and political centre of the country;
*”traveller (from the south)” > *”southerner” > “south”) and a new word, klo, was coined to ‘house’ the sense *”foreigner”
with the negative connotation, i.e., “barbarian”.
 400

and principles (gtsug lag). Since barbarians are usually distinguished by having inferior customs and
ethics, the rendering “foreigner” seems to be more accurate in this particular context. In addition, it
seems that in PT 1089:r21-22 lho bal people are contrasted with gñug ma “natives”.

lho as a term referring to non-Tibetans occurs also in the following phrase: myi ṅand pa daṅ lha lho
daṅ man mon gyi ṅo (PT 1047:220), lit. “dice-side of bad (or: humble) men, ?whatsoever? lhos and
mons”. Two observations can help us to better understand the semantics of the term under
discussion. First of all, lha lho is accompanied here by the analogously formed term man mon both of
which are reduplicated formations with the vowel change: lha lho < lho and man mon < mon. mon is a
well known term denoting different peoples of non-Tibetan origins living in the southern parts of
Tibet.1 Secondly, the third term occurring in the same passage, namely myi ṅand pa, “a bad man”, has
a clearly pejorative meaning. From this we can infer that *lho referred to a group of people that in
some way was connoted negatively.2

The compound under consideration is documented also in the canonical literature3. Besides, it forms
a part of another compound, namely lho bal yul, that is juxtaposed with bod yul in ’Dul ba’i mdo’i ’grel
pa (D 4122, ’dul ba, lu 51r2) for which compare lho bal gyi yul of Yan lag brgyad pa’i sñiṅ po’i rnam par
’grel pa tshig gi don gyi zla zer quoted in the footnote.

To conclude, one could hypothesise that CT toponym bal (yul) might have been a back formation
from lho bal after the latter word has been identified mainly with foreigners coming to Central Tibet

1
Cf.: “The term covers all sorts of aboriginal tribes of the wooded Himalayan hills and is possibly related to the word ‘Man’
used in literary Chinese for all southern ‘barbarians’” (STEIN.RA 1972:34), “Mon[yul] the Himalayan tract to the West of
Bhutan” (PETECH 1988b:1081), “used in Tibet to designate non-Tibetan inhabitants of the Nepalese and Indian borderlands”
(RAMBLE 1997:497), “Native inhabitants commonly subscribe to the view that the Monpa once occupied virtually all areas of
Upper Tibet west of the 89th meridian. The Mon are sometimes said to be black (nag) Bon practitioners who haunted the
landscape before the time of the Vajrayāna hero Gu ru rin po che; p.210: The ethnonym and toponym Mon is used in
Tibetan folklore and literature to refer to almost any of the cis-Himalayan and Transhimalayan tribes from present-day
Arunachal Pradesh across the great mountain arc to Baltistan” (BELLEZZA 2008:116), “[Mon] is among the group of the four
(border) kingdoms (of Bod) which became subject to the btsan po” (DOTSON 2009:168). One can also cite in this context
Dzongkha lho mon “old name of Bhutan” (file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-
Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/Contents/29-06-LHA.html; 14.09.2014).
2
Interestingly, one finds in CT sources the morpheme mon connected also to kla klo, cf. kla klo’i tig ta “several bitter roots
growing in the sub-Himālayan regions; one is also called mon gyi tig ta Gentiana cheretta” (D:43a).
3
Cf.: brda mi phrad na ni yod pa ma yin źes pa ni ’on źiṅ lkugs pa daṅ lho bal lta bu brda mi phrad pa la byas pa ni byas śiṅ bsgo bar
mi chud pa’o // (Prajñākara, ’Dul ba mdo’i rnam par bśad pa, D 4121, ’dul ba, ru 141v7)
“If [someone] does not understand [words], [he] is not existent; thus, as concerns what is said to those who like deaf and
dumb persons and lho bal do not understand [words], [one] does not enter into a conversation (lit. into talking and
speaking) [with them].”
śar gyi lho bal gyi yul nas ’bab pa daṅ / nub phyogs te / stag gzig gi yul nas ’bab pa daṅ / mtha’ las byuṅ ba lho nub kyi mtshams kyi
yul ma la ya las byuṅ źiṅ ’bab pa’i chu bo ni (Candranandana, Yan lag brgyad pa’i sñiṅ po’i rnam par ’grel pa tshig gi don gyi zla zer,
D 4312, gso ba rig pa, ko 53r3)
“The river that appeared and is flowing down from the land Ma la ya [that lies] between (lit. on the border of) the
southern and western [lands], coming from the land of lho bal of the south and coming from the land of Stag gzig, being
in the west, and that appeared from the margins.”
klad pa tsha ba’am / rims sam / rtsib (2) logs na ba’am / rgyal po’i srid ’khrugs pa’am / lho bal gyis dkrugs ba’am / mu ge’i ’khrug
pa’am / gźan daṅ gźan gyi ’khrug pas lus kyi gnod pa’am / ṅag gi gnod pa’am / yid kyi gnod pas (read: pa?) tshe gcig la byaṅ
bar ’gyur ro // (Ska ba dpal brtsegs, Gsuṅ rab rin po che’i gtam rgyud daṅ śakya’i rabs rgyud, D 4357, sna tshogs, co 263v1-2)
“The infliction of the body, speech, and mind, because of fever (lit. the heat of the brain), contagious disease, pain in the
ribs, tumult [in] the king’s domain, agitation by lho bal, disorder due to (lit. of) famine, or disorder [caused by] (lit. of)
others, will be purified during one life.”
 401

from southern directions. Neither bal (yul) nor lho bal should, in my opinion, be linked to the OT
toponym bal po which is mentioned in the OTA (ITJ 750 repeatedly) as a place of residence of Tibetan
btsan pos.

[T] lho bal la stsogs te // rgyal khams thams cad chags ’og du ’dus nas // bka’ gus (134) par ñan to (PT
986:133-4)
“All the kingdoms, foreigners and the like, gathered at [his] feet. Thereafter, [they] listened humbly
to [his] orders.”
lho bal gyi to dog / (r22) daṅ stoṅ zlar bskos pa’i rnams // dpon sna gñug ma’i goṅ du mchis pa’i lugs daṅ zla
dpe ma mchiste // (PT 1089:r21-2)
“There were no manners and exemplars of those who, appointed as to dog and stoṅ zla of foreigners,
were above different kinds of native masters.”
lho bal gyi stoṅ pon rnams gyis de’i zla dpes blar gsol nas / (PT 1089:r69)
“The heads of thousand district of foreigners requested to the authorities with the exemplars of
that.”
mtsho chen po’i [bar // ñi ma] (19) śar pa logs kyi rgyal po ste // lho bal gźan daṅ myi ’dra [bar // srid daṅ]
(20) chos bzaṅ // gtsug lag che bas // bod daṅ yaṅ // ’thab kyi zla [// gñen] (21) gyi [do] ste // (ST Treaty
E 18-21)1
“Being the king of the region between great sees where the sun rises, unlike other foreigners, due to
[his] good srid and customs as well as great principles, [he] was a match in fighting even with
Tibetans [and] a companion in friendship.”2

1
The bracketed elements are reconstructed after RICHARDSON 1985:110.
2
Besides, the following compounds containing lho bal are attested in OT sources: lho bal stoṅ (PT 1089:r24-5, r73); lho bal sde
chen (PT 1089:r27); lho bal naṅ (PT 1089:r67); lho bal btson (PT 1071:r277; < lho bal kyi/gyi btson, PT 1071:r289, r300, r311-2, PT
1072:8, 19, 31).
 402

REFERENCES
 403

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY

AM Asia Major
AOH Acta Orientalia Hungarica
BEFEO Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies
HJAS Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies
IL Indian Linguistics
JA Journal Asiatique
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JIABS Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies
JIATS Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
LTBA Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
repr. reprinted
RET Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines
TJ The Tibet Journal
TP T’oung Pao
WZKM Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes
ZAS Zentralasiatische Studien
ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft

PRIMARY SOURCES
A detailed list of all Old Tibetan documents (including those from the secondary corpus) that are
cited in the thesis is furnished in the Quotation index.

PRIMARY CORPUS
MANUSCRIPTS
PT 1042 Funeral ritual
PT 1285 Ritual text
PT 1286 Royal Genealogy
PT 1287 Old Tibetan Chronicles
PT 1288 Old Tibetan Annals I
ITJ 750 Old Tibetan Annals I
Or.8212.187 Old Tibetan Annals II
INSCRIPTIONS
Inscription on Bsam yas bell
Bsam yas rdo riṅs inscription
Inscription on Khra ’brug bell
Inscription on Khri lde sroṅ btsan’s tomb
Lcaṅ bu inscription
’Phyoṅ rgyas inscription
Rkoṅ po inscription
Sino-Tibetan peace Treaty inscription
Skar cuṅ inscription
Inscription on Yer pa bell
Źol rdo riṅs inscription
Źwa’i lha khaṅ inscription

SECONDARY SOURCES
Aalto, P., 1964, Word-pairs in Tokharian and other languages, Linguistics 5, pp.69–78.
Alber, B., Arndt-Lappe, S., 2012, Templatic and subtractive truncation, [in:] Trommer, J., The Morphology and Phonology of
Exponence, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Allen, N.J., 1978: Sewala puja bintila puja: Notes on Thulung Ritual Language, Kailash 6.4, pp.237-56.
Anninos, T., 2000, Tibetan Leather Boxes, Arts of Asia 30, pp.101-17.
 404

Aris, M. (ed.), 1992, Lamas, Princes, and Brigands. Joseph Rock’s Photographs of the Tibetan Borderlands of China, China House
Gallery, New York.
Backus, C., 1981, The Nan-Chao Kingdom and T’ang China’s Southwestern Frontier, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bacot, J., Thomas, F.W., Toussaint, Ch., 1940, Documents de Touen-Houang Relatifs a l’Histoire du Tibet, Geuthner, Paris.
Bailey, G.T., 1911, Kanauri vocabulary in two parts: English-Kanauri and Kanauri-English II, JRAS 43.2, pp. 315-64.
Balk, M., 1986, Indische Etymologien in einem tibetsichen Kommentar, [in:] Eimer, H. (ed.), Vicitrakusumāñjali. Volume
Presented to Richard Othon Meisezahl on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday, Indica et Tibetica, Bonn, pp.1-22.
Banga, A., Hanssen, E., Neijt, A., Schreuder, R., 2013, Preference for linking element -en- in Dutch noun-noun compounds:
native speakers and second language learners of Dutch, Morphology 23, pp.33-56.
Barbieri-Low, A., 2007, Artisans in early imperial China, University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Bauer, L., 1978, The Grammar of Nominal Compounding with special reference to Danish, English and French, Odense University
Press, Odense.
Bauer, L., 2009, Typology of compounds, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.343-56.
Beckh, H., 1911, Udānavarga. Eine Sammlung buddhistischer Sprüche in tibetischer Sprache, Verlag von Georg Reimer, Berlin.
Beckwith, C.I., 1977, A study of the early medieval Chinese, Latin, and Tibetan historical sources on pre-imperial Tibet, Ph.D. Thesis,
Ann Arbor.
Beckwith, C.I., 1983 (repr. 2003), The Revolt of 755 in Tibet, [in:] McKay, A., The history of Tibet, vol.1, London,
RoutledgeCurzon, pp.273-85.
Beckwith, C.I., 1987 (repr. 1993), The Tibetan Empire in Central Asia: A History of the Struggle for Great Power among Tibetans,
Turks, Arabs, and Chinese during the Early Middle Ages, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Beckwith, C.I., 2009, Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present, Princeton University
Press, Princeton.
Beckwith, C.I., Walter, M.L., 2010, On the meaning of Old Tibetan rje blon during the Tibetan Empire period, JA 298.2,
pp.535-48.
Bellezza, J.V., 2005, Spirit-Mediums. Sacred Mountains, and the Bon Tradition in Upper Tibet. Calling Down the Gods, Brill, Leiden.
Bellezza, J.V., 2008, Zhang Zhung. Foundations of Civilisations in Tibet, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Wien.
Benedict, P.K., 1942, Tibetan and Chinese Kinship Terms, HJAS 6, pp.313-337.
Benedict, P.K., 1972, Sino-Tibetan. A conspectus, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bernhard, F., 1965, Udānavarga, Band I: Einleitung, Beschreibung der Handschriften, Textausgabe, Bibliographie, Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, Göttingen.
Beyer, S., 1988, Magic and Ritual inTibet. The Cult of Tara, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
Beyer, S.V., 1992 (repr. 1993), The Classical Tibetan Language, Sri Satguru Publications, Delhi.
Bialek, J., 2015 (forthcoming a), Erneuerbare Wörter: Alttibetischer Wortschatz im neuen kulturellen Umfeld.
Sprachwandel durch Übersetzungskultur, [in:] Schrijver, P., Mumm, P.-A. (eds.), Dasselbe mit anderen Worten? Sprache,
Übersetzung und Sprachwissenschaft, Akten des 2. Symposiums des Zentrums historische Sprachwissenschaften (ZhS) München, 11.
und 12. April 2014, Hempen Verlag, Bremen, pp.21-42.
Bialek, J., (forthcoming b), Side, stench, remnant, plot, oath, and craftiness - the “semantic capacity” of the OT dku.
Bielmeier, R., 1988a, On Tone in Tibetan, [in:] Uebach, H., Jampa L. Panglung (eds.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 4th
Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Band II, Kommission für Zentralasiatische Studien, Bayerische
Akademie der Wissenschaften, München, pp.43-54.
Bielmeier, R., 1988b, The reconstruction of the stop series and the verbal system in Tibetan, [in:] Eguchi, P.K. (ed.),
Languages and history in East Asia. Festschrift for Tatsuo Nishida on the occasion of his 60th birthday, Shokado, Kyoto, pp.15–27.
Bielmeier, R., 2004a, Lexikalische Variation und lexikalischer Wandel im Tibetischen am Beispiel einiger
Körperteilbezeichnungen, [in:] Mihatsch, W., Steinberg, R. (eds.), Lexical Data and Universals of Semantic Change, Stauffenburg
Verlag, Tübingen, pp.167-202.
Bielmeier, R., 2004b, Shafer's proto-West Bodish hypothesis and the formation of the Tibetan verb paradigms, [in:] Anju
Saxena, (ed.), Himalayan Languages. Past and Present, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin / New York, pp. 395-412.
Bielmeier, R., Haller, F., Häsler, K., Huber, B., Volkart, M., (unpublished), Comparative Dictionary of Tibetan Dialects.
Bisetto, A., Scalise, S., 2005, The Classification of Compounds, Lingue e Linguaggio 4.2, pp.319-332.
Blo bzaṅ ’phrin las, 2002, Duṅ dkar tshig mdzod chen mo, Kruṅ go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khaṅ, Beijing.
Bloomfield, L., 1935 (repr. 2005), Language, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
Boeder, W., 1991, A note on synonymic parallelism and bilingualism, Studia Linguistica 45.1/2, pp.97-126.
Boesi, A., 2005, Plant knowledge among Tibetan populations, [in:] Boesi, A., Cardi, F. (eds.), Wildlife and Plants in Traditional
and Modern Tibet: Conceptions, Exploitation, and Conversation, Memorie della Società Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museo
Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano, Milano, pp.33-48.
 405

Böhtlingk, O., Roth, R., 1855-75 (repr. 1990), Sanskrit-Wörterbuch, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
Bon gyi śes rig tshig mdzod, 2012, Don grub lha rgyal et al. (ed.), Bod ljoṅs mi dmaṅs dpe skrun khaṅ, Lha sa.
Boord, M.J., 1993, The Cult of the Deity Vajrakīla. According to the Texts of the Northern Treasures Tradition of Tibet (Byang-gter
phur-ba), The Insitute of Buddhist Studies, Tring.
Boryś, W., 2005, Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego, Wydawnictwo Literackie, Kraków.
Bsod nams skyid, Dbaṅ rgyal, 1992, Tun hoṅ nas thon pa’i bod kyi lo rgyus yig cha, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Pe cin.
Bsod nams skyid, Dbaṅ rgyal (eds.) 2003, Bod kyi gna’ rabs yig cha gces bsdus, Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Chengdu.
Btsan lha ṅag dbaṅ tsul khrims, 1997, Brda dkrol gser gyi me loṅ, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Beijing.
Buck, S.H., 1969, Tibetan-English Dictionary with Supplement, The Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C.
Bushell, S.W., 1880, The Early History of Tibet. From Chinese Sources, JRAS 12, pp.435-541.
Cantwell, C., Mayer, R., 2008, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Wien.
Caplow, N.J., 2009, The role of stress in Tibetan tonogenesis: a study in historical comparative acoustics. Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California, Santa Barbara.
Caughley, R., 2000, Dictionary of Chepang, A Tibeto-Burman language of Nepal, Pacific Linguistics, Canberra.
Ceccagno, A., Basciano, B., 2009, Sino-Tibetan: Mandarin Chinese, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of
Compounding, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.478-90.
Chang, K., 1959-1960, An Analysis of the Tun-Huang Tibetan Annals, Journal of Oriental Studies 5, pp.122-173.
Chos kyi grags pa, 1957, Brda dag miṅ tshig gsal ba, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Peking.
Clarke, J., 2006, A History of Ironworking in Tibet: Centers of Production, Styles, and Techniques, [in:] LaRocca, D. (ed.),
Warriors of the Himalayas. Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, pp.21-33.
Coblin, W. South, 1986, A Sinologist’s Handlist of Sino-Tibetan Lexical Comparisons, Steyler Verlag, Nettetal.
Coblin, W. South, 1991a, A study of the Old Tibetan Shangshu paraphrase, Part I, JAOS 111, pp.303-322.
Coblin, W. South, 1991b, A study of the old Tibetan Shangshu paraphrase, Part II, JAOS 111, pp.523-539.
Coblin, W. South, 1991c, Notes on Old Tibetan rje-blas, [in:] Steinkellner, E. (ed.), Tibetan History and Language. Studies
Dedicated to Uray Géza on the Seventieth Birthday, Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien Universität Wien,
Wien, pp.63-110.
Cohen, M., 1996, Dunhuang at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, IDP Newsletter 4, pp.1-2.
Corff, O. et al. (eds.), 2013, Auf kaiserlichen Befehl erstelltes Wörterbuch des Manjurischen in fünf Sprachen. „Fünfsprachenspiegel“,
vols.1-2, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Cüppers, C., 2003, Some Remarks on the Tibetan Language Used in Former Government Decrees, [in:] Srong btsan spyi’i
tshogs ’dus theṅs daṅ po / bod kyi brda sprod skad yig gi skor, Songtsen Library, Dehradun, pp.333-339.
Cüppers, C., 2004, Ein Glossar zur Terminologie der tibetischen Urkundensprache, ZAS 33, pp.25-98.
Dalton, J.P., 2011, Mahāyoga Ritual Interests at Dunhuang: A Translation and Study of the Codex IOL Tib J 437/Pelliot
Tibétain 324, [in:] Imaeda, Y., Kapstein, M.T., Takeuchi, T. (eds.), New studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and
religion, Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo,
pp.293-313.
Das, S.C., 1902 (repr. 2000), A Tibetan-English Dictionary with Sanskrit synonyms, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
DeLancey, S., 1987, Sino-Tibetan languages, [in:] Comrie, B. (ed.), The world’s major languages, Routledge, London, pp.693-702.
DeLancey, S., 1989, Verb agreement in Proto-Tibeto-Burman, BSOAS 52, pp.315-333.
Demiéville, P., 1952, Le concile de Lhasa. Une controverse sur le quiétisme entre bouddhistes de l’Inde et de la Chine au VIIIe siècle de
l’ére chrétienne, Imprimerie Nationale de France, Paris.
Denwood, P., 1986, The Tibetan Noun Final –s, LTBA 9.1, pp.97-101.
Denwood, P., 1991, Some Rare Words in Tibetan Documents of the Early Period, [in:] Steinkellner, E. (ed.) Tibetan History and
Language. Studies Dedicated to Uray Géza on the Seventieth Birthday, Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien
Universität Wien, Wien, pp.129-136.
Denwood, P., 1999, Tibetan, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
Desgodins, A., 1899, Dictionnaire thibétain-latin-français par les missionnaires catholiques du Thibet, Imprimerie de la Société des
missions étrangères, Hongkong.
Dietz, S., 1984, Die buddhistische Briefliteratur Indiens: nach dem tibetischen Tanjur, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.
Dotson, B., 2004, A note on źaṅ: Maternal relatives of the Tibetan royal line and marriage into the royal family, JA 292, pp.
75-99.
Dotson, B., 2007a, Administration and Law in the Tibetan Empire: the Section on Law and State and its Old Tibetan
Antecedents, https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/3358/1/DotsonDPhil.pdf; 07.07.2009.
 406

Dotson, B., 2007b, Divination and Law in the Tibetan Empire: The Role of Dice in the Legislation of Loans, Interest, Marital
Law and Troop Conscription, [in:] Kapstein, M., Dotson, B. (eds.), Contributions to the Cultural History of Early Tibet, Brill,
Leiden, pp.3–77.
Dotson, B., 2007c, “Emperor” Mu rug btsan and the ’Phang thang ma Catalogue, Journal of the International Association of
Tibetan Studies 3, pp.1-25.
Dotson, B., 2008, Complementarity and Opposition in Early Tibetan Ritual, JAOS 128.1, pp.41-67.
Dotson, B., 2009, The Old Tibetan Annals. An Annotated Translation of Tibet’s First History, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften, Wien.
Dotson, B., 2011a, On the Old Tibetan Term khrin in the Legal and Ritual Lexicons, [in:] Turin, M., Zeisler, B. (eds.),
Himalayan Languages and Linguistics. Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, Brill, Leiden, pp.77-97.
Dotson, B., 2011b, Sources for the Old Tibetan Chronicle: A Fragment from the non-Extant Chronicle Pothi, [in:] Imaeda, Y.,
Kapstein, M.T., Takeuchi, T. (eds.), New studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and religion, Research Institute
for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo, pp.231-244.
Dotson, B., 2011c, Theorising the King: Implicit and Explicit Sources for the Study of Tibetan Sacred Kingship, RET 22,
pp.83-103.
Dotson, B., 2012, At the behest of the mountain: gods, clans and political topography in post-imeprial Tibet, [in:] Scherrer-
Schaub, C. (ed.), Old Tibetan Studies Dedicated to the Memory of R.E. Emmerick. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the IATS, 2003,
Brill, Leiden, pp.159-204.
Dotson, B., 2013a, The Victory Banquet. The Old Tibetan Chronicle and the Rise of Tibetan Historical Narrative,
Habilitationsschrift, Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München.
Dotson, B., 2013b, The Unhappy Bride and Her Lament, Journal of the International Association for Bon Research 1, pp.199-225.
Driem, G. van, 1988, Reflexives of the Tibeto-Burman *-t Directive Suffix in Dumi Rai, [in:] Bradley, D. et al. (eds.), Prosodic
analysis and Asian linguistics: to honour R.K.Sprigg, Research School of Pacific Studies, Canberra, pp.157-67.
Duden. Das Herkunftswörterbuch, 2006, Dudenverlag, Mannheim.
Duden. Deutsches Universalwörterbuch, 2007, Dudenverlag, Mannheim.
Edgerton, F., 1953 (repr. 1998), Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
Ehrhard, F., 2002, Life and Travels of Lo-chen Bsod-nams rgya-mtsho, Lumbini International Research Institute, Lumbini.
Elvin, M., 2004, The retreat of the elephants. An environmental history of China, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Emmerick, R.E., 1967, Tibetan texts concerning Khotan, Oxford University Press, London.
Emmerick, R.E., 1985, Tibetan Loanwords in Khotanese and Khotanese Loanwords in Tibetan, [in:] Gnoli, G. (ed.), Orientalia
Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata. Serie Orientale Roman, Insituto Italiano Per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome, pp.301-317.
English-Dzongkha Pocket Dictionary, 2010, Dzongkha Development Commission.
Firth, J.R., 1957, Ethnographic Analysis and Language with Reference to Malinowski’s Views, [in:] Firth, J.R. (ed.), Man and
Culture. An Evaluation of the Work of Bronislaw Malinowski, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, pp.93-118.
Francke, A.H., 1905/41, Gśam yul na bśad pa’i ke sar gyi sgruṅs bźugs so. A Lower Ladakhi version of the Kesar saga, Calcutta.
Francke, A.H., 1907a, Das tibetische Pronominalsystem, ZDMG 61, pp.439-440, 950.
Francke, A.H., 1909c, Tibetan inscription on the stone monument in front of the Ta-chao-ssu temple in Lhasa, 822 A.D.,
Epigraphia Indica 10, pp.89-93.
Francke, A.H., 1914, Notes on Sir Aurel Stein’s Collection of Tibetan Documents from Chinese Turkestan, JRAS, pp.37-59.
Francke, A.H., 1926 (repr. 1972), Antiquities of Indian Tibet. Part II: The Chronicles of Ladakh and Minor Chronicles, S. Chand & co.
(Pvt.) Ltd., New Delhi.
Francke, A.H., Simon, W., 1929, Addenda, [in:] Jäschke, H.A., Tibetan Grammar, de Gruyter, Berlin.
Gaenszle, M., 2002, Ancestral Voices: Oral Ritual Texts and their Social Contexts among the Mewahang Rai of East Nepal, Lit,
Münster.
Geeraerts, D., 2007, Diachronic Prototype Semantics. A Contribution to Historical Linguistics, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Gña’ goṅ dkon mchog tshes brtan, 1995, Bod kyi brda rñiṅ yig cha bdams bsgrigs, Kruṅ dbyaṅ mi rigs slob grwa chen mo’i dpe
skrun khaṅ, Beijing.
Gō Minoru, Aoki Bunkyō, Yamamoto Hajime, Kitamura Hajime (eds.), 1954, An Eastern Tibetan Dictionary (revised) and A Study
of the Eastern Tibetan Language – with special reference to the initial Consonants, Okayama.
Go śul grags pa ’byuṅ gnas, 2001, Bod btsan po’i skabs kyi gna’ rtsom gces bsdus slob deb, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Pe cin.
Goldstein, M.C., 1971, Serfdom and Mobility: An Examination of the Institution of “Human Lease” in Traditional Tibetan
Society, Journal of Asian Studies 30.3, pp.521-34.
Goldstein, M.C., 1978, Tibetan-English Dictionary of Modern Tibetan, Ratna Pustak Bhandar, Kathmandu.
Goldstein, M.C., 2001 (repr. 2004), The New Tibetan-English Dictionary of Modern Tibetan, Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi.
Goldstein, M.C., Narkyid, N., 1984 (repr. 2007), English-Tibetan Dictionary of Modern Tibetan, LTWA, Dharamsala.
Goṅ ba klu ’bum rgyal, 2006, Spu rgyal btsan po’i skabs kyi brda rñiṅ yig cha slob gsar stoṅ gi ’jug sgo, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Pe
cin.
 407

Grønbech, K., Krueger, J.R., (1955), An Introduction to Classical (Literary) Mongolian, Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.
Grünwedel, A., 1900, Mythologie des Buddhismus in Tibet und der Mongolei. Führer durch die lamaistische Sammlung des Fürsten E.
Uchtomskij, Brockhaus, Leipzig.
Grzega, J., 2003, Borrowing as a Word-Finding Process in Cognitive Historical Onomasiology, Onomasiology Online 4, pp.22-
42.
Guiart, J., 1989, Voyages dans les Marches Tibétaines, Musée de l’Homme, Paris.
Haarh, E., 1968, The Zhang-zhung language, a grammar and dictionary of the unexplored language of the Tibetan Bonpos,
Acta Jutlandica 40.1, pp.7-43.
Haarh, E., 1969, The Yar-luṅ dynasty: A study with particular regard to the contribution by myths and legends to the history of
Ancient Tibet and the origin and nature of its kings, G.E.C. Gad’s Forlag, København.
Hahn, M., 1996, Lehrbuch der Klassischen Tibetischen Schriftsprache, Indica et Tibetica Verlag, Swisttal-Odendorf.
Hahn, M., 1997 (repr. 2003), A propos the Term gtsug lag, [in:] Hahn, M., Schlüssel zum Lehrbuch der klassischen tibetischen
Schriftsprache und Beiträge zur tibetischen Wortkunde (Miscellanea etymologica tibetica I-VI), Indica et Tibetica Verlag, Marburg,
pp.131-143.
Hahn, M., Dietz, S., 2008, Wege zur rechten Erkenntnis. Buddhistische Lehrbriefe, Verlag der Weltreligionen, Frankfurt am Main.
Halliday, M.A.K., Teubert, W., Yallop, C., Čermáková, A., Lexicology and Corpus Linguistics, An Introduction, Continuum,
London.
Hamid, A., (1998), Ladakhi - English - Urdu Dictionary with an English - Ladakhi index, Melong Publications, Leh.
Hanisch, A., 2005, Āryaśūras Jātakamālā: philologische Untersuchungen zu den Legenden 1 bis 15, Indica-et-Tibetica, Marburg.
Hanssen, E., 2011, Linking elements in compounds: Regional variation in speech production and perception, LOT, Utrecht.
Hanssen, E., 2013, Semantic and prosodic effects of Dutch linking elements, Morphology 23, pp.7-32.
Hartmann, J.-U., 1987, Das Varṇārhavarṇastotra des Mātṛceṭa, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen.
Heine, B., 1997, Possession. Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization, University Press, Cambridge.
Heine, B., Kuteva, T., 2002, World Lexicon of Grammaticalization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Heller, A., 1994, Ninth Century Buddhist Images Carved at lDan-ma-brag to Commemorate Tibeto-Chinese Negotiations.
Appendix, [in:] Kvaerne, P. (ed.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies,
vol.2, The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, Oslo, pp.12-19.
Heller, A., 2006, Armor and Weapons in the Iconography of Tibetan Buddhist Deities, [in] LaRocca, D.J. (ed.), Warriors of the
Himalayas. Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, pp.35-41.
Helman-Ważny, A., Schaik, S. van, 2012, Witnesses for Tibetan Craftsmanship: Bringing together paper analysis,
palaeography and codicology in the examination of the earliest Tibetan manuscripts, Archaeometry 55.4, pp.707-41.
Hill, N., 2006, The Old Tibetan Chronicle: Chapter 1, RET 10, pp.89-101.
Hill, N., 2008, Verba Moriendi in the Old Tibetan Annals, [in:] Beckwith, C.I. (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages III,
International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, Halle (Saale), pp.71-86.
Hill, N., 2010a, A Lexicon of Tibetan verb stems as reported by the grammatical tradition, Kommission für zentral- und
ostasiatische Studien, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, München.
Hill, N., 2010b, An Overview of Old Tibetan Synchronic Phonology, Transactions of the Philological Society 108.2, pp.110-25.
Hill, N., 2010c, The converb –las in Old Tibetan, BSOAS 73.2, pp.245-60.
Hill, N., 2011, The allative, locative, and terminative cases (la-don) in the Old Tibetan Annals, [in:] Imaeda, Y., Kapstein, M.T.,
Takeuchi, T. (eds.), New studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and religion, Research Institute for Languages
and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo, pp.3-38.
Hill, N., 2013, A new interpretation of the mythological incipit of the Rkong po inscription, [in:] Tropper, K., Scherrer-
Schaub, C. (eds.), Tibetan Inscriptions. Proceedings of a Panel Held at the Twelfth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan
Studies, Vancouver 2010, Brill, Leiden, pp.171-182.
History of Civilizations of Central Asia, vol.3, 1996, Litvinsky, B.A. (ed.), UNESCO Publishing.
Hoernle, A.F., 1916, Manuscript remains of Buddhist literature found in Eastern Turkestan, vol. I, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Hoffmann, H., 1950, Quellen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Bon-Religion, Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der
Literatur, Mainz.
Hoffmann, H., 1975 (repr. 1986), Tibet. A Handbook, Indiana University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies,
Bloomington.
Huber, T., 2005, Antelope hunting in northern Tibet: cultural adaptations to wildlife behaviour, [in:] Boesi, A., Cardi, F.
(eds.), Wildlife and Plants in Traditional and Modern Tibet: Conceptions, Exploitation, and Conversation, Memorie della Societa
italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museo Civico di Storia naturale di Milano, Milano, pp.5-17.
Huber, T., 2010, Relating to Tibet: Narratives of Origin & Migration among Highlanders of the far Eastern Himalaya, [in:]
Arslan, S., Schwieger, P. (eds.), Tibetan Studies: An Anthology. PIATS 2006: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of
the International Association of Tibetan Studies, Königswinter 2006, International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies,
Andiast, pp.297-335.
 408

Huber, T., 2013, The Iconography of gShen Priests in the Ethnographic Context of the Extended Eastern Himalayas, and
Reflections on the Development of Bon Religion, [in:] Ehrhard, F.-K., Maurer, P. (eds.), Nepalica-Tibetica. Festgabe for
Christoph Cüppers, International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, Andiast, pp.263-94.
Hummel, S., 1952, Der lamaistische Ritualdorch (Phur-bu) und die alt-vorderorientalischen „Nagelmenschen“, Asiatische
Studien 6, pp.41-51.
Imaeda, Y., 2012, Re-examination of the 9th-century inscription at Ldan ma brag (II) in Eastern Tibet, [in:] Scherrer-Schaub,
C. (ed.), Old Tibetan Studies Dedicated to the Memory of R.E. Emmerick. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the IATS, 2003, Brill,
Leiden, pp.113-8.
Imaeda, Y., Takeuchi. T., 1990, Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale, Tome III, Corpus syllabique,
Bibliothèque nationale, Paris.
Imaeda. Y., Takeuchi, T., Hoshi, I., Ohara, Y., Ishikawa, I., 2001, Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque
nationale, Tome IV, Corpus syllabique, ILCAA, Université des Langues Étrangères de Tokyo, Tokyo.
Index to Abhidharmakośabhāṣya (P. Pradhan edition), 1973, Hirakawa, A. et al. (eds), parts 1-3, Daizo Shuppan
Kabushikikaisha, Tokyo.
Ishikawa, M., 1990, A Critical Edition of the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa. An Old and Basic Commentary on the Mahāvyutpatti,
Toyo Bunko, Tokyo.
Iwao, K., 2007, On the Old Tibetan khri sde, Xiyu lishi yuyan yanjiu jikan / Historical and Philological Studies of China’s Western
Regions 1, pp.209-26.
Iwao, K., 2009, An Analysis of the Term rkya in the Context of the Social System of the Old Tibetan Empire, The Memoirs of
the Toyo Bunko 67, pp.89-108.
Iwao, K., 2012, Organisation of the Chinese inhabitants in Tibetan-ruled Dunhuang, [in:] Scherrer-Schaub, C. (ed.), Old
Tibetan Studies Dedicated to the Memory of R.E. Emmerick. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the IATS, 2003, Brill, Leiden, pp.65-75.
Iwao, K., Hill, N., Takeuchi, T., 2009, Old Tibetan Inscriptions, Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and
Africa, Tokyo.
Jamspal, L., 2006, The Gonkhang, Temple of the Guardian Deities, [in:] LaRocca, D. (ed.), Warriors of the Himalayas.
Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, pp.43-49.
Jäschke, H.A., 1871, Handwörterbuch der tibetischen Sprache, Unitätsbuchhandlung, Gnadau.
Jäschke, H.A., 1881 (repr. 2003), A Tibetan-English Dictionary, Dover Publications, New York.
Jong, J.W. de, 1989, The story of Rāma in Tibet. Text and translation of the Tun-huang manuscripts, Steiner-Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Joseph, U.V., 2007, Rabha, Brill, Leiden.
Kapstein, M.T., 2000, The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation, and Memory, Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Kapstein, M.T., 2006, The Tibetans, Blackwell Publishing, Malden.
Karmay, S.G., 1998-2005, The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet, vols. 1-2, Mandala Book
Point, Kathmandu.
Karmay, S.G., 2007, The Great Perfection (rDzogs chen). A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism, Brill, Leiden.
Kastovsky, D., 2009, Diachronic perspectives, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.323-40.
Kauffmann, H.-E., 1939, Das Fadenkreuz in Hinterindien, Forschungen und Fortschritte 15, pp.193-5.
Kind., M., 2002, Abducting the Divine Bride. Reflections on territory and identity among the Bonpo community in
Phoksumdo, Dolpo, [in:] Buffetrille, K., Diemberger, H. (eds.), Territory and identity in Tibet and the Himalayas. PIATS 2000:
Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000, Brill, Leiden,
pp.271-88.
Klein, E., 1966, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
Klimburg-Salter, D., Lojda, L., Ramble, C., 2013, Bön. Geister aus Butter. Kunst & Ritual des alten Tibet, Wien.
Kluge, F., 2011, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache, Seebold, E. (bearb.), 25. Auflage, De Gruyter, Berlin.
Kowalewski, J.E., 1844-49 (repr. 1964), Dictionnaire mongol-russe-français, vols.1-3, Paragon book reprint corp., New York.
Krishan, S., 2001a, A Sketch of Chaudangsi Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.401-448.
Krishan, S., 2001b, A Sketch of Darma Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.347-400.
Kürschner, S., Szczepaniak, R., 2013, Linking elements - origin, change, and functionalization, Morphology 23, pp.1-6.
Kvaerne, P., 1985, Tibet. Bon Religion. A death ritual of the Tibetan Bonpos, Brill, Leiden.
Labrune, L., 2013, Featural linking elements in Basque compounds, Morphology 23, pp.377-405.
Lacouperie, T. de, 1885, Beginnings of Writing in and around Tibet, JRAS, pp.415-82.
Lalou, M., 1939-61, Inventaire des manuscrits tibétains de Touen-houang: conservés à la bibliothèque nationale (Fonds Pelliot
tibétain), 3 vols., Bibliothèque nationale, Paris.
 409

Lalou, M., 1952, Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales, JA 240, pp.339-361.
Lalou, M., 1955, Revendications des fonctionnaires du Grand Tibet au VIIIe siècle, JA, pp.171-212.
Lalou, M., 1958, Fiefs, poisons et guérisseurs, JA 246, pp.157-201.
LaRocca, D.J., 2006a, Warriors of the Himalayas. Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York.
LaRocca, D.J., 2006b, Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, [in] LaRocca, D.J. (ed.), Warriors of the Himalayas.
Rediscovering the Arms and Armor of Tibet, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, pp.3-19.
Laufer, B., 1899, Über das va zur, ein Beitrag zur Phonetik der tibetischen Sprache, WZKM 13, pp.95-109, 199-226.
Laufer, B., 1900, Ein Sühngedicht der Bonpo, Gerold, Wien.
Laufer, B., 1914a, Bird divination among the Tibetans (Notes on document Pelliot No. 3530 with a study of Tibetan
phonology of the ninth century), TP 15, pp.1-110.
Laufer, B., 1914b, Chinese Clay Figures, Part I, Prolegomena on the History of Defensive Armor, Publications of the Field
Museum of Natural History 13.2, pp.73-173.
Laufer, B., 1916 (repr. 1987), Loan-Words in Tibetan, TP 17, pp.403-552.
Laufer, B., 1919, Sino-Iranica. Chinese Contributions to the History of Civilization in Ancient Iran, Publications of the Field
Museum of Natural History 15.3, pp.1-630.
Laufer, B., 1930, The early history of felt, American Anthropologist 30, pp.1-18.
Lcaṅ skya sprul sku rol pa’i rdo rje (Rolbiidorj), 2006, Dag yig mkhas pa’i ’byung gnas, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ, Pe cin.
Lessing, F.D., 1960, Mongolian-English Dictionary, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Lévi, M.S., 1912, L’Apramāda-varga. Étude sur les recensions des Dharmapadas, JA, pp.203-294.
Lewis, M.E., 2009, The mythology of early China, [in:] Lagerwey, J., Kalinowski, M. (eds.), Early Chinese Religion: Part One:
Shang through Han (1250 BC – 220 AD), Brill, Leiden, pp.532-594.
Li Fang Kuei, 1955-56, The inscription of the Sino-Tibetan treaty of 821-822, TP 44, pp.1-99.
Li Fang Kuei, 1959, Tibetan Glo-ba-‘dring, [in:] Egerod, S., (ed.), Studia Serica Bernhard Karlgren dedicata. Sinological studies
dedicated to Bernhard Karlgren on his seventieth birthday, October fifth, 1959, E. Munksgaard, Copenhagen, pp.55-9.
Li Fang Kuei, 1961, A Sino-Tibetan glossary from Tun-huang, TP 49, pp.233-356.
Li Fang Kuei, Coblin, W. South, 1987, A study of the Old Tibetan inscriptions, Institute of History and Philology, Academia
Sinica, Taipei.
Lieber, R., 2009a, A lexical semantic approach to compounding, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of
Compounding, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.78-104.
Lieber, R., 2009b, IE, Germanic: English, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.357-69.
Lieber, R., Štekauer, P., 2009, Introduction: Status and definition of compounding, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The
Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.3-18.
Lokesh, Chandra, 1959-1961 (repr. 2001), Tibetan-Sanskrit Dictionary, International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya
Prakashan, New Delhi.
Lokesh Chandra, 2007, Sanskrit-Tibetan Dictionary being a reverse of the 19 volumes of the Tibetan-Sanskrit dictionary,
International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi.
Macdonald, A.W., 1971, Une lecture des Pelliot Tibétain 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047, et 1290. Essai sur la formation et l’emploi
des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sroṅ-bcan sgam-po, [in:] Études Tibétaines dédiées à la mèmoire de Marcelle
Lalou, Libraire d’Amerique et d’Orient, Paris, pp.190-391.
Macdonald, A., Imaeda, Y., 1978, Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale, Tome I, Bibliothèque
nationale, Paris.
Mainwaring, G.B., Grünwedel, A., 1898, (repr. 1979), Dictionary of the Lepcha-Language, Ratna Pustak Bhandar, Kathmandu.
Malinowski, B., 1923, The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages, [in:] Ogden, C.K., Richards, I.A. (eds.), The Meaning of
Meaning: A Study of Influence of Language Upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism, Harcourt, Brace and World, New York,
pp.296-336.
Malinowski, B., 1935, Coral Gardens and Their Magic, Allen & Unwin, London.
Marchand, H., 1969, The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation, A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach, C.H.
Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, München.
Martin, D., 2010, Zhangzhung dictionary, RET 18, pp.5-253.
Matisoff, J.A., 1973, Tonogenesis in Southeast Asia, [in:] Hyman, L. (ed.), Consonant types and tone, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, pp.71-96.
Matisoff, J.A., 2003, Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction, University of
California, Berkeley.
Matisoff, J.A., 2008, The Tibeto-Burman Reproductive System. Toward an Etymological Thesaurus, University of California Press,
Berkeley.
 410

Mayer, R., Cantwell, C., 1993, A Dunhuang Manuscript on Vajrakīlaya: [IOL MSS TIB J 754, 81-82], TJ 18.2, pp.2-16.
Mayrhofer, M., 1992-2001, Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen, vols.1-3, Universitätsverlag C. Winter, Heidelberg.
Miller, R.A., 1955, The significance for comparative grammar of some ablauts in the Tibetan number-system, TP 43, pp.287-
296.
Miller, R.A., 1966, Early Evidence for Vowel Harmony in Tibetan, Language 42, pp.252-277.
Mimaki, K., 1992, Index to two brda gsar rñiṅ treatises. The works of dBus pa blo gsal and lCaṅ skya Rol pa’i rdo rje, Bulletin
of the Naritasan Institute for Buddhist studies 15.2, pp.479–503.
Mithun, M., 1984, The Evolution of Noun Incorporation, Language 60.4, pp.847-94.
Mithun, M., 2000, Incorporation, [in:] Booij, G. et al. (eds.), Morphologie: ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und
Wortbildung, vol.1, pp.916-28.
Mkhas pa lde’u, 2010, Rgya bod kyi chos ’byuṅ rgyas pa, Bod ljoṅs bod yig dpe rñiṅ dpe skrun khaṅ, Lha sa.
Molè, G., 1970, The T’u-yü-hun from the Northern Wei to the Time of the Five Dynasties, Istituto italiano per il medio ed estremo
oriente, Roma.
Monier-Williams, M., 1899 (repr. 2002), A Sanskrit-English dictionary: etymologically and philologically arranged with special
reference to cognate Indo-European languages, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Ṅag dbaṅ bstan dar, 1838, Brda’ yig miṅ don gsal bar byed pa’i zla ba’i ’od snaṅ, Peking.
Nagano, Y., 2008, A preliminary note to the Gyarong color terms, RET 14, pp.99-106.
Nebesky-Wojkowitz, R. de, 1956 (repr. 1996), Oracles and Demons of Tibet, Rashtra Rachna Printers, Delhi.
Needham, J. (ed.), 1974, Science and Civilisation in China. Spagyrical discovery and invention : magisteries of gold and immortality,
vol.5.2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Neef, M., 2009, IE, Germanic: German, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.386-99.
Nicolle, D., 1997, Arms of the Umayyad era: Military technology in a time of change, [in:] Lev, J. (ed.), War and Society in the
Eastern Mediterranean, 7th-15 centuries, Brill, Leiden, pp.9-100.
Nishida, A., 2011, An Old Tibetan Divination with Coins: IOL Tib J 742, [in:] Imaeda, Y., Kapstein, M.T., Takeuchi, T. (eds.),
New studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and religion, Tokyo, Research Institute for Languages and Cultures
of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, pp.315-27.
Norberg-Hodge, H., Gyelong Thupstan Paldan, 1991, Ladakhi English. English Ladakhi Dictionary, LEDeG-Ladakh Project, Delhi.
Norbu, N., 1997, Drung, Deu and Bön. Narrations, Symbolic languages and the Bön tradition in ancient Tibet, LTWA, Dharamsala.
Nübling, D., Szczepaniak, R., 2013, Linking elements in German. Origin, Change, Functionalization, Morphology 23, pp.67-89.
Olsen, S., 2000, Composition, [in:] Booij, G. et al. (eds.), Morphologie: ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung,
vol.1, pp.897-916.
Olsen, S., 2001, Copulative compounds: a closer look at the interface between syntax and morphology, [in:] Booij, G., Marle,
J. van (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2000, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp.279–320.
Pa tshab pa saṅs dbaṅ ’dus, Glaṅ ru nor bu tshe riṅ (eds.), 2007, Gtam śul dga’ thaṅ ’bum pa che nas gsar du rñed pa’i bon gyi gna’
dpe bdams bsgrigs, Bod ljoṅs bod yig dpe rñiṅ dpe skrun khaṅ, Lha sa.
Panglung, J.L., 1994, New Fragments of the sGra-sbyor bam-po gñis-pa, East and West 44.1, pp.161-72.
Pathak, S.K., 1955, Synonym-compounds in Tibetan, Poona Orientalist 22, pp.9-11.
Pathak, S.K., 1958, A note on synonym-compounds in Tibetan, IL 19, pp.163-168.
Pelliot, P., 1908, Une bibliothèque médiévale retrouvée au Kan-sou, BEFEO 8, pp.501-29.
Pelliot, P., 1915, Quelques transcriptions chinoises de noms tibétains, TP 16, pp.1-26.
Petech, L., 1988a, Glosse agli Annali di Tun-Huang, [in:] Selected papers on Asian history, Institute Italiano per Il Medio ed
Estremo Oriente , Roma, pp.261-299.
Petech, L., 1988b, The succession to the Tibetan throne in 704-705, [in:] Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata. Serie Orientale
Roman, vol.3, Insituto Italiano Per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome, pp.1079-88.
Petech, L., 1994 (repr. 2003), The disintegration of the Tibetan kingdom, [in:] McKay, A. (ed.), The history of Tibet, vol.1,
London, RoutledgeCurzon, pp.286-97.
Phuntsok, Chabpel Tseten, 1990, A Critical Study of the Kongpo Demo Rock Inscriptions, TJ 15.3, pp.41-58.
Plaisier, H., 2007, A Grammar of Lepcha, Brill, Leiden.
Poppe, N., 1964, Grammar of Written Mongolian, Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.
Ralli, A., 2009, IE, Hellenic: Modern Greek, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.453-63.
Ramble, C., 1997, Se: preliminary notes on the distribution of an ethnonym in Tibet and Nepal, [in:] Karmay, S.G., Sagant, P.
(eds.), Les habitants du toit du Monde, Nanterre, pp.485-513.
Ramsay, H.L., 1890, Western Tibet: A Practical Dictionary of the Language and Customs of the Districts Included in the Ládak Wazarat,
Ball, Lahore.
 411

Richardson, H., 1952, Ancient Historical Edicts at Lhasa and The Mu Tsung/Khri Gtsug Lde Brtsan Treaty of A.D. 821-822 from the
Inscription at Lhasa, Luzac, London.
Richardson, H., 1953, Tibetan Inscriptions at Źva-hi Lha Khaṅ II, JRAS, pp.1-12.
Richardson, H., 1954, A Ninth Century Inscription from Rkoṅ-po, JRAS, pp.157-173.
Richardson, H., 1969, Tibetan chis and tshis, AM 14, pp.254-6.
Richardson, H., 1972, The rKong-po Inscription, JRAS, pp.30-39.
Richardson, H., 1973, The sKar-cung inscription, JRAS, pp.12-20.
Richardson, H., 1980, The First Tibetan Chos-Byung, TJ 5.3, pp.62-73.
Richardson, H., 1983, Bal-po and lho-bal, BSOAS 46, pp.136-8.
Richardson, H., 1985 (repr. 2004), A Corpus of Early Tibetan Inscriptions, Royal Asiatic Society, London.
Richardson, H., 1992, Pelliot tibétain no. 997: The inventory of Yu-lim gtsug-lag-khang, BSOAS 55, pp.105-110.
Richardson, H., 1998a, An Early Judicial Document from Tibet, [in:] Richardson, H., High peaks, pure earth: collected writings on
Tibetan history and culture, Serindia Publications, London, pp.182-188.
Richardson, H., 1998b, Early Tibetan Law Concerning Dog-Bite, [in:] Richardson, H., High peaks, pure earth: collected writings
on Tibetan history and culture, Serindia Publications, London, pp.135-139.
Richardson, H., 1998c, Hunting Accidents in Early Tibet, [in:] Richardson, H., High peaks, pure earth: collected writings on
Tibetan history and culture, Serindia Publications, London, pp.149-166.
Richardson, H., 1998d, Mention of Tibetan Kings in Some Documents from Tun-huang, [in:] Richardson, H., High peaks, pure
earth: collected writings on Tibetan history and culture, Serindia Publications, London, pp.189-195.
Rnam rgyal tshe riṅ, 2001, Bod yig brda rñiṅ tshig mdzod, Kruṅ go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khaṅ, Beijing.
Robinson, H.R., 2002, Oriental Armour, Herbert Jenkins, London.
Rock, J.F., 1952, The Na-khi nāga cult and related ceremonies, Istituto italiano per il medio ed estremo oriente, Roma.
Roerich, G.N., 1983-93, Tibetan-Sanskrit-Russian-English Dictionary, [Tibetsko-russko-anglijskij slovar' s sanskritskimi paralleliami],
Oriental Literature Publishers, Moskow.
Róna-Tas, A., 1955, Social terms in the list of grants of the Tibetan Tun-huang chronicle, AOH 5, pp.249-70.
Róna-Tas, A., 1956, Tally-stick and divination-dice in the iconography of Lha-mo, AOH 6, pp.163-177.
Róna-Tas, A., 1963, Felt-making in Mongolia, AOH 16, pp.201-15.
Róna-Tas, A., 1978, On a Term of Taxation in the Old Tibetan Royal Annals, [in:] Ligeti, L. (ed.), Proceedings of the Csoma de
Kőrös Memorial Symposium Held at Métrafűred, Hungary 24-30 September 1976, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp.357-363.
Róna-Tas, A., 1985, Wiener Vorlesungen zur Sprach- und Kulturgeschichte Tibets, Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische
Studien Universität Wien, Wien.
Róna-Tas, A., 1992, Reconstructing Old Tibetan, [in:] Ihara Shoren, Yamaguchi Zuiho (eds.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the
5th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989, vol.2., Naritasan Shinshoji, Narita, pp.697-704.
Sangyay, T., 1986, Glossary of the “Government Monastic and Private Taxation in Tibet”, TJ 11.1, pp.41-47.
Sárközi, A., 1984, A Tibetan-Mongolian Manuscript of Lexicographical Explanations to the Rgyud bzhi, [in:] Ligeti, L. (ed.),
Tibetan and Buddhist Studies Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of Alexander Csoma de Kőrös, Akadémiai Kiadó,
Budapest, vol.2, pp.249-79.
Sasaki, R. (ed.), 1965, Mahāvyutpatti, Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan, Tokyo.
Scalise, S., Bisetto, A., 2009, The classification of compounds, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of
Compounding, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.34-53.
Schaik, S. van, 2011, A new look at the Tibetan invention of writing, [in:] Imaeda, Y., Kapstein, M.T., Takeuchi, T. (eds.), New
studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and religion, Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and
Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo, pp.45-96.
Scherrer-Schaub, C., 2002, Enacting words. A diplomatic analysis of the imperial decrees (bkas bcad) and their application
in the Sgra sbyor bam po gñis pa tradition, JIABS 25.1-2, pp.263-340.
Scherrer-Schaub, C., Bonani, G., 2009, Establishing a typology of the old Tibetan manuscripts: a multidisciplinary approach,
[in:] Klimburg-Salter, D., Liang, J., Tauscher, H., Zhou, J. (eds), The Cultural History of Western Tibet. Recent Research from the
China Tibetology Research Center and the University of Vienna, Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Wien,
pp.299-335.
Schiefner, A., 1859, Ueber eine eigenthümliche Art tibetischer Composita, Mélanges asiatiques 5, pp.12-16.
Schmidt, I.J., 1841, Tibetisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch, St. Petersburg.
Schröter, F.C.G., 1826, A Dictionary of the Bhotanta, or Boutan Language, Serampore.
Schuessler, A., 1998, Another note on Old Tibetan rje-blas, LTBA 21.2, pp.3-4.
Schuessler, A., 2007, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.
Schuh, D., 2012, Kleine Enzyklopädie zur Tibetischen Mathematik, Kalenderrechnung und Astronomie (skar-rtsis) sowie zu den
Sinotibetischen Divinationskalkulationen (nag-rtsis), International Institute of Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, Andiast.
 412

Sharma, B.D., 2002, Indian Wildlife. Threats abd Preservation, Anmol Publications, New Delhi.
Shree, K., 2001a, A Sketch of Darma Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.347-400.
Shree, K., 2001b, A Sketch of Chaudangsi Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.401-448.
Simon, W., 1940, Certain Tibetan suffixes and their combinations, HJAS 5, pp.372-391.
Simon, W., 1971, Tibetan “fifteen” and “eighteen”, [in:] Études Tibétaines dédiées à la mèmoire de Marcelle Lalou, Libraire
d’Amerique et d’Orient, Paris, pp.472-478.
Simon, W., 1975, Iotization and palatization in classical Tibetan, BSOAS 38, pp.611-14.
Simon, W., 1977, Alternation of final vowel with final dental nasal or plosive in Tibetan, BSOAS 40, pp.51-57.
Sinclair, J., 2004, Trust the Text. Language, corpus and discourse, Routledge, London.
Skalička, V., 1979, Typologische Studien, Vieweg, Wiesbaden.
Skjærvø, P., 2004, Iranians, Indians, Chinese and Tibetans: The Rulers and Ruled of Khotan in the First Millenium, [in:]
Whitfield, S. (ed.), The Silk Road. Trade, Travel, War and Faith, Serindia Publications, Chicago, pp.34-42.
Snellgrove, D., 1967, The Nine Ways of Bon, Oxford University Press, London.
Sørensen, P.K., 1994, The mirror illuminating the royal genealogies: Tibetan buddhist historiography; an annotated translation of the
XIVth century Tibetan chronicle: rGyal-rabs gsal-ba’i me-long, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.
Sørensen, P.K., 2002, An XIth Century Ascetic of Buddhist Eclecticism: Kha-rag sgom-chuṅ, [in:] Kollmar-Paulenz, K. (ed.),
Tractata Tibetica et Mongolica. Festschrift für Klaus Sagaster zum 65. Geburtstag, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp.241-53.
Spanien, A., Imaeda, Y., 1979, Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale, Tome II, Bibliothèque nationale,
Paris.
Stein, M.A., 1907, Ancient Khotan, Oxford; vol.1: http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/VIII-5-B2-7/V-1/; vol.2:
http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/VIII-5-B2-7/V-2/; 01.07.2010.
Stein, M.A., 1921, Serindia: Detailed Report of Explorations in Central Asia and Westernmost China, vol.1-5, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Stein, R.A., 1939, Trente-trois fiches de divination tibétaines, HJAS 4, pp.297-371.
Stein, R.A., 1963, Deux notules d’histoire ancienne du Tibet, JA 251, pp.327-335.
Stein, R.A., 1970, Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po Tibétains, JA 258, pp.155-185.
Stein, R.A., 1971, Du récit au rituel dans les manuscrits tibétains de Touen-Houang, [in:] Études Tibétaines dédiées à la mèmoire
de Marcelle Lalou, Libraire d’Amerique et d’Orient, Paris, pp.479-547.
Stein, R.A., 1972, Tibetan Civilization, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Stein, R.A., 1983, Tibetica Antiqua I. Les deux vocabulaires des traductions indo-tibétaine et sino-tibétaine dans les
manuscripts de Touen-Houang, BEFEO 72, pp.149-236.
Stein, R.A., 1984, Tibetica Antiqua II. L’usage de métaphores pour des distinctions honorifiques à l’époque des rois
tibétains, BEFEO 73, pp.257-272.
Stein, R.A., 1985, Tibetica Antiqua III. A propos du mot gcug-lag et de la religion indigène, BEFEO 74, pp.83-133.
Stein, R.A., 1988, Tibetica Antiqua V. La religion indigène et les bon-po dans les manuscrits de Touen-Houang, BEFEO 77,
pp.27-56.
Suhnu, R.Sh., 2001a, A Sketch of Rongpo Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.195-270.
Suhnu, R.Sh., 2001b, A Sketch of Byangsi Grammar, [in:] Nagano, Y., Lapolla, R.J., New Research on Zhangzhung and Related
Himalayan Languages, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, pp.271-341.
Sumatiratna (Blo bzaṅ rin chen), 1959, Bod hor kyi brda yig miṅ tshig don gsum gsal bar byed pa mun sel sgron me, [Tibetan-
Tibetan Dictionary], Corpus Scriptorum Mongolorum Vols.6-7, Mongolian Academy, Ulaanbaatar.
Surkhang, W., 1966, Tax Meausrement and lag ʼdon tax, Bulletin of Tibetology 3.1, pp.15-28.
Svensén, B., 2009, A Handbook of Lexicography. The Theory and Practice of Dictionary-Making, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Sweetser, E., 1990, From Etymology to Pragmatics, Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Szymanek, B., 2009, IE, Slavonic: Polish, [in:] Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, pp.464-77.
Takeuchi, T., 1984, On the Old Tibetan Word Lho-bal, [in:] Yamamoto, T. (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirty-First International
Congress of Human Sciences in Asia and North Africa [CISHAAN], The Toho Gakkai (The Institute of Eastern Culture), Tokyo,
pp.986-87.
Takeuchi, T., 1992, On the Old Tibetan Sale Contracts, [in:] Ihara, S., Yamaguchi, Z. (eds.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th
Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989, vol.2, Naritasan Shinshoji, Narita, pp.773-92.
 413

Takeuchi T., 1994, Tshan: Subordinate Administrative Units of the Thousand-Districts in the Tibetan Empire, [in:] Kvaerne,
P. (ed.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, vol.2, The Institute for
Comparative Research in Human Culture, Oslo, pp.848-862.
Takeuchi, T., 1995, Old Tibetan Contracts from Central Asia, Daizo Shuppan, Tokyo.
Takeuchi T., 1998, Old Tibetan Manuscripts from East Turkestan in the Stein Collection of the British Library, vols.2, The Centre for
East Asian Cultural Studies for Unesco, The Toyo Bunko & The British Library, London.
Takeuchi, T., 2003, Military Administration and Military Duties in Tibetan-ruled Central Asia (8th-9th centuries), [in:] McKay,
A. (ed.), Tibet and her Neighbours, A History, Mayer, London, pp.43-54.
Takeuchi, T., 2004, The Tibetan military system and its activities from Khotan and Lob-nor, [in:] Whitfield, S. (ed.), The Silk
Road. Trade, Travel, War and Faith, Serindia Publications, Chicago, pp.50-6.
Takeuchi, T., 2012, Formation and Transformation of Old Tibetan, [in:] Historical Development of the Tibetan Languages,
Takeuchi, T., Hayashi, N. (eds), Research Institute of Foreign Studies, Kobe University of Foreign Studies, Kobe, pp.3-17.
Takeuchi, T., 2013, Glegs tshas: Writing Boards of Chinese Scribes in Tibetan-rules Dunhuang, [in:] Dotson, B., Iwao, K.,
Takeuchi, T. (eds.), Scribes, Texts, and Rituals in Early Tibet and Dunhuang. Proceedings of the Third Old Tibetan Studies Panel held at
the Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Vancouver 2010, Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp.101-
9.
Taube, M., 1970, Das Suffix -ma in tibetischen Buchtiteln, Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung, Deutsche Akademie der
Wissenschaften zu Berlin 16.1, pp.107-17.
Taube, M., 1980, Die Tibetica der Berliner Turfansammlung, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.
Tekin, T., 1968, A Grammar of Orkhon Turkic, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Tenzin, Pasar Tsultrim, Nyima, Changru Tritsuk Namdak, Rabsal, Gatsa Lodroe, 2008, A Lexicon of Zhangzhung and Bonpo
Terms, ed. by Nagano, Y., Karmay, S.G., National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka.
Terjék, J., 1969, Fragments of the Tibetan sutra of ‘The wise and the fool’ from Tun-huang, AOH 22, pp.289-334.
Terjék, J., 1972, Colloquial influences on written Tibetan, AOH 25, pp.39-51.
Thargyal, R., 2007, Nomads of Eastern Tibet: Social Organization and Economy of a Pastoral Estate in the Kingdom of Dege, Huber, T.
(ed.), Brill, Leiden.
The New Kosciuszko Foundation Dictionary, 2003, Fisiak, J. (ed.), The Kosciuszko Foundation, New York.
Thomas, F.W., 1933, Tibetan Documents concerning Chinese Turkestan, JRAS, pp.379-400, 537-568.
Thomas, F.W., 1935-55, Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan I-IV, Luzac & Company, London.
Thomas, F.W., 1936, Law of theft in Chinese Kan-su: A IXth-Xth Century Fragment from Tun-huang, Zeitschrift für
vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, pp.275-287.
Thomas, F.W., 1948, (repr. 1951), Nam. An Ancient Language of the Sino-Tibetan Borderland, Oxford University Press, London.
Thomas, F.W., 1957, Ancient Folk-Literature from North-Eastern Tibet, Akademie Verlag, Berlin.
Thomas, F.W., Giles, L., 1947-48, A Tibeto-Chinese Word-and-Phrase Book, BSOAS 12, pp.753-769.
Thomas, F.W., Konow, S., 1929, Two medieval documents from Tun-huang, Brøgger, Oslo.
Toh, Hoong Teik, 2002, Tibetan mdo, AOH 55.4, pp.391-402.
Tournadre, N., Sangda Dorje, 2003 (repr. 2009), Manuel de Tibétain Standard: langue et civilisation, Mondes et Langue,
L’asiathèque, Paris.
Tshe riṅ dbaṅ rgyal, 1930, Dictionnaire tibétain-sanscrit. Ñe bar mkho ba’i legs sbyar gyi skad bod kyi brda’ ka’ li’i phreṅ bsgrigs ṅo
mtshar nor bu’i do śal, Bacot, J., (ed.), Geuthner, Paris.
Tucci, G., 1949, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, La libreria dello stato, Rome.
Tucci, G., 1950, The Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, Insituto Italiano Per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Roma.
Tucci, G., 1956, Preliminary report on two scientific expeditions in Nepal, Istituto italiano per il medio ed estremo oriente, Roma.
Tucci, G., 1958, Minor Buddhist Texts, Insituto Italiano Per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Roma.
Tucci, G., Heissig, W., 1970, Die Religionen Tibets und der Mongolei, Verlag W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart.
Uebach, H., 1985, Ein Beitrag zur Dokumentation der Inschrift von rKoṅ-po, Archiv für zentralasiatische Geschichtsforschung 8.
Uebach, H., 1987, Nel pa Paṇḍitas Chronik Me-tog phreṅ-ba, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, München.
Uebach, H., 2003, On the Tibetan expansion from the seventh to mid-eighth centuries and the administration (khö) of the
countries subdued, [in:] McKay, A. (ed.), Tibet and her Neighbours, A History, Mayer, London, pp.21-7.
Uebach, H., 2008, From red tally to yellow paper. The official introduction of paper in Tibetan administration in 744/45,
RET 14, pp.57-69.
Uebach, H., 2010, Donation of cattle for a Buddhist monastery? Notes on Tibetan rkang-’gro/’gros, [in:] Achard, J.-L. (ed.),
Études tibétaines en l’honneur d’Anne Chayet, Libraire Droz, Genève, pp.315-325.
Uebach, H., 2012, Tibetan officials in the 8th-century south-eastern part of the Empire, [in:] Scherrer-Schaub, C. (ed.), Old
Tibetan Studies Dedicated to the Memory of R.E. Emmerick. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the IATS, 2003, Brill, Leiden, pp.53-64.
Uebach, H., 2014, Three unexplained compounds in the text of the Old Tibetan funeral ritual PT 1042, JA 302.1, pp.97-109.
 414

Uebach, H., Zeisler, B., 2008, rJe-blas, pha-los and Other Compounds with Suffix -s in Old Tibetan Texts, [in:] Huber, B.,
Volkart, M., Widmer, P. (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek. Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag,
International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, Halle (Saale), pp.309-334.
Ulving, T., 1959, Umlaut in Tibetan numerals, TP 47, pp.75-80.
Ulving, T., 1972, Tibetan vowel harmony reexamined, TP 58, pp.203-217.
Uray, G., 1954a, Duplication, gemination and triplication in Tibetan, AOH 4, pp.177-244.
Uray, G., 1954b, Comptes-Rendus: “B.C. Bopoбьeв-Десятовский, Коллекция тибетских документов на дереве,
собранная С.Е. Малвым, Ученые записки Института востоковедения, VI (1953), 167-175; B.C. Bopoбьeв-Десятовский,
Тибетские документы на дереве из района озера Лоп-Нор, Epigrafika Vostoka 7 (1953), pp. 70-76; B.C. Bopoбьeв-
Десятовский, Тибетские документы на дереве из района озера Лоп-Нор, Epigrafika Vostoka 8 (1953), pp. 77-85”, AOH 4,
pp.304-7.
Uray, G., 1960, The four horns of Tibet according to the Royal Annals, AOH 10, pp.31-57.
Uray, G., 1962a, Old Tibetan dra-ma draṅs, AOH 14, pp.219-230.
Uray, G., 1962b, The offices of the bruṅ-pas and the great mṅans and the territorial division of Central Tibet in the earlty 8th
Century, AOH 15, pp.353-60.
Uray, G., 1966, ’greṅ, the alleged Old Tibetan equivalent of the ethnic name Ch’iang, AOH 19, pp.245-256.
Uray, G., 1971, À propos du tibétain rgod-g-yuṅ, [in:] Études Tibétaines dédiées à la mèmoire de Marcelle Lalou, Libraire
d’Amerique et d’Orient, Paris, pp.553-556.
Uray, G., 1972a, Queen Sad-mar-kar’s songs in the Old Tibetan Chronicle, AOH 25, pp.5-38.
Uray, G., 1972b, The narrative of legislation and organization of the Mkhas-pa’i dga’-ston. The origins of the traditions
concerning Sroṅ-brtsan sgam-po as first legislator and organizer of Tibet, AOH 26, pp.11-68.
Uray, G., 1975, L’annalistique et la pratique bureaucratique au Tibet ancien, JA, pp.157-70.
Uray, G., 1982, Notes on the Thousand-Districts of the Tibetan Empire in the First Half of the Ninth Century, AOH 36,
pp.545-548.
Uray, G., 1984, The Earliest Evidence of the Use of the Chinese Sexagenary Cycle in Tibetan, [in:] Ligeti, L. (ed.), Tibetan and
Buddhist Studies Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of Alexander Csoma de Kőrös, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, vol.2,
pp.341-60.
Uray, G., 1990, The Title dbaṅ-po in Early Tibetan Records, [in:] Daffina, P., (ed.), Indo-Sino Tibetica: Studi in onore di Luciano
Petech. A collection of Oriental Studies presented to professor Petech on the occasion of his 75th Birthday, Bardi Editore, Roma,
pp.419-33.
Uray, G., 1991, The Location of Khar-can and Leṅ-ču of the Old Tibetan Sources, [in:] Varia Eurasiatica. Festschrift für Professor
András Róna-Tas, Szeged, pp.195-227.
Vann, M. de, 2008, Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages, Brill, Leiden.
Volkart, M., 2003, Types of compounds in Written Tibetan, [in:] Tej Ratna Kansakar, Turin, M., (eds.), Themes in Himalayan
Languages and Linguistics, Kathmandu, pp.233-48.
Vollmann, R., 2001, Wortstruktur und Wortbildung im Tibetischen, Grazer Linguistische Studien 55, pp.93-127.
Vollmann, R., 2006, Der Wortbegriff im Tibetischen, Grazer Linguistische Studien 66, pp.75-97.
Vollmann, R., 2009, Reduplication in Tibetan, Grazer Linguistische Studien 71, pp.115-134.
Waddell, L.A., 1909, Ancient historical edicts at Lhasa, JRAS, pp.923-952.
Waddell, L.A., 1910, Ancient historical edicts at Lhasa, JRAS, pp.1247-1282.
Waddell, L.A., 1911, Ancient historical edicts at Lhasa, JRAS, pp.389-435.
Wälchli, B., 2005, Co-Compounds and Natural Coordination, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Walde, A., 1910, Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung, Heidelberg.
Walter, M., 1998, The significance of the term ring lugs. Religion, administration, and the sacral presence of the btsan-po,
AOH 51, pp.309-319.
Walter, M., 2009, Buddhism and Empire. The Political and Religious Culture of Early Tibet, Brill, Leiden.
Whitfield, R., 1985, Textiles, Sculpture and Other Arts, Kodansha International Ltd., Tokyo.
Whitney, W.D., 1889 (repr. 1964), Sanskrit Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Willis, C.M., 2007, A Descriptive Grammar of Darma: An Endangerted Tibeto-Burman Language, Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Texas; http://v2.linguistlist.org/~lapolla/downloads/Willis_Dissertation_as%20submitted_to_UT.pdf;
10.12.2010.
Wörterbuch der tibetischen Schriftsprache, 2005-, Franke, H., Hartmann, J.U., Höllmann, T.O. (eds.), vols.1-26, Verlag der
Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, München.
Yamaguchi, Z., 1975, The Geographical Location of Sum-Yul, Acta Asiatica 29, pp.20-42.
Yamaguchi, Z., 1992, The Establishment and Significance of the Zhang Lon System of Rule by Maternal Relatives during the
T’u-fan 吐蕃 Dynasty, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunku 50, pp.57-80.
 415

Ye śes rdo rje (Ishdorj), 1959, Bod skad kyi brda’ gsar rñiṅ dka’ ba sog skad du kā li sum cu’i rim pas gtan la pheb pa’i brda’ yig mkhas
pa rgya mtsho blo gsal mgul rgyan ces bya ba bźugs so, Corpus Scriptorum Mongolorum Bd.4, Ulsyn Khevleliin Gazar,
Ulaanbaatar.
Zeisler, B., 2004, Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages: A Comparative Study, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Zeisler, B., 2009a, Reducing phonological complexity and grammatical opaqueness: Old Tibetan as a lingua franca and the
development of the modern Tibetan dialects, [in:] Aboh, E.O., Smith, N. (eds.), Complex Processes in New Languages, John
Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, pp.75-95.
Zeisler, B., 2009b, Skaddi ḥgyurcanaŋ rdobaḥi mentogtsogsla luskanni sŋonḥjug baḥi rdzessiskorla – Language change and
the fossilisation of the Old Tibetan b- prefix in Ladakhi and Balti, [in:] Ahmed, M., Bray, J. (eds.), Recent Research on Ladakh
2009. Papers from the 12th colloquium of the International Association for Ladakh Studies, Kargil, International Association of Ladakh
Studies, Kargil & Leh, pp.81-96.
Zeisler, B., 2010, East of the Moon and West of the Sun? Approaches to a Land with Many Names, North of Ancient India
and South of Khotan, [in:] Vitali, R. (ed.), The Earth Ox Papers. Proceedings of the International Seminar on Tibetan and Himalayan
Studies, Held at the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, September 2009 on the Occasion of the ‘Thankyou India’ Year, The Tibet
Journal 34.3-4/35.1-2, pp.371-463.
Zeisler, B., 2011, For love of the word: a new translation of Pt 1287, the Old Tibetan Chronicle, chapter I, [in:] Imaeda, Y.,
Kapstein, M.T., Takeuchi, T. (eds.), New studies of the Old Tibetan Documents: philology, history and religion, Research Institute
for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo, pp.97-213.
Zeisler, B., 2015, The seven stars of heaven. A gift for a reconvalenscent, [in:] Ramble, C., Roesler, U. (eds.), Tibetan and
Himalayan Healing. An Anthology for Anthony Aris, Vajra Books, Kathmandu, pp.757-64.
Zhang Yisun, 1993, Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo / Zang Han Da Cidian, Mi rigs dpe skrun khaṅ / Minzu Chubanshe, Beijing.
Zhaxi, H., Stuart, K., Dorji, R., Benson, S., 2007, Tibetan-English, https://archive.org/details/Tibetan-english-
tibetanDictionary; 15.04.2015.
Zimmermann, H., 1979, Wortart und Sprachstruktur im Tibetischen, Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.

INTERNET SOURCES
ABC
http://www.abc.net.au/
Artstor
http://www.artstor.org/
Asian Classics Input Project
http://www.asianclassics.org/
Bibliotheca Polyglotta
http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=library&bid=2
Das Digitale Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache
http://www.dwds.de/
Dzongkha English Dictionary
file:///G:/Dictionaries/Tibeto-Burman/Dzongkha%20English%20Dictionary/index.html
Early Tibet
http://earlytibet.com/
Gallica
http://gallica.bnf.fr/?lang=EN
Himalayan Art Resources
http://www.himalayanart.org/
International Dunhuang Project
http://idp.bl.uk/
MDBG. Chinese-English Dictionary
http://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php
Oxford dictionaries
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/
Nitartha. Online Tibetan English Dictionary
http://www.nitartha.org/dictionary_search04.html
Old Tibetan Documents Online
http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/
Resources for Kanjur & Tanjur Studies
https://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/
Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus
http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl
 416

The Buddhist Canons Research Database

http://www.aibs.columbia.edu/databases/New/index.php
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
http://www.metmuseum.org/
Thesaurus Literaturae Buddhicae
http://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/?page=library&bid=2
THL Tibetan to English Translation Tool
http://www.thlib.org/reference/dictionaries/tibetan-dictionary/translate.php
Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre
http://tbrc.org/#home
Tibeto-Logic
http://tibeto-logic.blogspot.de/
Voyageravecmoi
http://voyageravecmoi.com/
 417

INDICES
 418

INDEX OF OT MORPHEMES
The index includes morphemes that occur in Lemma sections as well as their variants [V] attested in
OT sources.

˚ka: ste’u ~ ma 62 ˚gru: se ~ bźi 126

˚kar: thaṅ ~ 64 ˚gru: se cuṅ ~ bźi 126
kom tse 1 ˚gru: se mo ~ bźi 126
˚kyad: ’dzaṅs 110 ˚dgu: ñes ~ 58
˚kru: se mo ~ bźi 126 dgyes skyems 25
dku 4 dgra chos 26
dku gaṅ 2 dgra thabs 27
dku ’gel 3 dgra bźer 28
dku rgyal 4 dgra zin 29
dku ’pel 5 dgra zun 30
dku’ rgyal 4 dgra’ bźer 28
dku’ gaṅ 2 mgo 107
dku’ bel 5 ˚mgo: rtsis ~ 107
dkyel mkhas 6 mgo nan 31
bku rgyal 4 ˚’gel: dku ~ 3
rkaṅ ’gros 7 ˚’gros: rkaṅ ~ 7
rkaṅ ton 8 rgal mkhas 32
rkaṅ pran 9 rgod g.yuṅ 33
rkaṅ phran 9 rgyal thag brgyad 34
rkya sa 11 rgyal tag brgyad 34
rkyen ris 10 ˚rgyal: dku ~ 4
sku 2 ˚rgyal: dku’ ~ 4
sku khaṅ 2 ˚rgyal: bku ~ 4
sku gaṅ 2 ˚brgya’: zaṅs ~ 116
˚skya: khram ~ 21 ˚brgyad: rgyal thag ~ 34
skya sa 11 ˚brgyad: rgyal thag ~ 34
˚skyems: dgyes ~ 25 ṅa: bsar ~ ba 128
˚skyes: bla ~ 96 ṅan źan 35
˚bskyed: brnan ~ 86 ṅam len 36
˚bskyed: bsnan ~ 86 ṅam lend 36
kha sprod 12 mṅa’ thaṅ 37
kha bso 13 mṅa’ dbaṅ 38
khab so 14 rṅo thog 39
khu ljo 15 sṅo sa 40
khur ra 16 ˚cad: lhag ~ 129
khyim graṅs 17 ˚cuṅ: se ~ gru bźi 126
khyim rtsis 18 ˚ce: źal ~ gra 113
khyim yig 19 ˚cen: dra ~ 75
khrab bse’ 20 ˚cod: mdor ~ 77
˚khram: taṅ ~ 65 gces spras 41
˚khram: thaṅ ~ 65 ˚lcags: mdo ~ 76
khram skya 21 chags ’og 42
˚mkhas: dkyel ~ 6 chags lham 43
˚mkhas: rgal ~ 32 ˚chad: gum ~ 23
mkho śam 22 ˚chad: lhag ~ 129
˚mkhos: ’brog ~ 101 chu rlag 44
˚ga: sa ~ dog 125 che phra 45
˚gaṅ: dku ~ 2 che phrag 45
˚gaṅ: dku’ 2 ˚chos: dgra ~ 26
˚gaṅ: sku ~ 2 mcho gar 46
˚gar: mcho ~ 46 mchog gar 46
˚gar: mchog ~ 46 mjal dum 47
gum chad 23 mjal dus 47
˚god: snon ~ 85 ’jaṅ dum 48
gyur gsum 24 ˚’jug: ’byuṅ ~ 100
gyur sram 24 rje bla 49
˚gra: rtsis ~ 106 rje blas 49
˚gra: źal ce ~ 113 rje blon 50
˚graṅs: khyim ~ 17 rje dbyal 51
 419

rje sa 52 mdor cod 77

rjes ’paṅs 53 ˚’da’: ram ~ 121
rjes ’baṅs 53 ldeg ren pa 78
˚ljo: khu ~ 15 ldoṅ prom 79
ñam noṅs 54 ˚nan: mgo ~ 31
ñiṅ źiṅ 56 ˚nam: so ~ 127
ñiṅ rim 55 ˚noṅs: ñam ~ 54
ñin źiṅ 56 noṅs myig 80
ñe yo ba 57 noṅs yo 81
˚ñen: thugs ~ 67 nol thabs 82
ñes dgu 58 mna’ mtho 83
˚brñan: ltag ~ 59 snam prag 84
˚tag: rgyal ~ brgyad 34 snam phrag 84
taṅ 65 snam brag 84
˚taṅ: dbaṅ ~ 98 snon god 85
taṅ khram 65 brnan bskyed 86
˚ton: rkaṅ ~ 8 bsnan bskyed 86
˚rtug: lug ~ 124 pur myi 87
ltag brñan 59 ˚pa: ldeg ren ~ 78
stag phraṅ 60 ˚pya: staṅs ~ 61
stag ’phraṅ 60 pyi: yul ~ ’brog gdeṅs 119
stag ’phreṅ 60 pyi ’brog gdeṅs 119
staṅ dbyald 61 pyiṅ ril 92
staṅ sb[y]al 61 pyiṅ rild 92
staṅs pya 61 ˚prag: snam ~ 84
staṅs byal 61 ˚pran: rkaṅ ~ 9
staṅs dbyal 61 ˚prom: thaṅ ~ 66
staṅs sbyal 61 ˚prom: ldoṅ ~ 79
staṅs bsbyal 61 ˚dpe: zla ~ 118
˚stug: lhun ~ 130 ˚’paṅs: rjes ~ 53
ste’u ka ma 62 ˚’pel: dku ~ 5
stod rims 63 ˚spur: bu ~ 94
˚thag: rgyal: ~ brgyad 34 spo bleg 88
thaṅ 65 spos lam 89
˚thaṅ: mṅa’ ~ 37 ˚spras: gces ~ 41
˚thaṅ: dbaṅ ~ 98 ˚sprod: kha ~ 12
thaṅ kar 64 pha los 90
thaṅ khram 65 phur myi 87
thaṅ prom 66 pho ma 91
thaṅ ’phrom 66 phyiṅ ril 92
˚thabs: dgra ~ 27 phyiṅ rild 92
˚thabs: nol ~ 82 ˚phyuṅ: zur ~ 117
thugs ñen 67 ˚phra: che ~ 45
˚thog: rṅo ~ 39 ˚phrag: che ~ 45
thoṅ myi 68 ˚phrag: snam ~ 84
thoṅ myig 69 ˚phraṅ: stag ~ 60
thom myig 68 ˚phran: rkaṅ ~ 9
˚mtha’: dbuṅ ~ 99 phrog rlog 93
˚mtha’: dbus ~ 99 ˚’phraṅ: stag ~ 60
mthiṅ braṅ 70 ˚’phreṅ: stag ~ 60
˚mtho: mna’ ~ 83 ’phrog rlom 93
˚daṅ: dbaṅ ~ 98 ˚’phrom: thaṅ ~ 66
˚dum: mjal ~ 47 ˚ba: ñe yo ~ 57
˚dum: ’jaṅ ~ 48 ˚ba: bsar ṅa ~ 128
˚dus: mjal ~ 47 ˚bal: lho ~ 131
dog 125 bu spur 94
˚dog: sa ga ~ 125 bu srid 95
˚dog: sa ~ 125 ˚bub: źu ~ 114
dog mon 71 ˚bel: dku ~ 5
dog yab 72 boṅ myi 68
dog srin 73 ˚byal: staṅs ~ 61
˚dogs: sa ~ 125 ˚brag: snam ~ 84
doṅ ral 74 ˚braṅ: mthiṅ ~ 70
dra cen 75 ˚bla: rje ~ 49
˚gdeṅs: pyi ’brog ~ 119 bla skyes 96
˚gdeṅs: yul pyi ’brog ~ 119 bla ’og 97
mdo lcags 76 ˚blas: rje ~ 49
 420

˚bleg: spo ~ 88 ˚bźi: se mo gru ~ 126

˚blon: rje ~ 50 ˚bźer: dgra ~ 28
˚blon: źaṅ ~ 112 ˚bźer: dgra ~ 28
˚dbaṅ: mṅa’ 38 zaṅ yag 115
dbaṅ taṅ 98 zaṅs brgya’ 116
dbaṅ thaṅ 98 ˚zin: dgra ~ 29
dbaṅ daṅ 98 ˚zun: dgra ~ 30
dbuṅ mtha’ 99 zur phyuṅ 117
dbus mtha’ 99 zla dpe 118
˚dbyal: rje ~ 51 ˚gzugs: mtshe ~ 109
˚dbyald: staṅ ~ 61 ˚’og: chags ~ 42
˚dbyal: staṅs ~ 61 ˚’og: bla ~ 97
˚’baṅs: rjes ~ 53 ˚yag: zaṅ ~ 115
’byuṅ ’jug 100 ˚yab: dog ~ 72
˚’briṅ: źa 111 ˚yab: yul ~ 120
˚’briṅ: źam 111 ˚yig: khyim ~ 19
˚’brum: se ~ bźi 126 yul pyi ’brog gdeṅs 119
˚’brog: pyi ~ gdeṅs 119 yul yab 120
˚’brog: yul pyi ~ gdeṅs 119 ˚yo: ñe ~ ba 57
’brog mkhos 101 ˚yo: noṅs ~ 81
˚sbyal: staṅ ~ 61 ˚g.yuṅ: rgod ~ 33
˚sbyal: staṅs ~ 61 ˚ra: khur ~ 16
˚bsbyal: staṅs ~ 61 raṅ lugs 122
˚ma: ste’u ka ~ 62 riṅ 122
˚ma: pho ~ 91 riṅ lugs 122
˚mag: mun ~ 103 riṅ lus 122
mu su 102 ram ’da’ 121
mun mag 103 ral 74
mun dmag 103 ˚ral: doṅ ~ 74
˚mo: se ~ kru bźi 126 ˚riṅ: źam 111
˚mo: se ~ gru bźi 126 ˚rim: ñiṅ ~ 55
˚mon: dog ~ 71 ˚rims 63
˚myi: thoṅ ~ 68 ˚rims: stod ~ 63
˚myi: pur ~ 87 ˚ril: pyiṅ ~ 92
˚myi: phur ~ 87 ˚ril: phyiṅ ~ 92
˚myi: boṅ ~ 68 ˚rild: pyiṅ ~ 92
myi rlag 104 ˚rild: phyiṅ ~ 92
˚myig: thoṅ ~ 69 ˚ris: rkyen ~ 10
˚myig: thom ~ 68 ru lag 123
˚myig: noṅs ~ 80 ˚ren: ldeg ~ pa 78
˚dmag: mun ~ 103 ˚rlag: chu ~ 44
˚tse: kom ~ 1 ˚rlag: myi ~ 104
gtsug 105 ˚rlog: phrog ~ 93
gtsug lag 105 ˚rlom: ’phrog ~ 93
˚rtsis: khyim ~ 18 ˚lag: gtsug ~ 105
rtsis gra 106 ˚lag: ru ~ 123
rtsis mgo 107 ˚lam: spos ~ 89
mtshan źiṅ 108 ˚lugs: raṅ ~ 122
mtshe gzugs 109 ˚lugs: riṅ ~ 122
’dzaṅs 110 lug rtug 124
’dzaṅs kyad 110 ˚lus: riṅ ~ 122
źa ’briṅ 111 ˚len: ṅam ~ 36
źaṅ blon 112 ˚lend: ṅam ~ 36
źaṅ lon 112 ˚lon: źaṅ ~ 112
źaṅ lond 112 ˚lond: źaṅ ~ 112
źam ’briṅ 111 ˚los: pha ~ 90
źam riṅ 111 ˚śam: mkho ~ 22
˚źan: ṅan ~ 35 ˚sa: rkya ~ 11
źal ce gra 113 ˚sa: skya ~ 11
˚źiṅ: ñiṅ ~ 56 ˚sa: sṅo ~ 40
˚źiṅ: ñin ~ 56 ˚sa: rje ~ 52
˚źiṅ: mtshan ~ 108 sa ga dog 125
źu bub 114 sa dog 125
˚bźi: se gru ~ 126 sa dogs 125
˚bźi: se cuṅ gru ~ 126 sa gdog 125
˚bźi: se ’brum ~ 126 ˚su: mu ~ 102
˚bźi: se mo kru ~ 126 se gru bźi 126
 421

se cuṅ gru bźi 126 ˚gsum: gyur ~ 24

se ’brum bźi 126 bsar ṅa ba 128
se mo kru bźi 126 ˚bse’: khrab ~ 20
se mo gru bźi 126 ˚bso: kha ~ 13
˚so: khab ~ 14 lhag cad 129
so nam 127 lhag chad 129
˚sram: gyur ~ 24 ˚lham: chags ~ 43
˚srid: bu ~ 95 lhun stug 130
˚srin: dog ~ 73 lho bal 131
 422

INDEX OF LEXEMES FROM OTHER ASIATIC LANGUAGES

The index contains only lexemes cited in Analytical sections [A] of the lemmata. Lexemes that occur
in quotations from various multilingual dictionaries have not been included. I have not listed
lexemes claimed in various works as belonging to Źaṅ źuṅ language since many of them are in fact
corrupted forms of Tibetan lexemes and no linguistic criteria have been be proposed so far to
ascertain the authenticity of their alleged Źaṅ źuṅ origin.

BYANGSI
GYARONG
taŋbu 37
taŋmo 37 kə prɑm 66
taŋʃimo 37 QIANGIC
thaŋ 37
baŋ 98 prom 66
baŋmo 98 KHOTANESE
CHAUDANGSI chā 8
təŋ-bu 37 KINNAURI
bəŋ 98
bəŋ-phəl 98 baṅ 98
CHEPANG LEPCHA
dheŋ 37 kom-t’un 1
dheŋ.kə- 37 kom-bo 1
dhyaŋ.gay 37 gya tśo 20
-naʔ 127 gya (tśo) bik 20
naʔ- 127 ṅat 37
naʔ.ryas 127 jal 111
yo 111 juṅ 28
yo- 111 je 28
yoh 111 nya ra-bo 121
yoh.nəm 111 nyí 43/91
yoʔ- 111 nyím 43
yu- 111 tiṅ 37
ram- 121 tŭk-jer 28
luʔ naʔ 127 toṅ 69
hlyu- 66 tyak 43
hlyut- 66 t’o 39
hlyun- 66 t’ók 39
hlyun 66 daṅ 37
na 127
CHINESE nám nám 127
baitong 白銅 79 nám mă 127
chi 尺 8 pă-hlum 24
*d(l)ôŋ 79 păṅ 98
doŋ 79 băṅ 98
jie 介 20 bóṅ 98
*lôŋ 79 yă 111
man 鬘 60 yă-ši 111
qī 漆 20 ye-še 111
qi shu 漆树 20 ra 121
ral 74
tian si 天寺 2
lut 66
tong 彤 79
ša-kap 114
zhan 戰 82
ša ra-bo 121
DARMA ší 111
hlă 24
thang 37 hlá-m 24
thəŋ 37 a-băṅ 98
thəŋ-mo 37 a-ral 74
bəŋ 98
 423

MONGOLIAN deŋ 37
deŋ-ga 37
köm 1
šala 111 RONGPO
PALAUNG thaŋga 37
thiŋ 37
məlɔŋ 79 daŋ 37
PLB SANSKRIT
*plu 66 ārṣa 105
PTANI unnata 4
kṛṣikarmānta 49
*rjo 66 navakarmika 49
*lɯŋ 79 padma 87
PTB puruṣa 87
pragalbha 93
*g-sow 127 praskandin 93
*g-yaːp 72 senāvāhana 103
*nig 91
*ŋa-y 37 TAI-WUMING
*plu 66 luːŋ 79
*r-tsyəy 127
*s-lwa 66 TAMANGIC
*s-nik 127 tsjaː 111
*s-nyak 127
*zyal 111 TOKHARIAN A
RABHA kāryap pärko 85
tɨŋ-tɨŋ 37
 424

QUOTATION INDEX
The following index lists all passages quoted in Text sections [T] of the lemmata. In addition,
passages from Analytical sections [A] of the lemmata that consist of at least a clause (i.e., an NP and
a predicate) and are provided with a translation are included as well.

OT SOURCES

MANUSCRIPTS
PELLIOT TIBÉTAIN
PT 16 22v4 ldeg ren pa, dbaṅ thaṅ 49-53 stod rims
24r4 gces spras 53 mṅa’ thaṅ
24v4 dbaṅ thaṅ 64 źaṅ lon
25v4-26r1 chags ’og 66-7 źa ’briṅ
26r2-3 dgra chos 87-9 mṅa’ dbaṅ
26r3 dku gaṅ 90-1 rkaṅ ’gros; khram skya
26r3-4 dgra chos 91-2 (rgyal) thag brgyad, (se)
26r4-v1 gces spras gru bźi
27r2-4 gces spras 95 rkaṅ ’gros
28v2 mṅa’ thaṅ 101-2 mṅa’ thaṅ
29r1-2 gces spras 105-7 khram skya, źa ’briṅ
29v1-2 mṅa’ thaṅ 109-10 mṅa’ thaṅ
29v2 dgra chos 117-8 (se) gru bźi
31r2-3 rkaṅ ’gros 122-7 źa ’briṅ
32v1 dbaṅ thaṅ 140-1 ñam noṅs, źaṅ lon
33v1-2 mṅa’ thaṅ PT 1043 85 dog yab
34r3 dbaṅ thaṅ PT 1047 5 staṅs dbyal
34v1 yul yab, sa dog 7-8 dgyes skyems, staṅs dbyal
PT 126 65 so nam 24-5 dra cen
101 che phra 53-6 ṅam len
111-2 khram skya, źu bub 55 dgra zin
126-7 stag ’phraṅ 173 kha sprod
129-32 stag ’phraṅ 281 ṅam len
141 thaṅ kar 284 ṅam len
151 gtsug lag 347-8 rgod g.yuṅ
152-4 źa ’briṅ 364-5 dku ’pel
PT 239 r6.5 dbaṅ thaṅ PT 1051 39 gces spras
v16.3 dbaṅ thaṅ 64 rṅo thog
PT 943 23a bu srid PT 1052 r47-8 gces spras
57r4-5 gtsug lag r77-9 thaṅ prom
PT 981 350 rṅo thog r113 sa dog
PT 986 69-70 nol thabs r131-4 gyur sram
92-3 dgra chos, dra cen r148 gyur sram
101-2 dra cen r241 gyur sram, mthiṅ braṅ
111-2 chags ’og v7-8 snam phrag
133-4 chags ’og, lho bal PT 1060 63-4 rkaṅ pran
137 nol thabs PT 1067 8-13 rje blon
6-9 thaṅ khram, riṅ lugs PT 1068 44 phyiṅ rild
9-10 khab so, ’byuṅ ’jug 61 rje dbyal
11-2 riṅ lugs 71-2 ñiṅ rim
12-4 riṅ lugs 104 khur ra
15-6 rtsis mgo 114 (rgyal) thag brgyad
PT 1002 5-6 riṅ lugs 114-5 (se) gru bźi
PT 1038 13-7 sa dog 115-6 (rgyal) thag brgyad
PT 1039 4-5 staṅs dbyal 121 (rgyal) thag brgyad, (se)
PT 1040 71-7 so nam gru bźi
PT 1042 13 mṅa’ thaṅ, mṅa’ dbaṅ, dbaṅ PT 1071 r2-4 źaṅ lon
thaṅ r4 dbaṅ thaṅ
19-22 spos lam r11 dbaṅ thaṅ
24-5 mṅa’ dbaṅ, spos lam r13-5 thoṅ myi
30-4 źa ’briṅ, źaṅ lon r24-7 thoṅ myi
47-8 rkaṅ ’gros r30 thoṅ myi
 425

r65-7 źaṅ lon PT 1166 5-6 riṅ lugs

r79-81 źaṅ lon PT 1194 3 (se) gru bźi
r404-6 phyiṅ rild 24-5 rje blon
r436 dbaṅ thaṅ 40-1 thaṅ kar
PT 1078 r3 rṅo thog 77 (rgyal) thag brgyad
PT 1078bis 16 khram skya PT 1203 r8 riṅ lugs
37 riṅ lugs PT 1256 2-3 ñe yo ba
PT 1079 2-3 khyim yig PT 1283 41 ldeg ren pa
4-5 khab so, thaṅ khram, riṅ 64 ñe yo ba
lugs 144 ldeg ren pa
5-7 riṅ lugs 204 ṅam len
13-6 stod rims, riṅ lugs 247-8 so nam
16-7 khyim yig 362 ṅam len
17-8 khyim yig 365 ṅam len
18-20 khyim yig 366-7 bla ’og
22-3 riṅ lugs 390 dbaṅ thaṅ
PT 1082 3-4 noṅs yo 408 dbaṅ thaṅ
13 dra cen 435-6 gces spras
40-1 rje sa 457-9 so nam
PT 1084 6-9 riṅ lugs 506-7 ldeg ren pa
17 riṅ lugs 581 ṅam len
25-6 riṅ lugs 581-2 dra cen
27-8 riṅ lugs 600 ṅam len
PT 1085 r5-7 bla skyes 601-2 dra cen
PT 1087 3 riṅ lugs 608-9 ṅam len
PT 1088 5-6 riṅ lugs 624 ṅam len
6 che phra, bla ’og PT 1285 r16 rje dbyal
PT 1089 r9 rkaṅ ton r16-7 so nam
r21-2 ṅam len, zla dpe, lho bal r17-8 staṅs dbyal
r26 dbuṅ mtha’ r18-9 staṅs dbyal
r28 zla dpe r19-20 staṅs dbyal
r67 ṅam len r29-30 staṅs dbyal
r69 zla dpe, lho bal r55 thaṅ prom
PT 1091 10-1 rgod g.yuṅ r59 rje dbyal, staṅs dbyal
PT 1094 4-6 gces spras r66-8 źu bub
PT 1095 3-5 gces spras r76 thaṅ prom
PT 1098 5-6 bla ’og r104-5 sa dog
PT 1101 8-9 riṅ lugs r115 thaṅ prom
PT 1111 6-8 skya sa, bla skyes r146-8 sa dog
17-8 che phra, bla skyes r165-7 źu bub
19-21 rtsis mgo v44 źu bub
PT 1115 r1-2 rṅo thog v72 mna’ mtho
PT 1120 r8-9 skya sa v81 mna’ mtho
PT 1134 9-10 (se) gru bźi v97 ṅam len
23 (se) gru bźi v100 phyiṅ rild
29-30 (se) gru bźi PT 1286 30-2 dog yab, yul yab, sa dog
32 (se) gru bźi 34 yul yab
38-9 (se) gru bźi 35 yul yab
39-41 zaṅs brgya’ 39-40 rje sa
42-3 lhun stug 41 gtsug lag
43-4 chu rlag 42-3 dog yab
45-6 mtshe gzugs 43 yul yab, sa dog
51 (se) gru bźi 44-5 so nam
56-8 zaṅs brgya’, (se) gru bźi PT 1287 5 chu rlag
65 (se) gru bźi 8-9 rgal mkhas, stag ’phraṅ
92 mna’ mtho 14-5 skya sa
92-4 mna’ mtho 14-6 zaṅ yag
119-20 (rgyal) thag brgyad, (se) 19-20 kha sprod, zaṅs brgya’
gru bźi 25-6 rje dbyal
183-4 rṅo thog 31-3 kha sprod
199 kom tse 34-5 chu rlag, myi rlag
270 khur ra 39-40 chags lham, chu rlag, myi
PT 1136 18-9 (rgyal) thag brgyad, (se) rlag
gru bźi 43-4 khu ljo
46-7 rkaṅ pran 45-7 rje dbyal, ’phrog rlom
48 rkaṅ pran 47-8 mna’ mtho
59 (se) gru bźi 51-2 rje dbyal
 426

51-3 dog yab, bu spur, yul pyi 379 dgra bźer

’brog gdeṅs, yul yab 392-7 nol thabs
57 chags lham, pho ma 394-7 ñiṅ rim
59-60 dog yab, bu spur, yul pyi 399-402 bu srid, so nam
’brog gdeṅs, yul yab 408 ṅam len
62 sa dog 408-12 mu su
66-7 kha bso 409-10 rkaṅ pran
72-4 ltag brñan, ’dzaṅs kyad 412-6 pho ma
74-5 ’dzaṅs kyad 421-2 gyur sram, sa dog
76 riṅ lugs 426 gum chad, rṅo thog
79-83 ltag brñan, ’dzaṅs kyad 430-2 rgal mkhas
85-7 lug rtug 433-4 chu rlag
89-93 snam phrag 434-5 dgyes skyems, rjes ’baṅs
94-6 dku gaṅ 437-9 rje blon
96-7 rtsis gra, ’dzaṅs kyad, źal ce 445-6 chags lham
gra 446-8 ṅam len, mṅa’ thaṅ, lhun
101 rje dbyal stug
104-5 źaṅ lon 447-9 kha bso
124-6 ñes dgu 451-4 gtsug lag
127-8 ṅan źan, ñes dgu 452-4 ñe yo ba, dbaṅ thaṅ
135-6 dku ’gel 453 dgra zin
141-2 dbaṅ thaṅ 456-8 dog mon
153-7 mna’ mtho 457 gtsug lag
159-63 dgra zin, ñin źiṅ 459-60 dog srin
161-3 mtshan źiṅ 462-3 mthiṅ braṅ
163-4 dra cen 466-8 pho ma
184-5 khram skya 473-6 dog mon
185-7 mtshe gzugs 476 gtsug lag
194-5 dku ’gel 478-81 doṅ ral
195-6 dku rgyal 483-5 mchog gar, ste’u ka ma,
196 dku rgyal mdo lcags, bsar ṅa ba
200-2 dku ’pel 490-1 chags lham
202-3 chu rlag 491-2 thaṅ kar
203-5 rṅo thog 496-8 dgra thabs
206-8 rṅo thog 496-9 stag ’phraṅ
207 rṅo thog 498-9 chags lham
214-5 rgal mkhas 521-2 dgra thabs
218-9 źa ’briṅ 522 dgra bźer
219-20 dgyes skyems, rjes ’baṅs 529-30 pur myi
222-3 thaṅ prom PT 1288 8 nol thabs
234-7 khur ra, sa dog 24 phyiṅ rild
240-2 pho ma 25-6 thoṅ myi, ldeg ren pa
240-4 kom tse 27-8 mkho śam, rgod g.yuṅ, rtsis
254-5 stod rims mgo
262-3 khrab bse, mdor cod, ldoṅ 36-8 nol thabs
prom 46-7 thoṅ myig
267-8 chags lham 49 dgra bźer
275-8 rje blon, źa ’briṅ, źaṅ lon PT 1289 r1.6 so nam
283-4 rṅo thog r3.3-4 thoṅ myig
294-5 pur myi v2.4 yul yab
303-5 lug rtug v3.6-7 (rgyal) thag brgyad
304-5 khyim graṅs PT 1290 r1 mkho śam
307-9 rjes ’baṅs r2-3 gtsug lag
315-6 dku ’pel r3 ṅam len
320-1 dgyes skyems, ’jaṅ dum v10-1 rje blon
322 dku gaṅ PT 1294 v rgod g.yuṅ
342 stod rims PT 1297.1 7 riṅ lugs
343-6 ’jaṅ dum 11 ṅam len
349-51 rjes ’baṅs PT 1297.2 18 riṅ lugs
354 gtsug lag PT 1297.3 3-4 gces spras
354-8 dkyel mkhas, dgra bźer, 5-6 lhag chad
dgra zin, rgal mkhas 11 ṅam len
358-9 gtsug lag PT 1297.6 a5 riṅ lugs
366-7 gtsug lag PT 2124 3-4 mgo nan
367 ñam noṅs 10-1 mgo nan
374-6 dbuṅ mtha’ PT 2204c 1-3 riṅ lugs
376-7 stod rims
 427

IOL TIB J
ITJ 730 9 mu su 253-4 bla ’og
15-6 phyiṅ rild 256-7 che phra
17-8 rṅo thog 258-9 noṅs yo
18-9 gces spras 264-5 rkaṅ ’gros
25 mu su 270-1 ṅam len
34 mu su 297-8 bla ’og
42 rṅo thog 337-9 mun mag, rtsis mgo
45-6 rkaṅ ’gros 339-41 mun mag
ITJ 731 r70-1 chu rlag ITJ 750 56 khram skya
r72 rje dbyal 56-8 ’brog mkhos
r111-3 mchog gar 58-9 rkaṅ ton, pha los, mun mag
v27-8 sa dog 71-3 stod rims
v69-70 thaṅ kar 95-6 phyiṅ rild
v77-8 thaṅ kar 97-8 phyiṅ rild
v83-5 dgra zun 104-5 mun mag, rtsis mgo
ITJ 732 29-30 rje dbyal 105-7 phyiṅ rild
ITJ 733 7-8 gtsug lag 108-9 phyiṅ rild
17 gtsug lag 109-10 rkaṅ ton
19-20 ṅam len, gtsug lag 122 dgra bźer
31 dbaṅ thaṅ 124 pha los
41 dra cen 127-8 stod rims
44-5 dra cen 150-2 ldeg ren pa
47-50 skya sa 154-5 stod rims
ITJ 734 1r8-9 gtsug lag 157-8 stod rims
1r28-9 ’phrog rlom 160-1 khab so; khram skya
2r47-9 źu bub 171-2 ’brog mkhos
2r68-9 dku gaṅ 173 ru lag
3r94 khrab bse 176-7 staṅs dbyal
3r96 thaṅ prom 179-80 stod rims
3r116 dku gaṅ 181-2 pha los
4r168-9 dku gaṅ 188-9 skya sa, sṅo sa
6r246-7 sa dog 193-4 ’byuṅ ’jug
7r273-6 rṅo thog 195-7 dra cen
7r300-2 rkaṅ pran 204-5 ’byuṅ ’jug
8r322 yul yab 205-6 khyim rtsis
ITJ 737A 333-5 pur myi 208-9 phyiṅ rild
ITJ 738 1v81 ñe yo ba 210-2 phyiṅ rild
2v16 so nam 212-3 pha los
2v22 gtsug lag 213-4 phyiṅ rild
3v1 ṅam len 215-6 phyiṅ rild
3v2 ṅam len 217-8 źaṅ lon
3v27-8 snam phrag 221-2 thaṅ khram
3v56 lhun stug 225-6 khab so, thugs ñen, lhag
3v66 ñe yo ba chad
3v70 ṅam len 227-9 ’byuṅ ’jug
3v75-6 ṅam len 240-1 thaṅ khram, riṅ lugs
3v96-7 dbaṅ thaṅ 241 khab so, mṅa‘ thaṅ
3v113-5 mthiṅ braṅ 248-50 stod rims
3v143 ṅam len 250-1 thaṅ khram
ITJ 739 1v5-6 mthiṅ braṅ 253 dgra bźer
1v6-7 gyur sram 253-5 snon god, mun mag
3v8-9 gtsug lag 255 dra cen
4v6-7 dbaṅ thaṅ 257-8 ’byuṅ ’jug
4v10 sa dog 260-1 ’byuṅ ’jug
6v1 ṅam len 269-70 pha los
8v4-5 so nam 270 stod rims
10r4-7 dbaṅ thaṅ 271-2 rkaṅ ton
12v5-7 chags lham, thaṅ prom 290-1 thaṅ khram, ’byuṅ ’jug
14v9-10 ṅam len 293-5 rgod g.yuṅ, pha los
15v7-8 gtsug lag 297-9 khram skya
17v7 dgra zin 301-2 ’byuṅ ’jug
ITJ 740 149 lhun stug 307 riṅ lugs
221 chu rlag ITJ 751 35v2 yul yab
226-7 chu rlag 35v2-3 gtsug lag
251 bla ’og 36r2 ṅam len
 428

36r4 ṅam len v51-2 khab so

36r4-v2 mṅa’ thaṅ v52-3 mun mag
36v1 dku rgyal v53-5 khab so
37v3 mjal dum ITJ 844 r2-3 khram skya
38r2-3 nol thabs ITJ 856.B r4 noṅs yo
39r4-v2 rjes ’baṅs ITJ 914 r1-4 skya sa
39v4-40r1 rjes ’baṅs ITJ 1247 4 dra cen
40r1-2 rjes ’baṅs ITJ 1359A 2-3 riṅ lugs
40v4 mṅa’ thaṅ ITJ 1368 12 źa ’briṅ
41r2-3 dgra zin, mjal dum 20 rkaṅ ton
41v3 gtsug lag 25 źa ’briṅ, źaṅ lon
ITJ 753 v1-2 rṅo thog ITJ 1375 r1-3 dku ’pel
v4-5 rṅo thog v4 dgyes skyems
v44-5 dku ’gel ITJ 1379 r3 skya sa
v48-9 khab so
OR.
Or.8210/S.2228 a11-2 riṅ lugs Or.15000/180 v7-8 staṅs dbyal
Or.8212.187 1 khram skya Or.15000/183 r2-3 noṅs yo
1-2 pha los, rtsis mgo v5 pur myi
4-6 ram ’da’ Or.15000/184 r2-3 ñe yo ba
7-9 thaṅ khram r5 ñe yo ba
13-5 dra cen Or.15000/212 v3 gum chad, noṅs yo
21-2 dra cen Or.15000/220 v3 rjes ’baṅs
32-3 dra cen Or.15000/248 4 ñam noṅs
51-5 dra cen Or.15000/265 r2 staṅs dbyal
55 dra cen v5 snon god
57-61 spo bleg, źaṅ lon v6-7 snon god
59-60 thaṅ khram Or.15000/294 2 dbaṅ thaṅ
63-8 spo bleg Or.15000/326 r2 rtsis mgo, riṅ lugs
81-5 dra cen r3-4 dbaṅ thaṅ
Or.8212/1403 r5 noṅs yo r5-6 rtsis mgo
r6 noṅs yo v1 rtsis mgo
Or.8212/1842 2 riṅ lugs Or.15000/329 r1 mun mag
Or.15000/18 r4 gum chad Or.15000/337 r3 khab so
Or.15000/35 r5 pur myi Or.15000/490 3-5 riṅ lugs
Or.15000/37 r7 ñam noṅs 18 riṅ lugs
Or.15000/91 r2 rkaṅ ’gros Or.15000/496 2 riṅ lugs
Or.15000/93 6 rṅo thog Or.15000/497 r4 ru lag
Or.15000/116 v3 rṅo thog r4-5 mun mag
Or.15000/150 r7 pur myi Or.15000/502 2 rṅo thog
r16 pur myi Or.15000/529 9-10 rṅo thog
Or.15000/154 2 pur myi Or.15000/536 2 riṅ lugs
OTHERS
Vol.55, fol.20 4-5 riṅ lugs Kozlov 4 7-8 riṅ lugs
5 bla ’og, riṅ lugs H.2 A khram skya
Vol.56, fol.72 10-2 rṅo thog, rje blas Khot. Plate 206 r1 ñam noṅs
15-6 rṅo thog Tu 1 6 noṅs yo
17-8 rṅo thog Tu 14 10-1 rjes ’baṅs
26-7 rje blas T III Ili Köl A3 ram ’da’
27 rṅo thog, rje blas B3 spo bleg
Vol.57, fol.220 4 riṅ lugs THOMAS/KONOW 6-9 mun mag
Ch.frag.82v b7 riṅ lugs 26-8 mun mag

WOODEN SLIPS
ITN 172 r1 skya sa ITN 789 r1-2 riṅ lugs
ITN 267 v1-2 thoṅ myig ITN 816 r1 stod rims
ITN 279 v1 stod rims ITN 844 2 ru lag
ITN 295 r1-v1 skya sa ITN 871 A1-B1 dgra thabs
ITN 439 v2 dbaṅ thaṅ ITN 953 v1 khab so
ITN 475 r1 rtsis mgo ITN 1073 r1 dbaṅ thaṅ
ITN 499 v3 bla ’og ITN 1120 v2-3 rṅo thog
ITN 500 r2-v1 bla ’og ITN 1215 2-3 snam phrag
ITN 548 r2 rtsis mgo ITN 1495 r1 rṅo thog
ITN 627 r1-2 riṅ lugs ITN 1635 A1-A3 dgra thabs
 429

ITN 1643 B dgra zun ITN 2048 A1-B1 dgra thabs

D khram skya ITN 2053 r1 rṅo thog
ITN 2013 r2-v2 rṅo thog ITN 2285 r1-v2 pur myi

INSCRIPTIONS

’Bis 2-4 rje blon E 46-9 ñam noṅs

4-6 gtsug lag E 49-50 dgra chos, dgra zun
’Phyoṅ 5-10 gtsug lag E 55-6 mjal dum
Bsam 18-20 rje blon W 1-6 mjal dum
Bsam Bell 1-12 staṅs dbyal W 10-1 mjal dum
Endere b2-c3 noṅs yo W 25-6 mjal dum
Khri 1-2 yul yab W 32-3 dra cen
1-4 mṅa’ thaṅ, gtsug lag W 36-43 mjal dum
5-8 mṅa’ thaṅ, gtsug lag W 68-70 gces spras
10-1 ṅam len W 71-4 rje blon
27-9 mjal dum S 1-3 che phra, mjal dum
54 che phra Źol N 12-7 ñin źiṅ, źa ’briṅ
56 gces spras, che phra N 17-20 rje blas
Lcaṅ 18-22 rkaṅ ’gros N 21-7 noṅs myig
32-4 rkyen ris N 31-8 dku rgyal
40-2 riṅ lugs N 50-2 dbaṅ thaṅ
47-59 zla dpe E 6-16 khab so, rje blas
Ldan.1 16 gces spras S 3-4 rje blas
Ldan.2 1-6 dku rgyal, rjes ’baṅs S 46-9 rje blon
7-8 mjal dum S 53-5 dra cen
Rkoṅ 4 yul yab S 56-63 dra cen
8-10 chags ’og Źwa E 4-8 pha los, zla dpe
9-10 khab so E 14-5 bla ’og
16-7 pha los E 25-8 źaṅ lon
18-21 bla skyes E 31-5 bsnan bskyed, bla ’og
19-21 rje blon E 32 dbaṅ thaṅ
Skar 12-5 dbuṅ mtha’ E 35-7 źaṅ lon
28-32 gces spras E 38-49 bsnan bskyed
39-43 riṅ lugs E 41-4 rje blon
42-3 dbaṅ thaṅ W 6-8 bla ’og
49-51 khyim yig, mgo nan W 9-13 ñam noṅs
55-7 zla dpe W 16-7 bla ’og
ST Treaty N 1-3 che phra, mjal dum W 17-9 rje blas
N 7-8 dbaṅ thaṅ W 19-23 zla dpe
N 32-3 khab so W 21-3 rjes ’baṅs
E 8-9 gtsug lag W 29-30 dbaṅ thaṅ
E 18-21 gtsug lag, lho bal W 32-4 źa ’briṅ
E 31-2 ñam noṅs W 48-50 che phra, źaṅ lon
E 35 gces spras W 56-8 zla dpe
E 37 mjal dum W 57-8 ñam noṅs, bsnan bskyed,
E 39-41 mjal dum zur phyuṅ
E 44-6 gces spras, mjal dum W 58-62 riṅ lugs

CANONICAL SOURCES

Bka’ ’gyur
Thabs mkhas pa chen po saṅs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo (H 361, mdo sde; apus ACIP) a 167v3-5 dgra chos
a 156v5-7 ’phrog rlom
a 296a4-5 ’phrog rlom
’Dul ba gźi (H 1, ’dul ba; apus ACIP) ṅa 194b4-5 ’phrog rlom
ṅa 277r4 mna’ mtho
’Dul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi (H 6, ’dul ba; apus ACIP) da 7b5-6 ’phrog rlom
da 141b1-3 ’phrog rlom
’Phags pa tiṅ ṅe ’dzin mchog dam pa (H 139, mdo sde; apus ACIP) tha 187r7-v1 dgra chos
tha 287a6 ’phrog rlom
’Phags pa yoṅs su mya ṅan las ’das pa chen po’i mdo (H 368, myaṅ ’das; apus ACIP) ka 291r1-2 dgra chos
Mdzaṅs blun (apus HAHN 1996:144, ll.4-5) dgra zun
(apus HAHN 1996:144, ll.5) dgra zun
(apus HAHN 1996:191, l.21) dgra chos
(apus HAHN 1996:191, ll.18-9) rje dbyal
 430

(H 347, mdo sde; apus ACIP) sa 437b4-5 bu srid

Saṅs rgyas phal po che źes bya ba śin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo (H 94, phal chen; apus ACIP) ka 158v7 kha sprod
cha 65b4 ’phrog rlom

Bstan ’gyur
Candranandana Yan lag brgyad pa’i sñiṅ po’i rnam par ’grel pa tshig gi don gyi zla zer ko 53r3 lho bal
(D 4312, gso ba rig pa)
Kamalaśīla, Lho za mo tshaṅs dbyaṅs la sdug bsṅal gyi bye brag bstan pa ṅe 134v1-2 ’phrog rlom
(D 4193; spriṅ yig; apus ACIP)
Prajñākara ’Dul ba mdo’i rnam par bśad pa (D 4121, ’dul ba) ru 94r4 ñe yo ba
ru 141v7 lho bal
Prajñāvarman Ched du brjod pa’i tshoms kyi rnam par ’grel pa (D 4100, mṅon pa; apus ACIP) thu 94b1-2 ’phrog rlom
Ska ba dpal brtsegs Gsuṅ rab rin po che’i gtam rgyud daṅ śakya’i rabs rgyud (D 4357, sna tshogs) co 263v1-2 lho bal
Śrīghoṣa Gces pa bsdus pa’i phrin yig bod rje ’baṅs la brdzaṅs pa co 234b3 ’phrog rlom
(D 4355; sna tshogs; apus ACIP)
Viśvāmitra Dpal gsaṅ ba ’dus pa’i rgyud kyi man ṅag gi rgya mtsho thigs pa ji 126r5; stod rims
(D 1844, rgyud; apus BCRD)
Won-ch’uk Dgoṅs pa zab mo ṅes par ’grel pa’i mdo rgya cher ’grel pa (D 4016, mdo ’grel) di 97r6 dgra zun

Li’i yul luṅ bstan pa (D 4202, spriṅ yig; apus EMMERICK 1967:20) ṅe 176r3 stod rims
Sgra sbyor bam po gñis pa (apus ISHIKAWA 1990:89-90) che phra

OTHER TIBETAN SOURCES

Bdud ’joms Gnam lcags spu gri lo rgyus (apus CANTWELL/MAYER 2008:47 & n.33) tha 30-2 khrab bse
Dpa’ bo gtsug lag Chos ’byuṅ mkhas pa’i dga’ ston (apus DOTSON 2012:162) fols.140a-b rjes ’baṅs
(apus DOTSON 2012:162) fols. 140a-b mna’ mtho
Dran pa nam mkha’ Bden pa bon gyi mdzod sgo sgra ’grel ’phrul gyi lde mig (apus WTS.9:156a) 54 mkho śam
’Ju mi pham rnam rgyal Gto sgrom ’bum tig gi dgoṅs don lag len khyer bder bkod pa’i gto yi 10-3 dku rgyal
cho ga bkra śis ’dod ’jo (apus LIN 2005:244)
Lde’u jo sras Chos ’byuṅ chen mo bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan (apus DOTSON 2012:163n9) 145 mna’ mtho
Mkhas pa lde’u Rgya bod kyi chos ’byuṅ rgyas pa (apus DOTSON 2012:163n9) 274 mkho śam
(apus DOTSON 2012:163n9) 373 mna’ mtho
Nel pa Paṇḍita Me tog phreṅ ba (apus UEBACH 1987:106) 12a2-3 mkho śam

Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me loṅ (Sde dge edition) 3r5 ṅam len
Rta gtad bźugs so (apus BELLEZZA 2008:630) text III-19:iii khrab bse
text III-19:vi phyiṅ rild
Dbu nag mi’u ’dra chags (apus KARMAY 1998:276) 15v6 sa dog
Gzi brjid (apus SNELLGROVE 1967b:50-2) khrab bse
(apus WTS.10:241a) 2:175.2 gyur sram
La dvags rgyal rabs (apus FRANCKE 1972b) 29:ll.7-8 khab so
 431

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
Das Hauptanliegen der vorliegenden Doktorarbeit zum Thema Studies in the lexis and word-formation of
Old Tibetan. Compounds and compounding besteht darin, die ausgewählten alttibetischen Komposita
auf ihre Semantik und Wortbildung hin zu untersuchen. Im Rahmen des Forschungsvorhabens sollte
eine vertiefte lexikologische Studie zu einem kritisch evaluierten alttibetischen Wortschatz erstellt
werden. Als Basis (sog. primärer Korpus) für die geplanten lexikologischen Studien wurden zwei
Gruppen von alttibetischen Quellen herangezogen:
• Die bereits veröffentlichten Inschriften (Glocke von Bsam yas, Bsam yas rdo riṅs, Glocke von
Khra ’brug, Khri lde sroṅ btsan’s Grab, Mtshur phu, ’Phyoṅ rgyas, Rkoṅ po, Sino-Tibetischer
Vertrag, Skar cuṅ, Glocke von Yer pa, Źol rdo riṅs, Źwa’i lha khaṅ);
• Zentralasiatische Manuskripte (ITJ 750, Or. 8212.187, PT 1042, PT 1285, PT 1286, PT 1287, PT
1288).

Die Arbeit besteht aus folgenden Teilen: Inhaltsverzeichnis, Danksagung, Abkürzungen, Liste der Bilder,
Einführung, Komposition im Alttibetischen, Alttibetische Komposita. Lexikologische Analyse,
Literaturverzeichnis, Indizes wobei die Kapitel Komposition im Alttibetischen und Alttibetische Komposita.
Lexikologische Analyse den wichtigsten Teil der Dissertation darstellen.

Im Kapitel Komposition im Alttibetischen wurden zum ersten Mal in der Tibetologie die Regeln der
Komposition für das Alttibetisch beschrieben, die sich anhand der im Kapitel Alttibetische Komposita.
Lexikologische Analyse analysierten alttibetischen Komposita erschließen ließen. Darüber hinaus
wurde die erste sprachwissenschaftlich basierte Klassifikation der alttibetischen Komposita
vorgeschlagen, die nach zwei unabhängig von aneinander behandelten Kriterien (semantischen und
syntaktischen) erstellt wurde. In der semantischen Klassifikation hat die Autorin neben den
weltweit in der Sprachwissenschaft typologisch anerkannten Klassen von endo- und exozentrischen
Wortzusammensetzungen auch eine Gruppe von esozentrischen Komposita identifizieren können,
deren Sonderstatus sich aus der strengen Tendenz zu Zweisilbigkeit der lexikologischen Einheiten
im Tibetischen ergibt. In der syntaktischen Klassifikation wurde zwischen vier Hauptgruppen
unterschieden: subordinierte, koordinierte, attributive und inkorporative Komposita. Im weiteren
 432

Teil des Kapitels wurden diverse morphonologische und wortbildende Prozesse beschrieben, denen
Komposita in tibetischen Sprachen unterliegen können.

Das Kapitel Alttibetische Komposita. Lexikologische Analyse führt die detallierten lexikologischen
Analysen der 131 ausgewählten alttibetischen Zusammensetzungen ein. Die Gruppe der für die
lexikologischen Untersuchungen vorgesehener Wörter wurde anhand folgender Kriterien
ausgewählt:
• Beleg in den bekannten tibetischen Schriften: Priorität erhielten hapax legomena, des Weiteren
Wörter, die bisher nur in alttibetischen Quellen oder spärlich in späterer Literatur belegt sind
und solche, die heutzutage ausschließlich dialektal gängig sind;
• Semantik: Wörter mit bislang unbekannter Bedeutung oder in idiosynkratischer Anwendung
wurden vorgezogen. Dabei sollten sich diachrone Bedeutungsänderungen (vom Alt- zum
klassischen Tibetischen und zu modernen Dialekten) erfassen lassen;
• Morphologie: Komposita, die die archaischen Formen bewahrt haben;
• Sprachlicher Beitrag: Lexeme, die aus sonstigen Gründen (z.B. wegen ihrer Herkunft oder
Sprachgeschichte) für die tibetische Sprachwissenschaft interessant sind;
• Kognitiver Beitrag: Lexeme, die von besonderem Interesse und besonderer Tragweite für das
Verständnis und die Studien der alttibetischen Sprache, Gesellschaft, Kultur, Religion oder
Staatsführung sind.

Die Ergebnisse der lexikologischen Untersuchungen werden in Form eines Lexikons präsentiert. Da
es sich bei den Lemmata um detaillierte lexikologische Studien und nicht um reine
Bedeutungsverzeichnisse handelt, wurden die Ergebnisse nach dem alphabetischen System (sog.
streng-alphabetische Makrostruktur ohne Gruppierung; Eng. strict-alphabetical macrostructure without
grouping oder straight-alphabetical macrostructure) geordnet. Zur besseren Übersicht wurden die
Informationen über einzelne Lexeme in Form strukturierter Lemmata dargestellt. In der
Mikrostruktur der lexikologisch analysierten Lexeme wurde zwischen folgenden Bereichen
unterschieden: Lemmasektion [1]*, formelle Sektion [2], lexikographische Sektion [3], analytische
Sektionen [4] – [9], lexikologische Sektion [10] und Textsektion [11].

Basierend auf der Auswertung des erstellten Textkorpus setzt sich die Dissertation zum Ziel, die
ausgewählten Lexeme auf ihre Semantik und womöglich Herkunft zu untersuchen. In dieser
Hinsicht ist die Perspektive der Dissertation primär eine lexikologische, d.h. ihr Fokus richtet sich
auf die Erforschung und Beschreibung eines Teils des alttibetischen Wortschatzes.

*
Nummern in Klammern beziehen sich auf die Abschnitte in der Lemmastruktur.