INTRODUCTION

"ngd rwšn'n, 'Begun (is) Angad Rōšnān'. The first words beneath this are those of M 4 a 18-19, namely, 'ngd rwšn'n fry'ng pt 'xšd. It was evident that this was the beginning of the whole cycle. The title on the recto page is damaged, but there too the words 'ngd rwšn'n appear. This misled Lentz into putting the pages into the wrong order. Thus in his publication the last verses of the cycle Huwīdagmān (contained in M 855 R) appear as part of the first canto of Angad Rōšnān.

Lentz accepted Reitzenstein's theories about the structure of the handām texts; and also agreed that there was a connection between them and M 4. In interpreting them, however, he differed entirely from his predecessor. The third edition of Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen had not then appeared, and he was therefore unaware of Reitzenstein's modification of his mythological interpretations. In any case he rejected these entirely. He dismissed the whole conception of a salvation-mystery as alien to Manichaeism;1 and rejected also the idea that the hymns were connected with death. He maintained instead that they were liturgical texts for use in the confessional, supporting this theory by comparisons between them, the Great Xwāstwānīft (Confession of the Elect), and a text from the Chinese Hymnscroll. According to him, the Soul in the hymn-cycles was not the World-Soul but that of an individual believer. He interpreted M 4 also as a confessional text; and suggested that in it is to be found "a part of a collection of short concluding prayers for confession-hymns... which were sung by the entire congregation each time in connection with the associated great hymns, which were recited by the priest" (original: "ein Teil einer Sammlung kurzer Schlussgebete von Beichthymnen . . . die jedesmal in Verbindung mit den zugehörigen grossen Hymnen, die vom Priester rezitiert wurden, von der ganzen Gemeinde gesungen wurden").2

Die Stellung Jesu appeared while the early part of the third edition of Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen was in the press; and Reitzenstein took the opportunity to comment on Lentz's views in the later part of this work.3 He welcomed his discoveries of the Sogdian material, but refused to accept his new interpretation of the texts, maintaining firmly his own beliefs.

Lentz in his discussion of the handām hymns mentioned the

1 See W.-L. i, p. 69. Lentz was justified in this contention, but ignored the fact that Reitzenstein had himself been careful to limit the sense in which he used the word "mystery" (see above, p. 3). Reitzenstein pointed this out when answering Lentz's criticisms (see Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, 3rd ed., pp. 276-7).
2 W.-L. i, p. 67.
3 pp. 275-84.