Possibly the view is correct which recognizes two nearly-allied dialects as existing side by side in Iran during its flourishing period--one prevailing towards the west, the other towards the east--one Medo-Persic, the other Sogdo-Bactrian--the former represented to us by the cuneiform inscriptions, the latter by the Zend texts.

Or it may be closer to the truth to recognize in the Zendic and Achsemenian forms of speech, not so much two contemporary idioms, as two stages of one and the same language, which seems to be at present the opinion of the best comparative philologists.

In either case Media can claim no special interest in Zend, which, if local, is Sogdo-Bactrian, and if not local is no more closely connected with Media than with Persia.
It appears then that we do not at present possess any means of distinguishing the shades of difference which separated the.

Median from the Persian speech.

We have in fact no specimens of the former beyond a certain number of words, and those chiefly proper names, whereas we know the latter tolerably completely from the inscriptions.