Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Of the Scythian origin of Zoroastrianism it will be idle to speak, till the advocates of the system have brought something like historical or rational evidence in its favour. The only civilisation of which we know in the neighbourhood of Media was that of the Assyro-Chal- ' daeans, which in many things was the instructor of the Medes and taught them their art, their writing, and their political organisation. Unfortunately, too little is known of the inner aspects of the Chaldaean religion. One may wonder if the Frashé-kereti, that renewal of the world that is to take place at the end of the Great year of twelve millennia, was derived from the Semitic myths of the annual revival of Adonis and Tammuz. Even the idea of resurrection seems to be attested on the so-called Cyrus’ cylinder of Babylon. If these hypotheses turn out to be correct, older Magism may be defined as an Aryan growth under Chaldaean influences. CHAPTER VIII. AGE AND GROWTH OF THE AVESTA. §1. The internal evidence of the doctrines has thus confirmed the half-historical evidence of the texts, and INTRODUCTION, VIIT. Ixv led us to believe that the Avesta is the embodiment and the fusion of two teachings, one of which belonged to the Achaemenian age, whereas the other could not be older : than the fall of the Greek domination in Iran. One might therefore divide the Avesta. so far as the doctrine goes, into pre-Alexandrian and post-Alexandrian texts. The ‘ Vendidéd may be taken as the best specimen of the texts imbued with the pre-Alexandrian spirit, as its general | laws are Achaemenian in tone, and a great part of it may be interpreted by means of classical testimonies regarding the Achaemenian age. The Gathas may be taken as the best specimen of the post-Alexandrian spirit, as they are . filled with ideas of post-Alexandrian growth. § 2. The date of the Gathas, if not exactly determinable, may yet be fixed between rather narrow limits. They can’ hardly be older than the first century before our era, or even before Philo of Alexandria ; for the neo-Platonic ideas and beings are found in them just in the Philonian stage. They cannot be dated later than the time of the Scythian kings, Kanishka and Huvishka, who reigned in India between 78 and 130 A.D., and who left on their coins records of many of the Zoroastrian divinities, not only the old elementary ones, like Metpo—Mithra, Tepo—Tighri, Oado—VAta, Mao—Maungha; but also the new abstract deities, like Oavyda—Vanainti, Op\ayyo—Verethraghna, and the Amshaspand Zaopnoap—Khshathra Vairya. If it is assumed that the idea Vohu Mand was inspired by Philo or his school, the Gathas will be thereby ascribed to the first century of our era. It is just the period when we find Vologeses and the first historical mention of an attempt to form a systematic religious code. The GAthas present therefore this apparent contradiction, that, being the oldest part of the Avesta, they represent, at
2It is just the period when we find Vologeses and the first historical mention of an attempt to form a systematic religious code. The GAthas present therefore this apparent contradiction, that, being the oldest part of the Avesta, they represent, at the same time, the latest growth of the Zoroastrian spirit. ; This is contradictory only to those who in a text confound the date of its composition with the date of the ideas it expresses. The Vendidd4d may be at the same time later than the Gathas in its composition and older in its material. The writer of the Vendidad had the Gathas before his eyes, [4] € Ixvi VENDIDAD. though he expressed ideas and facts far anterior to the time when the Gathas could have been written or thought of. But if the Gathas were written in the first century of our era, it follows that they must have been written in a dead language. Names like Vaninda, Oado, Saorévar, on the Indo-Scythian coins, show that at the end of that century the Zend was no longer a living language, but had already been brought to the level of the popular Pahlavi stage. Though the possibility remains that what we call the Philonian concept may be older than Philo, its best-known exponent; and that the Gathas may therefore be brought back as far as the first or second century before Christ, an epoch when we find already the neo-Platonic spirit in the later productions of Jewish ethics, like the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. In this hypothesis, the Zend might have been still a living, or rather a dying, language, judging from its state of decomposition. As to the country to which it belonged, only one thing can be safely affirmed: it was not Persia. It may have been Media, which remained to the last the centre of Zoroastrianism and the Zoroastrian priesthood ; it may have been the eastern part. of Iran, where a modern dialect, the Afghan, appears to be a lineal descendant of the Zend. One question remains to be settled. Allowing that a part of the Avesta is post-Alexandrian, is there a part of it which belongs to the pre-Alexandrian age, namely, that part which, so far as its contents go, belongs to the old religious stratum ? Certainly it would be most hazardous to deny the existence of a sacred literature under the Achaemenian kings, though no historical evidence can be brought forward to support its assumption. Nay more, if the Gathas are supposed to have been written in a dead language, we are obliged to assume the existence of an old literature and the survival of fragments of it; for it is impossible to write in a dead language unless one has under one’s eyes models composed at a time when the language was living. But if there has ever been such a thing as an Achaemenian Avesta, and even if fragments of it were in the hands of the INTRODUCTION, IX. Ixvii
3But if there has ever been such a thing as an Achaemenian Avesta, and even if fragments of it were in the hands of the INTRODUCTION, IX. Ixvii post- Alexandrian Diaskeuasts, one thing is certain ; there is not one page of that older Avesta that is literally reproduced in the newer Avesta. Those theogonies which the Magi in the time of Herodotos sang at the sacrifice have nothing to do with our Gathas, since our Gathas contain elements which did not enter the Iranian mind till Iran was overwhelmed by the Greek conquest. Neither were they like our Yasts, because the composition of our Yasts was directed by an historical and chronological principle, of biblical origin. Only the laws of the Vendidad, which, | most of them, are as old as the older Zoroastrianism, may be supposed to be a partial reproduction of an Achaemenian Avesta; but even they are presented in a form that implies the new evolution. A Magus of the old days was as energetic as an Avesta Athravan in protecting the purity of the earth against any defilement; but he would not have spoken of the earth as Spenta Armaiti. CHAPTER IX. CONCLUSIONS. § 1. Zoroastrianism is an historical religion, that is to say, one that has changed in course of time, not only by an inner evolution, but also under the reaction of foreign schools and political events. § 2. In the remotest period, the Median priests, the — Magi, elaborated on a naturalistic basis, not different from what is found in Indian, Greek, and Italian paganisms, an original system, not free from Semitic elements. Its characteristics are: dualism, the limited duration of the world, the resurrection, the worship of pure elements, and the ethics of labour. That system spread from Media to | Persia, and was dominant under the Achaemenians. It is Zoroastrianism proper ; no direct documents of it are left ; but it is known indirectly through the inscriptions, through the testimony of the classics, and through the documents of the neo-Zoroastrianism, which received its dogmas and gave them a new form. e2 Ixviii VENDIDAD.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Of the Scythian origin of Zoroastrianism it will be idle to speak, till the advocates of the system have brought something like historical or rational evidence in its favour. The only civilisation of which we know in the neighbourhood of Media was that of the Assyro-Chal- ' daeans, which in many things was the instructor of the Medes and taught them their art, their writing, and their political organisation. Unfortunately, too little is known of the inner aspects of the Chaldaean religion. One may wonder if the Frashé-kereti, that renewal of the world that is to take place at the end of the Great year of twelve millennia, was derived from the Semitic myths of the annual revival of Adonis and Tammuz. Even the idea of resurrection seems to be attested on the so-called Cyrus’ cylinder of Babylon. If these hypotheses turn out to be correct, older Magism may be defined as an Aryan growth under Chaldaean influences. CHAPTER VIII. AGE AND GROWTH OF THE AVESTA. §1. The internal evidence of the doctrines has thus confirmed the half-historical evidence of the texts, and INTRODUCTION, VIIT. Ixv led us to believe that the Avesta is the embodiment and the fusion of two teachings, one of which belonged to the Achaemenian age, whereas the other could not be older : than the fall of the Greek domination in Iran. One might therefore divide the Avesta. so far as the doctrine goes, into pre-Alexandrian and post-Alexandrian texts. The ‘ Vendidéd may be taken as the best specimen of the texts imbued with the pre-Alexandrian spirit, as its general | laws are Achaemenian in tone, and a great part of it may be interpreted by means of classical testimonies regarding the Achaemenian age. The Gathas may be taken as the best specimen of the post-Alexandrian spirit, as they are . filled with ideas of post-Alexandrian growth. § 2. The date of the Gathas, if not exactly determinable, may yet be fixed between rather narrow limits. They can’ hardly be older than the first century before our era, or even before Philo of Alexandria ; for the neo-Platonic ideas and beings are found in them just in the Philonian stage. They cannot be dated later than the time of the Scythian kings, Kanishka and Huvishka, who reigned in India between 78 and 130 A.D., and who left on their coins records of many of the Zoroastrian divinities, not only the old elementary ones, like Metpo—Mithra, Tepo—Tighri, Oado—VAta, Mao—Maungha; but also the new abstract deities, like Oavyda—Vanainti, Op\ayyo—Verethraghna, and the Amshaspand Zaopnoap—Khshathra Vairya. If it is assumed that the idea Vohu Mand was inspired by Philo or his school, the Gathas will be thereby ascribed to the first century of our era. It is just the period when we find Vologeses and the first historical mention of an attempt to form a systematic religious code. The GAthas present therefore this apparent contradiction, that, being the oldest part of the Avesta, they represent, at
2It is just the period when we find Vologeses and the first historical mention of an attempt to form a systematic religious code. The GAthas present therefore this apparent contradiction, that, being the oldest part of the Avesta, they represent, at the same time, the latest growth of the Zoroastrian spirit. ; This is contradictory only to those who in a text confound the date of its composition with the date of the ideas it expresses. The Vendidd4d may be at the same time later than the Gathas in its composition and older in its material. The writer of the Vendidad had the Gathas before his eyes, [4] € Ixvi VENDIDAD. though he expressed ideas and facts far anterior to the time when the Gathas could have been written or thought of. But if the Gathas were written in the first century of our era, it follows that they must have been written in a dead language. Names like Vaninda, Oado, Saorévar, on the Indo-Scythian coins, show that at the end of that century the Zend was no longer a living language, but had already been brought to the level of the popular Pahlavi stage. Though the possibility remains that what we call the Philonian concept may be older than Philo, its best-known exponent; and that the Gathas may therefore be brought back as far as the first or second century before Christ, an epoch when we find already the neo-Platonic spirit in the later productions of Jewish ethics, like the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. In this hypothesis, the Zend might have been still a living, or rather a dying, language, judging from its state of decomposition. As to the country to which it belonged, only one thing can be safely affirmed: it was not Persia. It may have been Media, which remained to the last the centre of Zoroastrianism and the Zoroastrian priesthood ; it may have been the eastern part. of Iran, where a modern dialect, the Afghan, appears to be a lineal descendant of the Zend. One question remains to be settled. Allowing that a part of the Avesta is post-Alexandrian, is there a part of it which belongs to the pre-Alexandrian age, namely, that part which, so far as its contents go, belongs to the old religious stratum ? Certainly it would be most hazardous to deny the existence of a sacred literature under the Achaemenian kings, though no historical evidence can be brought forward to support its assumption. Nay more, if the Gathas are supposed to have been written in a dead language, we are obliged to assume the existence of an old literature and the survival of fragments of it; for it is impossible to write in a dead language unless one has under one’s eyes models composed at a time when the language was living. But if there has ever been such a thing as an Achaemenian Avesta, and even if fragments of it were in the hands of the INTRODUCTION, IX. Ixvii
3But if there has ever been such a thing as an Achaemenian Avesta, and even if fragments of it were in the hands of the INTRODUCTION, IX. Ixvii post- Alexandrian Diaskeuasts, one thing is certain ; there is not one page of that older Avesta that is literally reproduced in the newer Avesta. Those theogonies which the Magi in the time of Herodotos sang at the sacrifice have nothing to do with our Gathas, since our Gathas contain elements which did not enter the Iranian mind till Iran was overwhelmed by the Greek conquest. Neither were they like our Yasts, because the composition of our Yasts was directed by an historical and chronological principle, of biblical origin. Only the laws of the Vendidad, which, | most of them, are as old as the older Zoroastrianism, may be supposed to be a partial reproduction of an Achaemenian Avesta; but even they are presented in a form that implies the new evolution. A Magus of the old days was as energetic as an Avesta Athravan in protecting the purity of the earth against any defilement; but he would not have spoken of the earth as Spenta Armaiti. CHAPTER IX. CONCLUSIONS. § 1. Zoroastrianism is an historical religion, that is to say, one that has changed in course of time, not only by an inner evolution, but also under the reaction of foreign schools and political events. § 2. In the remotest period, the Median priests, the — Magi, elaborated on a naturalistic basis, not different from what is found in Indian, Greek, and Italian paganisms, an original system, not free from Semitic elements. Its characteristics are: dualism, the limited duration of the world, the resurrection, the worship of pure elements, and the ethics of labour. That system spread from Media to | Persia, and was dominant under the Achaemenians. It is Zoroastrianism proper ; no direct documents of it are left ; but it is known indirectly through the inscriptions, through the testimony of the classics, and through the documents of the neo-Zoroastrianism, which received its dogmas and gave them a new form. e2 Ixviii VENDIDAD.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.