« EdellinenJatka »
be Adam. Therefore it becomes evident, that there was a
Zoroaster before the time of Darius Hydaspes; for Diogenes · Laërtius procem. p. 3. makes him 6000 years prior to that time. Some have made him contemporary with Ninus, others with Semiramis (if indeed such men ever existed,) some have confounded him with Hhus, others with Mitzraim, some with Nimrod, others with Moses.
We shall discover equal indecision in the Oriental accounts; we shall find, that some imagine him to have been a Chinese, whose father's name was Espintaman, and whose mother was called Dodo, which names (as Hyde judiciously observes) cannot be Chinese ; consequently the account cannot be true. Abu Muhhammed Mustafa, in the life of Gushtasp, says,
كان هو من تلا میذة عزير سمعه و قراء عليه ثم خالفه ندعي عليه عزير حتي تجذم---فنفاه بني اسراء ببل من بينهم فسار الي طرف المشرق
He was one of the disciples of Esdras, whom he was accustomed to hear, and to whom he was also accustomed to read alternately. And Esdras cursed him, until he became leprous. Then the children of Israel expelled him from their society, and he directed his course towards the East.' Bundârí, likewise quoted by Hyde, gives a nearly corresponding relation, and says on the authority of Abu Tâafar Al Tabari, that he was an inhabitant of Palestine, and that
كان خادما لبعض تلامذة ارميا النبي عزم
he was a servant to one of the disciples of Jeremiah the prophet, in high estimation and favor with him :' and Said Ebn Batric avers, that Zorodasht lived in the days of Nahor the father of Terah. Not being persuaded of the authenticity of the Sad-der and the Zend-avesta, I adduce no examples from them.
From the Persian and Arabic accounts it therefore appears, that there must have been a Zerdusht, or that the rites of Zerdusht must have existed before the time of him, who florished in the days of Gushtasp, and that the Zoroaster, of whom we read in Porphyry de Antro Nympharum, p. 254. could not have been the first of that name. L'his is evident from the Majizat Farsee,
نرس در قدیم زمان بر دین صابيه بودند کواکب پرستیدند تا زمان كشتاسپ بن لهراسب
• The Persians in ancient times were followers of the Tsabæan religion, and adored the stars down to the time of Gushtasp son of Lohorasp;' but it must be clear, tha tthe authorities, which confound Žerdusht with Abraham, cannot be correct, and proceed in a great degree from the fables of the Targumists, and Rabbins.
From innumerable passages in the Greek writers we are able to show, that there were some of this name amongst the Chaldees, from whence has arisen a confusion almost endless, so that both the Trinity and the oracles ascribed to Zoroaster have been indefinitely called Magic or Chaldaic. An author cited by Suidas says, 'Αστρονομίαν πρώτοι Βαβυλώνιοι έφευρον διά Ζωροάστρου, μεθ' ον Οστάνης*---αφ' ών Αιγύπτιοι και Ελληνες εδέξαντο. If then upon so intricate a point, I may be permitted to indulge an opinion, I would thus solve the difficulty.
Since fromt he Scriptural records,
ויצאוּ אִתָּם מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים לָלֶכֶת אַרְצָה כְּנַעַן
it is abundantly evident, that fire-worship prevailed in Chaldæa before the days of Abram, as at that early period of the world, places were most frequently named after some prominent circumstance, and if what the Robbins aver be correct, especially what the learned Moses Ben Maimon asserts, it probably arose shortly after the time of Enos, to which æra other writers have referred the origin of Tsabaism; therefore it seems likely, that Zoroaster could not have introduced the pyréal rites. inspection into the multiform idolatry of the East, following the authority of such men as Herodotus and as Diodorus Siculus, we may safely conclude, that the pyréal rites in the oriental parts of the world were so many branches of one form of worship, which the author already adduced from Suidas, whom we can support from the Scriptures, says, were first in use among the Babylonians; for if they were addicted to astronomical researches, the ignorance and credulity of the age, as well as the nature of the study, would lead them to introduce pyréal rites in honor of the sun, which have always been inseparable from genuine Tsabaism.
May we then not scruple to say that Zoroaster was no one individual person, that Zoroaster was the cognomen of the priests of those rites, whether we find them in Chaldæa, in Persia, or in any other country, where he was affirmed to have been : and sup
posing this to be the case, shall we not at once find the incoherent accounts of the Greek historians harmonised ? No man, who knows the prevailing custom of titular cognomina in the East, will dispute this conjecture :--indeed, if other proofs were wanting, he would perceive abundant evidence in the Hebrew writings; but independent of them, the Tuzuk-i Teemoor instances five kings from the Turki annals, who by reason of their greatness are never called by their proper names,
دارا پاد شاه هند-قیصر پادشاه روم - نغفور پادشاه خطا و چین و ماچین-خانان پادشاه تركستان-شهنشاه پادشاه ایران و توران
Dārā the mighty Sovereign of Hindôstan-Cæsar (Quee săr) the mighty Sovereign of Room (Constantinople)-Fŭghfoor the mighty Sovereign of Khotā, of Cheen, and of Mācheen— Khäquan the mighty Sovereign of Túrkistān—Shehinshāh (literally king of kings) the mighty Sovereign of Irān and Tooran: and the quotation from the Jehan Āra proves, that Zerdusht was the cognomen of Dâada, who now has been shown merely to have been the renovator of that worship, which probably had begun to have been neglected. One proof therefore supports the other, since it is manifest that men had cognomina from their different functions or from certain actions performed by them, and that cities received their names not arbitrarily, but from certain rites and ceremonies, or from some memorable circumstance relating to them; thus among other instances Pithom, of which we read in Exodus 1. 11. is said by the Cophts to be IEO U BORIHEN IIRDU PDU DCCH Pethom, a city in the land of Ramesses, but by the Greeks to be ηρώων πόλις εν γή “Ραμεσση.
If this be correct, what is the signification of the term Zerdusht or Zoroaster? it cannot be Bryant's Sol Asterius, it cannot be the vivum astrum Gücv žrtgov of Clemens Alexandrinus; and what authority or reason have we to presume, that it is actposórns? That it stands for Cinga sf the friend of fire, as Texeira was informed, is impossible ; because Hyde most accurately objects to an 1 with a medda undergoing aphæresis, as not common to the language, and instances that jj simply means gold : in like manner we may object, that ca for Cunga is also inadmis. sible, because the Persian possesses is, meaning a desert, and
ima meaning a hand; according therefore to this deduction the wi must be placed for the cow, which indeed sometimes occurs in MSS., and by the omission of , the word must suffer Syncope, which necessarily induces improbability, and in fact begs the question. This derivation seems to have been adopted from the supposed coincidence of Abraham and Zerdusht; which appears in a great degree to be founded upon the circumstance of Abraham leaving Ur of the Chaldees, and of his father's name being jil or fire, according to one Muhhammedan tradition. But as the Greek writers inform us, that he was also called Zapálenso Bryant is perfectly inconsistent with his own arbitrary system in objecting to the term Zerdusht; especially as he oftentimes owns the propensity of the Greeks to alter words, and to accommodate them to their own terminations, and there is as much, if not greater, difference between Ormuzd and Oromasdes, Aherman and Arimanius, Mihr and Mithras, Ardeshir and Artaxerxes, which is the Septuagint version of Ahasuerus, &c., as between the words in debate : but he is decidedly of opinion, that the rites came from the Chaldeans to the Persians.
Could it however be proved, that the Babylonian priests had a sacred language, like those of India, of Ægypt and of Persia, (as appears from the inscriptions at Istakhar,) and could it be demonstrated, that that tongue had an affinity with the Sanskrịta, as the others had, we could easily explain the meaning of the terms Zoroaster and Zarades. On etymological deductions however I place little reliance, excepting when there appears to be either authority or strong probability to recommend them. But if we have recourse to the Sanskrita, which is a tongue “ of the most unfathomable antiquity," we may rest certain, that the first syllable is Soora or Soorya the Sun : now if we compound this with Truta it will imply the science of the Sun: if however we adopt a derivative of the root sram to perform religious austerities, whence the order of the priesthood is called ásrama, we shall have a direct allusion to the sacerdotal office of Zoroaster, which will also be the case, if we compound Soorya the Sun with the participle of the verb sri to worship, to serve. And great probability arises in favor of the latter, because if we compound Soora the Sun with dasa a servant, we have precisely the same signification, and the Greek Zagáins: and this is also the Persian indgjg since in some
.; ; gical conjecture is left without the least reserve to the discretion VOL. VII. NO. XIII.
,but every etymolo ززراد شت and زرادشت MSS
of the reader : however if this deduction be the true, we may suppose that the Greeks had authority for interpreting it dotpoθότης. . St. John's Coll. Cam.
D. G. WAIT. 30th Jan. 1813.
INSCRIPTIONS FOUND AT ANCIENT SAGUNTUM.
We have been favored with the following additional Inscriptions lately brought into this country, and hope to be able to give some explanation
of them in a future number. The following rules are collected from some of the most distinguished Spanish
antiquaries. 1. The characters both of the Celtiberians, and of the Turdetani, are to be chiefly referred to the most ancient Greek and Etruscan.
2. There are several letters admitted to be doubtful.