Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

CHAP.

II.

nature of the Creator and that of the created being. In the Persian system, the Creation owed its existence to the conflicting powers of evil and good. These were subordinate to, or proceeding from, the Great Primal Cause (Zeruane Akerene), Time without bounds*, which in fact appears, as Gibbon observes, rather as a metaphysical abstraction, than as an active and presiding deity. The Creation was at once the work and the dominion of the two antagonist creators, who had balanced against each other in perpetual conflict a race of spiritual and material beings, light and darkness, good and evil. This Magianism, subsequent to the Jewish Captivityt, and during the residence of the captives in Mesopotamia, either spread with the conquests of the Persians, from the regions farther to the east, Aderbijan and Bactria, or was first promulgated by Zoroaster, who is differently represented as the author or as the reformer of the faith. From the remarkable allusions or points of coincidence between some of the Magian tenets and the Sacred Writings +, Hyde and Prideaux laboured to prove that Zoroaster§ had been a pupil of Daniel, and de

[blocks in formation]

II.

ness of

rived those notions, which seem more nearly allied CHAP. to the purer Jewish faith, from his intercourse with the Hebrew prophet, who held a high station under the victorious Medo-Persian monarchy.* But, Completein fact, there is such an originality and complete- Zoroastrian ness in the Zoroastrian system, and in its leading system. principles, especially that of the antagonist powers of good and evil, it departs so widely from the ancient and simple Theism of the Jews, as clearly to indicate an independent and peculiar source, at least in its more perfect development; if it is not, as we are inclined to believe, of much more ancient date, and native to a region much further to the east than the Persian court, where Zoroaster, according to one tradition, might have had intercourse, in his youth, with the prophet Daniel.

vesta.

If, as appears to be the general opinion of the con- The Zendatinental writers, who have most profoundly investigated the subject, we have authentic remains, or at

* The hypothesis which places Zoroaster under the reign of Darius Hystaspes, identified with the Gushtasp of Persian mythological history, is maintained_by_Hyde, Prideaux, Anquetil du Perron, Kleuker, Herder, Goerres, Malcolm, Von Hammer, and apparently by De Guignaut. The silence of Herodotus appears to me among the strongest objections to this view.

Foucher, Tychsen, Heeren, and recently Holty, identify Gushtasp with Cyaxares I., and place the religious revolution under the previous Median dynasty.

A theory which throws Zoroaster much higher up into antiquity is developed with great ability by Rhode, in his Heilige Sage.

The earlier date of the Persian
prophet has likewise been main-
tained by Moyle, Gibbon, and
Volney.

These views may in some degree
be reconciled by the supposition
that it was a reformation, not a
primary development of the reli-
gion which took place under the
Medo-Persian, or the Persian
monarchy.

The elements of the faith and the caste of the Magi were, I should conceive, earlier. The inculcation of agricultural habits on a people emerging from the pastoral life, so well developed by Heeren, seems to indicate a more ancient date. Consult also Gesenius on Isaiah, lxv. 5. Constant, sur la Réligion, ii. 187.

CHAP. least records which, if of later date, contain the true

[blocks in formation]

principles of Magianism, in the Liturgies and Institutes of the Zendavesta *; it is by no means an

* It may be necessary, in this country, briefly to state the question as to the authenticity or value of these documents. They were brought from the East by that singular adventurer, Anquetil du Perron. Sir W. Jones, in a letter, not the most successful of the writings of that excellent and accomplished man, being a somewhat stiff and laboured imitation of the easy irony of Voltaire, threw a shade of suspicion over the character of Du Perron, which in England has never been dispelled, and, except among Oriental scholars, has attached to all his publications. Abroad, however, the antiquity of the Zendavesta, at least its value as a trustworthy record of the Zoroastrian tenets, has been generally acknowledged. If altogether spurious, those works must be considered as forgeries of Du Perron. But, I., they are too incomplete and imperfect for forgeries; if it had been worth Du Perron's while to fabricate the Institutes of Zoroaster, we should, no doubt, have had something more elaborate than several books of prayers, and treatises of different ages, from which it required his own industry, and that of his German translator, Kleuker, to form a complete system. II. Du Perron must have forged the language in which the books are written, as well as the books themselves. But the Zend is universally admitted by the great Orientalists and historians of language to be a genuine and very curious branch of the Eastern dialects. (See Bopp. Vergleichende Grammatik.) It should be added, that the publication of the Zendavesta, in the original, has been

commenced by M. Bournouf in Paris, and by M. Olshausen in Germany.

III. These documents may be considered as more modern compilations, of little greater authority than the Sadder, which Hyde translated from the modern Persian. That they are of the age of Zoroaster, it may be difficult to prove; but their internal evidence, and their coincidence with the other notices of the Persian religion, scattered among the writings of the Greeks and Romans (see du Perron's and Kleuker's illustrations, especially the Persica of the latter), afford sufficient ground for supposing that they contain the genuine and unadulterated elements of the Zoroastrian faith, and, if not of primitive, are of very high antiquity. The traces of Mahometanism, which Brucker (vol. vi. p. 68.) supposed that he had detected, and which are apparent in the Sadder, are rather notions borrowed by Mahomet from the Jews; but whence obtained by the Jews, is the question. Mr. Erskine, the highest authority on such subjects, considers the existing Zendavesta to have been compiled in the age of Ardeshir Babhegan, the great restorer of the Magian faith. (Bombay Transactions.) In Professor Neuman's translation of Vartan there is a curious sentence, which seems to intimate that the books of the Magian faith either did not exist at that time, or were inaccessible to the generality.

IV. A thought has sometimes crossed my own mind (it has been anticipated by Du Perron), whether they can be the sacred books of a sect formed from an union of Gnos

II.

improbable source in which we might discover CHAP. the origin of those traditional notions of the Jews, which were extraneous to their earlier system, and which do not appear to rest on their sacred records.* It is undoubtedly remarkable, that among the Magian tenets, we find so many of those doctrines, about which the great schism in the Jewish popular creed, that of the traditionists and antitraditionists, contended for several centuries. It has already been observed, that in the later prophetic writings, many allusions and much of what may be called the poetic language and machinery, is strikingly similar to the main principles of the Magian faith. Nor can it be necessary to suggest how completely such expressions as the "children of light," and the "children of darkness," had become identified with the common language of the Jews, at the time of our Saviour: and when Jesus proclaimed himself "the Light of the world," no doubt he employed a term familiar to the ears of the people, though, as usual, they might not

tic or Manichæan Christianity with the ancient Persian religion. But there is no vestige of purely Christian tradition; and those and those points in which Parseism seems to coincide with Christianity are integral and inseparable parts of their great system. And against all such opinions must be weighed the learned paper of Professor Rask, who gives strong reasons for the antiquity both of the language and of the books. The language he considers the vernacular tongue of ancient Media. (Trans. of Asiatic Society, iii. 524.) Still, while I

appeal to the Zendavesta as au-
thority, I shall only adduce the
more general leading principles of
the faith, of which the antiquity
appears certain; and rarely any
tenet for which we have not cor-
roborative authority in the Greek
and Latin writers. The testimonies
of the latter have been collected
both by Du Perron and Kleuker.

* Mosheim has traced with
brevity, but with his usual good
sense and candour, this analogy
between the traditional notions of
the Jews and those of the Ma-
gians. De Reb. antè Const. M.ii.7.

II.

CHAP. clearly comprehend in what sense it was applicable to the Messiah, or to the purely moral character of the new religion.

}

The angels.

It is generally admitted, that the Jewish notions about the angels *, one great subject of dispute in their synagogues, and what may be called their Dæmonology, received a strong foreign tinge during their residence in Babylonia. The earliest books of the Old Testament fully recognize the ministration of angels; but in Babylonia † this simpler creed grew up into a regular hierarchy, in which the degrees of rank and subordination were arranged with almost heraldic precision. The seven great archangels of Jewish tradition correspond with the Amschaspands of the Zendavesta: and in strict mutual analogy, both systems arrayed

* La doctrine de l'existence des anges, fondé sur la révélation, a été beaucoup modifiée par les opinions des peuples qui habitaient sur les rivages du fleuve Cobar, dans la Babylonie, et dans les autres pays de l'Orient, où les deux royaumes d'Israel et de Juda furent dispersés, Sous ce point de vue on peut régarder les Mehestani, ou les sectateurs de Zoroastre, comme ceux qui ont appris beaucoup des choses aux dépositaires de la tradition, et dont les maximes se retrouvent aujourd'hui dans les deux Talmuds. Chiarini, Le Talmud de Babylone, tom. i. p. 101.

+ Even the traditionists among the Jews allowed that the names of the angels came from Babylon; they are nevertheless pure Hebrew or Chaldean. Mich-a-el (who is as God), Gabri-el, the Man of God. Gesen. Lex. in verb. Bellerman, über die Essaer, p. 30. The trans

ition from the primitive to the Babylonian belief may be traced in the apocryphal book of Tobit, no doubt of Eastern origin. On the Notions of Dæmons, see Jortin, Eccl. Hist. i. 161.

Jonathan, the Chaldean paraphrast, on Gen. ii. 7. "The Lord said to the seven angels that stand before him." Drusius, on Luke i. 19. Seven, however, seems to have been the number of perfection among the Jews from the earliest period. Old Testament, passim.

Six seems the sacred number with the Persians. The Amschaspands are usually reckoned six; but Oromasd is sometimes included to make up seven. See the Yesht of the Seven Amschaspands, in the Zendavesta of Du Perron or Kleuker. Compare also Foucher's Disquisition, translated in Kleuker, Anhang. i. p. 294.

« AnteriorContinuar »