The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-07-31

the Pahlavi lexicon published by Anquetil,
whose work vindicated itself by promoting dis
cover Eventually The Pahlayi inscriptions
gave the key to the Persian cuneiform inscrip-
tons, which in turn were to put beyond all
doubt the genuineness OF the Zend language.
Tychsen directed attention to the importance
Of the new discovery. This he wrote. lis q
proof that the Pahlayi tongue was used during
the period OF the Sasanides. for 1t was from
| them that these inscriptions emanRted this
statement was. Of course, q mistake). Just a.
IL was by them that the doctrine OF Zoroaster
was revived. One can now understand why the
Zend books are translated into PahlSvi."
II.
During the first twenty-five years Of this con-
tury the old and sterile discussions as to the
Authenticity Of the Zoroastrian text continued
In England At length came Burnouf. From the
time whom Anqpetil had published his transla-
ton. that IL to say. during seventy Year,. no
real progress had been made in the compre-
hension of the Avesta documents. The notion
that zend and sanskrit are two kindred Lam
Ruages was the only new idea evolved. but no
practical advantage for tho Interpretation Of
the text had resulted from It. It was about
1925 that Eugene Burnouf engaged In q course
OF researches on the geographical extent OF the
Aryau languages In India. After he had de-
fined the limits which divide the races
speaking Aryan lanGuaaesfr from tho native nom
BrRhmanical tribes On the south. he wanted
to discover II a similar boundary had ever
existed in the northwest. He was thus led to
study the languages Of Persia, and. FIRST Of all.
the Oldest Of them, Che Zend. As he tried to
read, however. the texts with tho help OF AnQue-
tits translation. he was surprised to find that
this was not tho clue he had expected. He saw
that two causes had misled Anquetil. On the
one hand hs Parsi teachers either imperfectly
comprehended themselves or taught him i'm
perfectly. not only the Zend. but even the Pah-
lavi intended to explain the meaning Of the
Zend; SO that the tradition on which his work
rested. being incorrect in itself. corrupted IL
from the very beginning. On the other hand,
as Sanskrit had been unknown 20 Anquetil.
and comparative grammar did not as YET exist.
he could not supply the defects Of tradition by
their aid. Burnouf. laying aside tradition az It
was presented in Anquetil's translation. con-
suited IL In o much older and purer form,
namely. In o Sanskrit version made In the If
teenth century by o Parsi In accordance with
the old Pahlavi version. He thus succeeded in
tracing the general outline Of a Zend lexicon
and in fixing the grammatical forms OF the
language, and founded the only correct method
Of interpreting the Avesta. Not far from the
same time the ancient Persian inscriptions ct
ICTbSpOhS ALI oeulbJun WbE0 ueClpn6T6Q Dy
Burnouf in Paris. by Lassen In Bonn and by
Sir Henry Rawlinson in Persia. Thus was re-
vealed tho existence. at the epoch OF the first
Achemenian Rings. Of q language closely con-
neoted with that Of the Avesta. and the last
doubts as to the authenticity Of tho Zend books
were at length removed.
We pass to a chapter on the age and growth
o the Avesta. Mr.. Darmesteter expresses the
opinion that the internal evidence furnished by
the doctrines confirms the half historical evil
dence OF the text, and leads to the conclusion
that the Avesta is the outcome Of a fusion Of
two teachings. one Of which belongs to the
Achemenian age. whereas the other cannot be
older than tho fall Of the Greek domination In
|Iran. Qur author. therefore. would divide the
Avesta.E 30 fur AZ the doctrines 60. into pre-
AleXandrian and post-Alexandrian texts. The
Vendidad he would accept as the best specimen
Of the text imbued with the pre-Aloxandrian
spirit, for its general laws are Achgmenian In
code. and q great part Of it may be interpreted
by means Of classical testimony regarding the
AchanoniRn age, The Gathas. or fragments
supplementary to the Vendidad, may be taken
as the best testimony of the post-Alexandrian
spirit. being filed with ideas Of post-Alex-
Rndrian growth. The date OF the Gathas, IL
not exactly determinable. is nevertheless fixed
by Mr.. Darmesteter between rather narrow
limits. In his Judgment they can hardly he
older thaff-the first century before our era, for
the Neo-Platonic ideas are found in them ia the
Philonian guise. They cannot be dated later
than the time Of tho Scythian kings who
reiRned In India between 10 and 100 A. D.,
who left on their coin records OF many OF tho
Zoroastrian divinlties. not only the old ele-
mentary ones but also the now abstract deities.
Ono question remains to be settled. Allowing
that a part OF the Avesta ia post A~lexandrian,
can we say positively that there is also a part
which belongs to the Professionalism age. q
part. In othor words. which. 30 far as its con-
tents 20. belongs to the old religious stratum 7
Mr.. DarInesteter thinks that It would be hazard
Gus to deny the existence OF q sacred literature
under the AchBmenian kings. although no his
torical evidence can be brought forward to sup
port the assumption that It existed. In truth,
If the dathas themselves are supposed to
have been written in a dead language. We are
obliged to assume the existence Of an elder
literature and the survival Of fragments OF It;
for 1t is impossible to write in a dead language
unless one has under ones eyes models COM
posed at a time when the language was living.
Nevertheless. II there ever was such a thing as
an Achemenian Avesta. and even II fragments
OF 1t were in the hands of the post Alexandrian
eompilers. one thing Is pronounced certain,
namely. that there Is not one page of that older
Avesta which is literally reproduced d. In the newer
AVeeta. Inc theoRonles which the Magi In the
time OF Herodotus sang at the sacrifices have
nothing to do with our Gathas. since these con-
tain elements which did not enter the Iranian
mind until Iran was overrun by the Greek con-
querors. Only the laws OF the Vendidad, most Of
which are as old as the older Zoroastrianism,
may be thought a partial reproduction of an
Achemenian Ayesta but even they are pre-
sented In a form that implies the now evolution.
III.
For the other chapters Of the Introduction we
must refer the reader to the book itself. and
conhne ourselves to the conclusions at which
the author arrives. Zoroastrianism is an his
torieal religion. that Is to say one that has