The Date of Zoroaster and the Rgveda
By Arthur Berriedale Keith
Summary
Professor Johannes Hertel argues that the date of Zoroaster and the Rgveda must be determined primarily through textual evidence rather than Indian tradition. He posits that Zoroaster’s activity occurred around 550 BCE, with the Rgveda being largely contemporary to the Avesta. This challenges earlier assumptions about the chronology of Aryan influence in India. Herodotus’ account of Persian religion reflects pre-Zoroastrian nature worship, emphasizing rituals like animal sacrifice and the veneration of natural elements, with no mention of Zoroastrian dualism or ethical reforms. Hertel contrasts this with Zoroaster’s teachings, which introduced moral dualism, rejected old practices like Haoma offerings and animal sacrifice, and opposed the Magoi priests’ extreme rituals. However, scholars dispute Hertel’s conclusion that Zoroaster’s teachings were little known in his time, noting that Herodotus’ silence does not necessarily indicate a recent reform but could reflect Zoroaster’s antiquity. The Lydian Xanthos, contemporary to Artaxerxes I (5th century BCE), cites Zoroaster as a Magi from 6,000 years before Xerxes’ invasion, though some traditions suggest 600 years. This aligns with earlier estimates, further complicating Hertel’s late dating. The text underscores the complexity of reconciling textual, archaeological, and traditional evidence in establishing the timeline of Zoroaster and the Rgveda.
Conclusion
This study challenges traditional reliance on Indian tradition for dating the Rgveda, advocating instead a text-centric approach supplemented by external evidence. By aligning the Rgveda's composition with the Avesta and situating Zoroaster's activity around 550 BCE, it proposes a contemporary timeline for these foundational texts. The analysis highlights Zoroaster's moral dualism as a reformist departure from older Iranian nature worship, contrasting Herodotus' portrayal of pre-Zoroastrian practices with the Avesta's later dualistic framework. While questioning Hertel's claims about Zoroaster's social status, the study underscores the significance of re-evaluating Aryan religious history through primary sources, offering a revised perspective on the interplay between tradition and historical criticism in understanding ancient India's religious evolution.