The History of Antiquity, Vol. 5 (of 6)Duncker, Max
History
The History of Antiquity, Vol. 5 (of 6)
Duncker, Max
History, Ancient
Among the tribes of the Persians Herodotus mentions no tribe of Magi. It
would be a mistake to conclude from this that there were originally no
priests among the Persians, and to put faith in Xenophon's statement
that Cyrus was the first to give the Magians the care of the sacred
fire, "because he preferred to go on board with the pious rather than
the impious."[320] No one will maintain that the Persians in ancient
times were without worship and religious rites, or that when they
accepted the doctrine of Zarathrustra, which did not permit sacrifice
without Magians, they used the services of none but alien priests. Such
a proceeding would be absurd. The proper conclusion from the fact that
Herodotus does not mention a tribe of Magians among the Persians is that
the priestly families there were less numerous; they had not broken away
from the tribal connections to which they originally belonged, and
formed themselves into a separate community. Further, from the fact that
the priestly families of the Persians in old times had not formed
themselves into a separate community, we may conclude--and indeed the
conclusion follows from the position of Media and the notice in the
Avesta about Ragha, and the observation about the ancient teachers of
the Medes, who are said to have been followers of Zarathrustra--that the
reform of the faith first came from Bactria to the Medes, that it was
adopted and more strongly represented among them, and so passed on to
the Persians. We cannot doubt that there were Persians belonging to the
order of Magians. If Plato and his pupils call Zoroaster the "teacher of
the Magians," and at the same time "a Persian," they must assume that
there were Magians among the Persians; if, according to Plato's
statement, the four teachers of the heirs to the Persian throne, of
which one had to teach the Magism of Zoroaster, were selected out of
"all the Persians;"--if at the time of Xerxes there were Persians who
wrote on the doctrine of Zoroaster, they must have been initiated in the
wisdom and knowledge of the Magians, and have known their invocations
and customs; the contents of the holy scriptures and the scriptures
themselves can hardly have been hidden from them. In order to prove that
the Magians, _i.e._ the priests, belonged exclusively to the Medes, the
fact has been brought forward that the Persians, after Darius had
dethroned the Pseudo-Smerdis, celebrated each year the feast of the
slaughter of the Magians, at which no Magian allowed himself to be seen,
but all were obliged to remain at home.[321] The Magophonia was not the
celebration of a victory over the Magi generally, but over the removal
of a usurper, and the restoration of the dominion to the Achæmenids,
which had been taken from them by one who happened to be a Magian.
Herodotus at any rate calls this Magian a Mede.[322] Darius contents
himself with calling him the "Magian." Hence there is no ground to doubt
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account