Proto-Indo-Iranian religion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Proto-Indo-Iranian religion is the term for the religion and beliefs of the Proto-Indo-Iranians, that is, the common predecessor of the various Indo-Iranian peoples.
Contents |
[edit] Introduction
The Indo-Iranians, i.e. speakers of Indo-Iranian languages, include three different subgroups: speakers of the Indo-Aryan languages (that is, the Indic branch including the Dardic languages); speakers of the Iranian languages (both east and west) and speakers of the Nuristani languages.
From the beliefs of these various and dispersed cultures, a set that is common to all may be reconstructed. This hypothetical (because unattested) set is then what is in academic circles recognized as the beliefs of the Proto-Indo-Iranians, and from which the various religions of the various Indo-Iranian peoples then descended. Divinities and divine concepts that can be reconstructed for this hypothetical Proto-Indo-Iranian religion include the universal force *rta (Vedic rta, Avestan asha), the sacred plant and drink*sauma (Vedic Soma, Avestan Haoma), and deities of social order such as *mitra (Vedic Mitra, Avestan and Old Persian Mithra, Miϑra), "*bhaga" (Vedic Bhaga, Avestan and Old Persian Baga).
However, the beliefs developed in different ways as cultures separated and evolved. For example, while in the 'Indic' branch Bhaga is a minor divinity in its own right, in the Iranian branch 'Baga' is a generic term for an (otherwise nameless) deity or group of deities. Similarly, the cosmological mythology of the peoples that remained on the Central Asian steppes and the Iranian plateau is to a great degree unlike that of the Indians, perhaps in part because the Indians tended to focus less on the groups of deities (*daiva and *asura) and more on the divinities individually, while in Iranian lore the greater scheme - in which the divinities each play a part - gained attention. By the time of Zoroaster, Iranian culture had also been subject to the upheavals of the Iranian Heroic Age (late Iranian Bronze Age, 1800-800 BCE), an influence that the Indians were not subject to. Moreover, the Indians, unlike the more conservative Iranians, were quite creative in their treatment of their divinities. As a result, some deities were conflated with others, or splitting occurred, that is, aspects of a divinity developed into divinities in their own right.
Sometimes certain myths developed into ones altogether different from their counterparts: For example, the Rig-Vedic Sarasvati is linguistically and functionally cognate with Avestan *Haraxvaitī Ārəduuī Sūrā Anāhitā. In the Rig-Veda (6,61,5-7) she battles a serpent called Vritra, who has hoarded all of the earth's water. In contrast, Iranian *Harahvati is the world-river that flows down from the mythical central Mount Hara. But *Harahvati does no battle - she is blocked by an obstacle (Avestan for obstacle: vərəϑra) placed there by Angra Mainyu. This tale, already attested in early portions of the Avesta, remained in common use as late as the 1st century CE, for from that century we have a Greek inscription dedicated to "Great Anaitis of High Hara".
[edit] Cognate terms and concepts
The following is a list of cognate terms and concepts that may be gleaned from comparative linguistic analysis of the RigVeda and Avesta. Both collections are from the period after the proposed date of separation (ca. 2nd millennium BCE) of the Proto-Indo-Iranians into their respective Indic and Iranian branches.
| Indo-Iranian | Vedic term | Avestan term | Common meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| *ap | āp | āp | "water," āpas "the Waters" |
| Apam Napat, Apām Napāt | Apām Napāt | the "water's offspring" | |
| *aryaman | aryaman | airyaman | "Arya-hood" (lit:** "member of Arya community") |
| *(a)rta | rta | asha/arta | "active truth", extending to "order" & "righteousness" |
| *athar-van- | atharvan | aϑrauuan | "priest" |
| *azi | ahi | azhi, (aži) | "dragon, snake", "serpent" |
| *daiva | deva | daeva, (daēuua) | a class of divinities |
| *manu | manu | manu | "man" |
| *mi-tra- | mitra | mithra, miϑra | "oath, covenant" |
| *nsura | asura | ahura | a class of divinities active in the social field |
| *sarvatāt | sarvatat | Hauruuatāt | "intactness", "perfection" |
| *saras-vnt-ih | Sarasvatī | Haraxvaitī (Ārəduuī Sūrā Anāhitā) | a mythological river, a river goddess |
| *sau-ma- | soma | haoma | a plant, deified |
| *sva(h)r- | svar | hvar, xvar | the Sun, also cognate to Greek helios, Latin sol, Engl. Sun |
| *vr-tra- | Vrtra- | verethra, vərəϑra (cf. Verethragna, Vərəϑraγna) | "obstacle" |
| *yama | Yama | Yima | son of the solar deity Vivasvant/Vīuuahuuant |
| *yaj-na- | yajña | yasna, rel: yazata | "worship, sacrifice, oblation" |
[edit] Relationship to Proto-Indo-European religion
- Main article: Proto-Indo-European religion
In the 1800s, because Vedic texts were (until then) the oldest surviving evidence of early Indo-European speaking peoples, it was assumed that these texts preserved aspects of Proto-Indo-European culture with particular accuracy. It was thus thought that Indo-Iranian divinities were directly linkable to Celtic, Norse, Greek and Roman belief systems.
Many ethnologists hoped to unify these various European pantheons into a Proto-Indo-European belief system. Many such early thinkers, following Max Müller, believed that all the Indo-Iranian religions began as forms of sun worship, an idea that has been given up in the early 20th century. Such ideas influenced the emergence of New Age thinking about myth, and theories such as Jung's notion collective unconscious. More recent interpretations include those of G. Dumézil and his followers who stress the tripartite system of Indo-European religion and society. The system has more recently been expanded to four or even five functions (N. Allen).
Although the unification theories of the 19th century no longer merit scholastic attention, modern scholarship still considers Proto-Indo-Iranian religion (with its components of old Indic and old Iranian religion) to be an archaic offshoot of a similarly unattested Indo-European religion and ritual that can be reconstructed in many of their aspects, but (and not unlike scholars of Indic and Iranian religion) has moved away from considering them near-identical. Instead, since early in the 20th century, following Meillet, Thieme and Kuiper, the social function of the Indo-Iranian *Asura/Āditya deities has been stressed; they are an innovative group not found in Indo-European religion.
