Product Code Database
The Avestan period () is the period in the history of the Iranians when the Avesta was produced. It saw important contributions to both the Zoroastrianism, as well as to Iranian mythology and its Shahnameh.
Scholars can reliably distinguish between two different linguistic strata in the Avesta; Old Avestan and Young Avestan, which are interpreted as belonging to two different stages in the development of the Avestan language and society. The Old Avestan society is the one to which Zarathustra himself and his immediate followers belonged. The Young Avestan society is less clearly delineated and reflects a larger time span.
There is a varying level of agreement on the chronological and geographical boundaries of the Avestan period. Regarding the geographical extent of the Avesta, modern scholarship agrees that it reflects the eastern portion of Greater Iran. Regarding the chronological extent, scholarship initially focused on a late chronology, that places Zarathustra in the 6th century BCE. More recently an early chronology, that places him several centuries earlier, has become widely accepted. This early chronology would largely place the Avestan period before the Achaemenid period, making it the earliest period of Iranian history for which literary sources are available.
However, some Young Avestan texts are considered to have be revised or otherwise altered after the main parts of the corpus had already become fixed. This may indicate a composition by people who didn't speak Avestan or after Avestan ceased to be a living language. One example of such a late revision may be found in the extant Aban Yasht dedicated to Aredvi Sura Anahita. Anahita became popular under the Achaemenid kings, and some scholars have argued that certain verses in the Yasht may have been added later to reflect this rise in popularity and the Near Eastern influence that was exerted under royal patronage. A particularly late date is often considered for the Vendidad, which is assumed to have been redacted by an editor or group of editors who compiled a number of early, now-lost Avestan sources, while having only a limited command of the Avestan language. Apart from such changes and redactions, the extant Old and Young Avestan texts were then passed on orally for several centuries until they were eventually set down in writing during the Sassanid period.
On the other hand, the Younger Avestan portion of the text contains a number of geographical references that can be identified with modern locations and therefore allow to delineate the geographical horizon of the Avestan people. It is generally accepted that these place names are concentrated in the eastern parts of Greater Iran centered around the modern day countries of Afghanistan and Tajikistan.
Colors =
DateFormat = yyyy
Period = from:-1600 till:0
TimeAxis = orientation:horizontal
ScaleMajor = unit:year increment:100 start:-1600 gridcolor:grid
ScaleMinor = unit:year increment:20 start:-1600 gridcolor:smallgrid
Bardata =
Plotdata =
id:sovereign value:rgb(1,0,0) legend:Sovereign
id:subject value:rgb(1,0.5,0.5) legend:Subject
id:semi value:rgb(1,0.25,0.25) legend:Semi-independent
id:grid value:rgb(0.8,0.8,0.8)
id:smallgrid value:rgb(0.9,0.9,0.9)
bar:Iran text:"[[Iran]]"
bar:CentralAsia text:"[[Steppe|Eurasian Steppe]]"
bar:India text:"[[India]]"
bar:Avestan text:"[[Avestan Period|Avestan]]"
bar:Iran from:-678 till:-560 color:semi $wide
bar:Iran at:-660 text:"[[Median~empire|Medes]]"
bar:Iran from:-540 till:-330 color:semi $wide
bar:Iran at:-480 text:"Persian~empire"
bar:Iran from:-320 till:-125 color:semi $wide
bar:Iran at:-270 text:"[[Seleucid~Empire|Seleucid Empire]]"
bar:Iran from:-120 till:0 color:semi $wide
bar:Iran at:-105 text:"[[Parthian~Empire|Parthian Empire]]"
bar:CentralAsia from:-1600 till:-1100 color:semi $wide
bar:CentralAsia at:-1400 text:"Andronovo Culture"
bar:CentralAsia from:-900 till:0 color:semi $wide
bar:CentralAsia at:-600 text:"Scythian cultures"
bar:India from:-1500 till:-1060 color:semi $wide
bar:India at:-1400 text:"[[Early Vedic Period|Vedic Period]]"
bar:India from:-1050 till:-600 color:semi $wide
bar:India at:-920 text:"[[Late Vedic Period|Vedic Period]]"
bar:India from:-550 till:-350 color:semi $wide
bar:India at:-540 text:"[[Post Vedic Period|Mahajanapadas]]"
bar:Avestan from:-1500 till:-1000 color:sovereign $wide
bar:Avestan at:-1350 text:"Old Avestan Period"
bar:Avestan from:-900 till:-500 color:sovereign $wide
bar:Avestan at:-850 text:"Young Avestan Period"
As regards the absolute chronology, roughly two different approaches can be found in the literature; a late and an early chronology. The late chronology is based on a rather precise date for the life of Zarathustra placing him in the sixth century BCE. The Young Avestan period would therefore reflect the Seleucid Empire or even early Parthian empire period of Iranian history. This date appears in some Greek accounts of Zarathutra's life as well as in later Zoroastrian texts like the Bundahishn. The discussion around this chronology, therefore, strongly focused on the validity of these accounts, with scholars like Walter Bruno Henning, Ilya Gershevitch, and Gherardo Gnoli having made arguments in its favor whereas others have criticized them.
The early chronology assumes a much earlier time frame for the Avestan period, with Zarathustra having lived sometime in the second half of second millennium BCE (1500-1000 BCE) and the Young Avestan period, therefore, reflecting the first half of the first millennium B.C.E. (1000 - 500 BCE). This early chronology is sometimes supported by an older dating of Zarathustra's life which, while giving an implausibly early date of 6.000 year before Xerxes I, suggest that the Greeks initially placed Zarathustra into a remote past. In addition, two groups of arguments are typically made in favor of an early chronology. First, the numerous and strong parallels between Old Avestan and the early Vedic period, which itself is assumed to reflect the second half of second millennium BCE. For example, both Old Avestan and the language of the Rigveda are still very close, suggesting only a limited time frame had passed since they split off from their common Proto-Indo-Iranian ancestor. Furthermore, both depict a society of semi-nomadic pastoralists, make no mention of Iron, use chariots and engage in regular Cattle raiding. Second, the Young Avestan texts lack any discernible Persians or Medes influence indicating that the bulk of them was produced before the rise of the Achaemenid Empire. As a result, much, in particular more recent, scholarship now supports an early chronology for the Avestan period.
Due to the pastoralism visible in the Old Avestan material, a connection with the Andronovo culture has been proposed for this period. As regards the Young Avestan period, the region of southern Central Asia has attracted interest. This is due to the shift from a pastoralist to a Sedentism Agriculture lifestyle, which is indicated for the time between the Old and Young Avestan period, and the interaction of the Avestan people with Eurasian nomads, indicating a continued proximity to the Eurasian Steppe during the Young Avestan period.
During the Bronze Age, Southern Central Asia was home to a prominent urban civilization with long-range trade networks to the south. However, the middle of the second millennium BCE saw major transformations of this area, with the urban centers being replaced by smaller settlements and a shift to a mixed agricultural-pastoral economy with strong ties to the northern steppe regions. This is commonly seen as a result of the migration of Iranian tribes from the steppe. Within this context, one candidate for the Avestan society is the Tazabagyab culture in the region of Khwarazm. This is sometimes connected to the location of Airyanem Vaejah, which Zoroastrian tradition names as the early homeland of the Iranians and birthplace of the Zoroastrian faith. Another archeological culture that has attracted interest as a candidate for the Avestan society is the Yaz culture, also known as Sine-Sepulchro or Handmade-Painted-Ware cultural complex. This is due to the fact that it is also connected to the southward spread of steppe-derived Iranian populations, the presence of farming practices consisted with the Young Avestan society and the lack of burial sites, consisted with the Zoroastrian practice of Excarnation.
Kinship is perceived as concentric circles, with the innermost being the family (xvaētu), followed by the clan (vərəzə̄na) and the outermost being the tribe (airyaman). These kinship groups may relate to geographical distinctions, with the family sharing a home (dəmāna), the clan living in a settlement (vīs), and the tribe living jointly in a land (dahyu). There is a clear delineation between priest on one side and warrior-herdsmen on the other. However, it is not clear whether the later group is further separated like in the related Young Avestan and Vedic period. In the non-Zoroastrian Old Avestan society, priests are generally called karapan, whereas an officiating priest is called zaotar (compare ) and manthras are uttered by priests called mąθran (compare ).
There is no mention of horse riding but several allusion to and Chariot racing are made. The Old Avestan people knew metal working. Like the Old Vedic term for metal ayas, the meaning of the Old Avestan term aiiah is unknown, but it has been interpreted as copper/bronze, consistent with a setting in the Bronze Age.
Young Avestan society has similar concentric circles of kinship; the family (nmāna), clan (vīs) and the tribe (zantu). Together with term for land (dahyu), they are related to the Old Avestan geographical distinctions. There is now a distinct tripartite division of the society into priests (, , 'Atar priest'), warriors (, , 'he who stands in a Ratha'), and commoners (vāstryō.fšuyant, 'he who fattens cattle on pastures'). Despite the same division and the same general terms existing in the Vedic society, the specific names for Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya are different, which may reflect an independent development of the two systems. There is a single passage in the Avesta that names a fourth class, namely the craftsmen (huiti).
Society appears to be very warlike and numerous references are made to battles with nomadic raiders. Asking the gods for favors related to war is the most common request found in the Young Avestan texts. Before battle, warriors apply Apotropaic magic to shield themselves from hostile weapons. Some of these magic rituals, like using an amulet from a Haoma stalk or stroking one's body with a bird's feather, were also used by the Vedic people as described in the Atharvaveda. The army is organised at the level of clans and tribes. They march into battle with uplifted banners. Chiefs ride chariots, while commoners fight on foot and warriors on horseback. Weapons include spears, maces and short swords. There is no mention of logistics, and military campaigns were probably only organised on a small scale.
In the Young Avestan society, a number of features associated with Zoroastrianism, like the killing of Xrafstar, purity laws, the veneration of the dog, and a strong dichotomy between good and evil, are already fully present. Great emphasis is placed on procreation, and sexual activities that are not conducive to this goal, such as masturbation, homosexuality and prostitution, are strongly condemned. One of the most salient elements of the Young Avestan society was the promotion of Xwedodah (), even between direct relatives. Although it is not clear to what extent it was practiced by common people, it has been speculated that this custom was part of an Ethnogenesis in which the customs of closely related Indo-Iranian groups were deliberately inverted.
On the one hand, the term Arya (, ) also appears in ancient India as a self designation of the Vedic period. The people of the Avesta and of the Vedas share a wide range of linguistic, social, religious and cultural similarities and must have formed a at some earlier time. Yet despite the close proximity of the Avestan and Vedic Arya, it is not clear if these two peoples had any continued interaction, since neither the Avesta nor the Vedas make any unambiguous reference to the other group.
On the other hand, the Avesta mentions a number of people with whom the Arya were in continuous contact with, namely the Turiia, Sairima, Sainu and Dahi. Despite the clear delineation between the Arya of the Avesta and these other groups, they all appear to be Iranian-speaking peoples. The Turiia are the Turanians of later legends and said to live somewhere beyond the Transoxiana. On the other hand, the Sairima and Dahi have been connected to the Sarmatians and Dahae, based on linguistic similarities, whereas the identity of the Sainu is unknown. Scholars, therefore, connect these peoples with Iranic nomads that lived in the steppe zone of northern Central Asia.
When the Iranians came into contact with the civilizations of the Ancient Near East, their geographical knowledge and perspective greatly increased. Consequently, their world view became influenced by the world view of these other peoples. For example, the Sassanians often used a fourfold division of the Earth, which was inspired by the Greeks. Regardless, the world view of the Avestan period remained common well into the Islamic period, where Iranian scholars like al-Biruni fused the knowledge of a spherical Earth with the Iranian concept of the seven regions.
The Avesta present a long history of the Iranians starting with the Pishdadian dynasty who is followed by the Kayanian dynasty. The last of the Kayanians is Vishtaspa, an early convert to Zoroastrianism and an important patron of Zarathustra. An important part of these stories is the fight between the Iranians (Airiia) against their archenemies the Turanians (Turiia). In particular, their king Afrasiab and his ultimately unsuccessful attempts to acquire the Khvarenah from them are described in great detail. Overall, these stories are considered primarily mythical. Characters like Jamshid, Fereydun and Kauui Usan have counterparts in the Vedic Yama, Trita, and Kavya Ushanas and therefore must go back to the common Indo-Iranian period. Regardless, some elements may contain historical information. One example is a possible memory of the kinship between the Iranians peoples expressed through three sons of Thraetaona, namely Iraj (Airiia), Tur (Turiia) and Sarm (Sairima). Another example is the historicity of the Kayanians. Early scholarship generally accepted their historicity, whereas more recent opinions range over a wide spectrum regarding this question.
Elements of these stories and its characters occur prominently in many later Iranian texts like the Bahman-nameh, the Borzu Nama, the Darab-nama, the Kush Nama as well as most prominently in the Iranian national epic, the Shahnameh. The impact of the Avestan period on Iranian literary tradition was overall so substantial that Elton L. Daniel concluded "Its stories were so rich, detailed, coherent, and meaningful that they came to be accepted as records of actual events - so much so that they almost totally supplanted in collective memory the genuine history of ancient Iran."
|
|
