The original form of the Persian religion has been already described
under the head of the third or Median monarchy. It was identical with
the religion of the Medes in its early shape, consisting mainly in
the worship of Ahura-Mazda, the acknowledgment of a principle of
evil--Angro-Mainyus, and obedience to the precepts of Zoroaster. When
the Medes, on establishing a wide-spread Empire, chiefly over races by
whom Magism had been long professed, allowed the creed of their subjects
to corrupt their own belief, accepted the Magi for their priests, and
formed the mixed religious system of which an account has been given in
the second volume of this work, the Persians in their wilder country,
less exposed to corrupting influences, maintained their original faith
in undiminished purity, and continued faithful to their primitive
traditions. The political dependence of their country upon Media during
the period of the Median sway made no difference in this respect; for
the Medes were tolerant, and did not seek to interfere with the creed of
their subjects. The simple Zoroastrian belief and worship, overlaid by
Magism in the now luxurious Media, found a refuge in the rugged Persian
uplands, among the hardy shepherds and cultivators of that unattractive
region, was professed by the early Achaemenian princes, and generally
acquiesced in by the people.
The main feature of the religion daring this first period was the
acknowledgment and the worship of a single supreme God--“the Lord God of
Heaven”--“the giver (i.e. maker) of heaven and earth”--the disposer of
thrones, the dispenser of happiness. The foremost place in inscriptions
and decrees was assigned, almost universally, to the “great god,
Ormazd.” Every king, of whom we have an inscription more than two lines
in length, speaks of Ormazd as his upholder; and the early monarchs
mention by name no other god. All rule “by the grace of Ormazd.” From
Ormazd come victory, conquest, safety, prosperity, blessings of every
kind. The “law of Ormazd” is the rule of life. The protection of Ormazd
is the one priceless blessing for which prayer is perpetually offered.
While, however, Ormazd holds this exalted and unapproachable position,
there is still an acknowledgment made, in a general way, of “other
gods.” Ormazd is “the greatest of the gods” (_mathista baganam_). It is
a usual prayer to ask for the protection of Ormazd, together with that
of these lesser powers (_hada bagaibish_). Sometimes the phrase is
varied, and the petition is for the special protection of a certain
class of Deities--the _Dii familiares_--or “deities who guard the
house.”
The worship of Mithra, or the Sun, does not appear in the inscriptions
until the reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon, the victor of Cunaxa. It is,
however, impossible to doubt that it was a portion of the Persian
religion, at least as early as the date of Herodotus. Probably it
belongs, in a certain sense, to primitive Zoroastrianism, but was kept
in the background during the early period, when a less materialistic
worship prevailed than suited the temper of later times.
Nor can it be doubted that the Persians held during this early period
that Dualistic belief which has been the distinguishing feature of
Zoroastrianism from a time long anterior to the commencement of the
Median Empire down to the present day. It was not to be expected
that this belief would show itself in the inscriptions, unless in the
faintest manner; and it can therefore excite no surprise that they are
silent, or all but silent, on the point in question. Nor need we wonder
that this portion of their creed was not divulged by the Persians to
Herodotus or to Xenophon, since it is exactly the sort of subject on
which reticence was natural and might have been anticipated. Neither the
lively Halicarnassian, nor the pleasant but somewhat shallow Athenian,
had the gift of penetrating very deeply into the inner mind of a
foreign people; added to which, it is to be remembered that they were
unacquainted with Persia Proper, and drew their knowledge of Persian
opinions and customs either from hearsay or from the creed and practices
of the probably mixed garrisons which held Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt.
Persian worship, in these early times, was doubtless that enjoined by
the Zendavesta, comprising prayer and thanksgiving to Ormazd and the
good spirits of his creation, the recitation of Gathas or hymns, the
performance of sacrifice, and participation in the Soma ceremony.
Worship seems to have taken place in temples, which are mentioned
(according to the belief of most cuneiform scholars) in the Behistun
inscription. Of the character of these buildings we can say nothing.
It has been thought that those two massive square towers so similar in
construction, which exist in a more or less ruined condition at Murgab
and Nakhsh-i-Rustam, are Persian temples of the early period, built to
contain an altar on which the priests offered victims. But the absence
of any trace of an altar from both, the total want of religious emblems,
and the extremely small size of the single apartment which each tower
contains, make strongly against the temple theory; not to mention that a
much more probable use may be suggested for the buildings.
With respect to the altars upon which sacrifice was offered, we are not
left wholly without evidence. The Persian monarchs of the early period,
including Darius Hystaspis, represented themselves on their tombs in the
act of worship. Before them, at the distance of a few feet, stands an
altar, elevated on three steps, and crowned with the sacrificial fire.
Its form is square, and its only ornaments are a sunken squared recess,
and a strongly projecting cornice at top. The height of the altar,
including the steps, was apparently about four and a half feet. [PLATE
LVIII., Fig. 4.]
The Persians’ favorite victim was the horse; but they likewise
sacrificed cattle, sheep, and goats. Human sacrifices seem to have been
almost, if not altogether, unknown to them, and were certainly alien to
the entire spirit of the Zoroastrian system. The flesh of the victim was
probably merely shown to the sacred fire, after which it was eaten by
the priests, the sacrificer, and those whom the latter associated with
himself in the ceremony.
The spirit of the Zendavesta is wholly averse to idolatry, and we may
fully accept the statement of Herodotus that images of the gods were
entirely unknown to the Persians. Still, they did not deny themselves a
certain use of symbolic representations of their deities, nor did
they even scruple to adopt from idolatrous nations the forms of their
religious symbolism. The winged circle, with or without the addition of
a human figure, which was in Assyria the emblem of the chief Assyrian
deity, Asshur, became with the Persians the ordinary representation of
the Supreme God, Ormazd, and, as such, was placed in most conspicuous
positions on their rock tombs and on their buildings. [PLATE LVIII.,
Fig. 7.] Nor was the general idea only of the emblem adopted, but all
the details of the Assyrian model were followed, with one exception. The
human figure of the Assyrian original wore the close-fitting tunic, with
short sleeves, which was the ordinary costume in Assyria, and had on
its head the horned cap which marked a god or a genius. In the Persian
counterpart this costume was exchanged for the Median robe, and a tiara,
which was sometimes that proper to the king,23 sometimes that worn with
the Median robe by court officers. [PLATE LVIII., Fig. 7.]
Mithra, or the Sun, is represented in Persian sculptures by a disk or
orb, which is not four-rayed like the Assyrian, but perfectly plain
and simple. In sculptures where the emblems of Ormazd and Mithra occur
together, the position of the former is central, that of the latter
towards the right hand of the tablet. The solar emblem is universal on
sculptured tombs, but is otherwise of rare occurrence.
Spirits of good and evil, the Ahuras and Devas of the mythology, were
represented by the Persians under human, animal, or monstrous forms.
There can be little doubt that it is a good genius--perhaps the
“well-formed, swift, tall Serosh”--who appears on one of the square
pillars set up by Cyrus at Pasargadae. This figure is that of a colossal
man, from whose shoulders issue four wings, two of which spread upwards
above his head, while the other two droop and reach nearly to his feet.
[PLATE LIX.] It stands erect, in profile, with both arms raised and the
hands open. The costume of the figure is remarkable. It consists of a
long fringed robe reaching from the neck to the ankles--apparently of
a stiff material, which conceals the form--and of a very singular
head-dress. This is a striped cap, closely fitting the head,
overshadowed by an elaborate ornament, of a character purely Egyptian.
First there rise from the top of the cap two twisted horns, which,
spreading right and left, become a sort of basis for the other forms to
rest upon. These consist of two grotesque human-headed figures, one at
either side, and of a complex triple ornament between them, clumsily
imitated from a far more elegant Egyptian model. [PLATE LX., Fig. 1.]
[Illustration: PLATE LIX.]
The winged human-headed bulls, which the Persians adopted from the
Assyrians, with very slight modifications, were also, it is probable,
regarded as emblems of some god or good genius. They would scarcely
otherwise have been represented on Persian cylinders as upholding the
emblem of Ormazd in the same way that human-headed bulls uphold the
similar emblem of Asshur on Assyrian cylinders. [PLATE LX., Fig. 2.]
Their position, too, at Persepolis, where they kept watch over the
entrance to the palace, accords with the notion that they represented
guardian spirits, objects of the favorable regard of the Persians. Yet
this view is not wholly free from difficulty. The bull appears in
the bas-reliefs of Persepolis among the evil, or at any rate hostile,
powers, which the king combats and slays; and though in these
representations the animal is not winged or human-headed, yet on some
cylinders apparently Persian, the monarch contends with bulls of exactly
the same type as that which is assigned in other cylinders to the
upholders of Ormazd. It would seem therefore that in this case the
symbolism was less simple than usual, the bull in certain combinations
and positions representing a god or a good spirit, while in others he
was the type of a deva or evil genius.
[[Illustration: PLATE LX.]
The most common representatives of the Evil Powers of the mythology
were lions, winged or unwinged, and monsters of several different
descriptions. At Persepolis the lions which the king stabs or strangles
are of the natural shape, and this type is found also upon gems and
cylinders; but on these last the king’s antagonist is often a winged,
while sometimes he is a winged and horned, lion. [PLATE LX., Fig. 3.]
The monsters are of two principal types. In both the forms of a bird and
a beast are commingled; but in the one the bird, and in the other the
beast predominates. Specimens are given [PLATE LX., Fig. 4] taken from
Persian gems and cylinders.
Such seems to have been, in outline, the purer and more ancient form
of the Persian religion. During its continuance a fierce iconoclastic
spirit animated the princes of the Empire, who took every opportunity of
showing their hatred and contempt for the idolatries of the neighboring
nations, burning temples, confiscating or destroying images, scourging
or slaying idolatrous priests, putting a stop to festivals,
disturbing tombs, smiting with the sword animals believed to be divine
incarnations. Within their own dominions the fear of stirring up
religious wars compelled them to be moderately tolerant, unless it
were after rebellion, when a province lay at their mercy; but when they
invaded foreign countries, they were wont to exhibit in the most open
and striking way their aversion to materialistic religions. In Greece,
during the great invasion, they burned every temple that they came near;
in Egypt, on their first attack, they outraged every religious feeling
of the people.
It was during this time of comparative purity, when the anti-idolatrous
spirit was in full force, that a religious sympathy seems to have drawn
together the two nations of the Persians and the Jews. Cyrus evidently
identified Jehovah with Ormazd, and, accepting as a divine command the
prophecy of Isaiah, undertook to rebuild their temple for a people who,
like his own, allowed no image of God to defile the sanctuary. Darius,
similarly, encouraged the completion of the work, after it had been
interrupted by the troubles which followed the death of Cambyses. The
foundation was thus laid for that friendly intimacy between the two
peoples, of which we have abundant evidence in the books of Ezra,
Nehemiah, and Esther, a friendly intimacy which caused the Jews to
continue faithful to Persia to the last, and to brave the conqueror
of Issus rather than desert masters who had shown them kindness and
sympathy.
The first trace that we have of a corrupting influence being brought
to bear on the Persian religion is connected with the history of the
pseudo-Smerdis. According to Herodotus, Cambyses, when he set out on
his Egyptian expedition, left a Magus, Patizeithes, at the capital, as
comptroller of the royal household. The conferring of an office of such
importance on the priest of an alien religion is the earliest indication
which we have of a diminution of zeal for their ancestral creed on the
part of the Achaemenian kings, and the earliest historical proof of the
existence of Magism beyond the limits of Media. Magism was really, it
is probable, an older creed than Zoroastrianism in the country where the
Persians were settled; but it now, for the first time since the Persian
conquest, began to show itself, to thrust itself into high places, and
to attract general notice. From being the religion of the old Scythic
tribes whom the Persians had conquered and whom they held in subjection,
it had passed into being the religion of great numbers of the Persians
themselves. The same causes which had corrupted Zoroastrianism in Media
soon after the establishment of the Empire, worked also, though more
slowly, in Persia, and a large section of the nation was probably weaned
from its own belief, and won over to Magism, before Cambyses went
into Egypt. His prolonged absence in that country brought matters to
a crisis. The Magi took advantage of it to attempt a substitution
of Magism for Zoroastrianism as the religion of the state. When
this attempt failed, there was no doubt a reaction for a time, and
Zoroastrianism thought itself triumphant. But a foe is generally most
dangerous when he is despised. Magism, repulsed in its attempt to oust
the rival religion, derived wisdom from the lesson, and thenceforth set
itself to sap the fortress which it could not storm. Little by little
it crept into favor, mingling itself with the old Arian creed, not
displacing it, but only adding to it. In the later Persian system the
Dualism of Zoroaster and the Magian elemental worship were jointly
professed--the Magi were accepted as the national priests--the rights
and ceremonies of the two religions were united--a syncretism not
unusual in the ancient world blended into one two creeds originally
quite separate and distinct, but in few respects antagonistic--and the
name of Zoroaster being still fondly cherished in the memory of the
nation, while in their practical religion Magian rites predominated,
the mixed religion acquired the name, by which it was known to the later
Greeks, of “the Magism of Zoroaster.”
The Magian rites have been described in the chapter on the Median
Religion. Their leading feature was the fire-worship, which is still
cherished among those descendants of the ancient Persians who did
not submit to the religion of Islam. On lofty spots in the high
mountain-chain which traversed both Media and Persia, fire-altars were
erected, on which burnt a perpetual flame, watched constantly lest it
should expire, and believed to have been kindled from heaven. Over the
altar in most instances a shrine or temple was built; and on these
spots day after day the Magi chanted their incantations, displayed
their barsoms or divining-rods, and performed their choicest ceremonies.
Victims were not offered on these fire-altars. When a sacrifice took
place, a fire was laid hard-by with logs of dry wood, stript of their
bark, and this was lighted from the flame which burned on the altar.
On the fire thus kindled was consumed a small part of the fat of the
victim; but the rest was cut into joints, boiled, and eaten or sold
by the worshipper. The true offering, which the god accepted, was,
according to the Magi, the soul of the animal.
If human victims were ever really offered by the Persians as sacrifices,
it is to Magian influence that the introduction of this horrid practice
must be attributed, since it is utterly opposed to the whole spirit of
Zoroaster’s teaching. An instance of the practice is first reported in
the reign of Xerxes, when Magism, which had been sternly repressed by
Darius Hystaspis, began once more to lift its head, crept into favor
at Court, and obtained a status which it never afterwards forfeited.
According to Herodotus, the Persians, on their march into Greece,
sacrificed, at Ennea Hodoi on the Strymon river, nine youths and nine
maidens of the country, by burying them alive. Herodotus seems to have
viewed the act as done in propitiation of a god resembling the Grecian
Pluto; but it is not at all certain that he interpreted it correctly.
Possibly he mistook a vengeance for a religious ceremony. The Brygi, who
dwelt at this time in the vicinity of Ennea Hodoi, had given Mardonius
a severe defeat on a former occasion; and the Persians were apt to
treasure up such wrongs, and visit them, when occasion offered, with
extreme severity.
When the Persians had once yielded to the syncretic spirit so far as to
unite the Magian tenets and practices with their primitive belief, they
were naturally led on to adopt into their system such portions of the
other religions, with which they were brought into close contact, as
possessed an attraction for them. Before the date of Herodotus they had
borrowed from the Babylonians the worship of a Nature-Goddess, whom the
Greeks identified at one time with Aphrodite, at another with Artemis,
at another (probably) with Here, and had thus made a compromise with one
of the grossest of the idolatries which, theoretically, they despised
and detested. The Babylonian Venus, called in the original dialect of
her native country Nana, was taken into the Pantheon of the Persians,
under the name of Nansea, Anaea, Anaitis, or Tanata, and became in a
little while one of the principal objects of Persian worship. At first
idolatry, in the literal sense, was avoided; but Artaxerxes Mnemon, the
conqueror of Cunaxa, an ardent devotee of the goddess, not content with
the mutilated worship which he found established, resolved to show his
zeal by introducing into all the chief cities of the Empire the image
of his patroness. At Susa, at Persepolis, at Babylon, at Ecbatana, at
Damascus, at Sardis, at Bactra, images of Anaitis were set up by his
authority for the adoration of worshippers. It is to be feared that at
this time, if not before, the lascivious rites were also adopted, which
throughout the East constituted the chief attraction of the cult of
Venus.
With the idolatry thus introduced, another came soon to be joined.
Mithra, so long an object of reverence, if not of actual worship, to
the Zoroastrians, was in the reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon, honored, like
Anaitis, with a statue, and advanced into the foremost rank of deities.
The exact form which the image took is uncertain; but probability is in
favor of the well-known type of a human figure slaying a prostrate bull,
which was to the Greeks and Romans the essential symbol of the Mithraic
worship. The intention of this oft-repeated group has been well
explained by Hyde, who regards it as a representation of the Sun
quitting the constellation of Taurus, the time when in the East his
fructifying power is the greatest. The specimens which we possess of
this group belong to classical art and to times later than Alexander;
but we can scarcely suppose the idea to have been Occidental. The
Western artists would naturally adopt the symbolism of those from whom
they took the rites, merely modifying its expression in accordance with
their own aesthetic notions.
Towards the close of the Empire two other gods emerged from the
obscurity in which the lower deities of the Zoroastrian system were
shrouded during the earlier and purer period. Vohu-manu, or Bah-man,
and Amerdat, or Amendat, two of the councillors of Ormazd, became the
objects of a worship, which was clearly of an idolatrous character.
Shrines were built in their honor, and were frequented by companies
of Magi, who chanted their incantations, and performed their rites
of divination in these new edifices as willingly as in the old
Fire-temples. The image of Bah-man was of wood, and was borne in
procession on certain occasions.
Thus as time went on, the Persian religion continually assimilated
itself more and more to the forms of belief and worship which prevailed
in the neighboring parts of Asia. Idolatries of several kinds came
into vogue, some adopted from abroad, others developed out of their
own system. Temples, some of which had a character of extraordinary
magnificence, were erected to the honor of various gods; and the
degenerate descendants of pure Zoroastrian spiritualists bowed down to
images, and entangled themselves in the meshes of a sensualistic and
most debasing Nature-worship. Still, amid whatsoever corruptions, the
Dualistic faith was maintained. The supremacy of Ormazd was from first
to last admitted. Ahriman retained from first to last the same character
and position, neither rising into an object of worship, nor sinking into
a mere personification of evil. The inquiries which Aristotle caused to
be made, towards the very close of the Empire, into the true nature of
the Persian Religion, showed him Ormazd and Ahriman still recognized
as Principles, still standing in the same hostile and antithetical
attitude, one towards the other, which they occupied when the first
Fargard of the Vendidad was written, long anterior to the rise of the
Persian Power.