Ilya Gershevitch

Ilya Gershevitch
Approaches to Zoroaster’s Gathas
Iran, 33, 1995, 1-29

In 1995 there appeared in the periodical Iran a contribution which I. Gershevitch made, at the end of 1993, to an International Colloquium on new approaches to the interpretation of the Gathas, held in Croydon under the auspices of the World Zoroastrian Organisation. On this occasion I. Gershevitch reproposed Henning’s thesis in favour of dating Zoroaster between the 7^th and the 6^th century B.C.

I. Gershevitch has been followed by Gherardo Gnoli in his 1997 Ehsan Yarshater Lectures at the University of California in Los Angeles.

Ì.V. P’yankov
Zoroastr v istorii sredneì Azii: problema mesta i vremeni
Vestnik drevneI istorii, 1996/3, 3-23

P’yankov proposes a date for Zoroater between the second half of the seventh and the first half of the sixth century.

Gherardo Gnoli

Gherardo Gnoli
Zoroaster in History
Bibliotheca Persica Press, New York, 2000

Coming some two decades ater Zoroaster’s Time and Homeland, Gnoli has reconsidered his previous position, and has revived the “traditional” date: Zoroaster is thus placed in the period between the last two decades of the seventh to the middle of the sixth century B.C.:

The present work concludes, therefore, with the remark that the analysis which Jackson made of the sources a hundred years ago … should leave no room for doubt as to the fact that Zoroaster lived between the end of the 7^th and the middle of the 6^th century B.C. We may also confirm that the discovery made by H. Lewy in 1944, which was perfected by Taqizadeb in 1947, then made use of by Henning in 1949 and more recently brought into favour again by Gershevitch in 1993, allows us to be even more precise and to acknowledge the historical value ot the traditional date and, in the absence of new elements that contradict the results presented here, to state that the dates of Zoroaster are the ones that Henning gave as a third alternative …: 618-541 B.C. (165)

Jean Kellens
Zoroastre dans l’histoire ou dans le myth? À propos du dernier livre de Gherardo Gnoli
Journal Asiatique, 2001, 171-184

In a review article of the Zoroaster in History Jean Kellens defends the “unbistoricity” of Zoroaster. For him the traditional date “258 years before Alexander” can be explained by mythology as well as by history and seems incompatible with what we know about the development of the Avestan texts and the beliefs related to the millenarian doctrine:

La datation de Zarathusbtra est un élément du modèle. De mon point de vue, la date traditionnelle “258 avant Alexandre” est en théorie sans valeur historique et l’archaïsme linguistique de l’Avesta ancien est le seul indice — très imparfait, comme j’ai toujours tenu à le noter — dont nous disposons pour situer dans l’histoire, non l’homme Zarathushtra, mais les plus anciens textes où son nom est mentionné. (172)

A. Shapur Shahbazi
Recent speculations on the traditional date of Zoroaster
Studia Iranica, 31, 2002, 7-45

Shahbazi has made a “careful examination” of Gnoli’s Zoroaster in history to contradict his theses. For Shahbazi, the origins of “Zoroaster’s traditional date” could only be sought in Babylonian historical records.

Raham Asha

Raham Asha
Âdarbâd son of Mahrspend. New lights on his life and on some of his works
(forthcoming)

Raham Asha re-exmaines the date “258 (and 300) years before Alexander” (pp. 28-59).