The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads v2.c41.s1.7

v2.c41.s1.7

Ingenious as are the arguments of Hertel, it is clearly impossible to accept them as adequate to prove his thesis that Zoroaster was an earlier contemporary of Dareios I. The attitude of the king is certainly that of the adherent of a faith who believes strongly in his god; it does not prove that the faith was a new one; it might well have existed for some centuries in comparative obscurity, to be brought into prominence by the moral earnestness of a king who shared the spirit of the founder of the reformed faith and of his successors. The evidence *a priori* is simply negative in direction, and the conclusion drawn by Hertel is wholly uncertain, unless it can be supported by other evidence.