From: Francesco Brighenti
Message: 66718
Date: 2010-10-09
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@>Zoroaster's reform accepted certain divinities of Old Iranian pagan religion (which was Indo-Iranian-inherited) and repudiated certain others by labeling them as amoral and/or violent demonic beings (daevas). This negative re-evaluation affected Indra, Nanghaithya, *Saurva, Vayu (partially), and the word daeva. However, Zoroaster nowhere mentions any of the daevas by name; it is only from Pahlavi texts that we know their names (Indar, Nanghaithya, Savol, and Vayush).
> wrote:
>
> > Several modern linguists have proposed that the name Nâsatya may
> > go back to the Indo-Iranian verbal root *nas- 'to come together
> > (at home)' < PIE *nes- 'to return home safely'... In Sanskrit,
> > the name Nâsatya attributed to the As'vins would, thus, have
> > originally meant something like 'the Saviors'...
>
> Indo-Iranian root does not make much sense because in Avesta
> Nasatya are destrucive demons and don't play much of a role in
> their mythology.
> If we put a time line:Some Vedic scholars, also in recent years, have maintained that the date of composition of the Rigveda is closer to 1000 BCE than to 1500 BCE (not to speak of your certainly non-"mainstrean" 2000 BCE!). Therefore, your timeline can be emended as follows:
>
> Nasatya Rgveda ~2000 B.C
> Nasatya Mitanni ~1400 B.C
> Nanhaitya Avesta ~1000 B.C (?)
> Nestor Illiad ~700 B.C