Witzel conference on Rigveda in Delhi a farce

Witzel needs an introduction: Witzel calls himself a ‘well-known scientist’ in press releases about his trips. In fact, he is  a church agent, more specifically from Dalit Freedom Network of Colorado church (proved in the CAPEEM california textbook trial).

CAPEEM Witzel deposition  http://www.scribd.com/doc/17216925/CAPEEM-Witzel-Deposition

Dossier on Witzel http://www.scribd.com/doc/17192089/Dossier-on-Witzel  

Know Witzel http://www.scribd.com/doc/17161525/knowwitzel  

WItzel's fraudulent advocacy for 'untouchables' http://www.scribd.com/doc/17021695/Witzel-untouchables

 

CAPEEM India Abroad article http://www.scribd.com/doc/16644992/CAPEEM-India-Abroad-Article

 

Witzel has admitted that he and his cohorts  were part of White Nationalist Church in USA and in contact with one or more of Fetna's members in the California textbook (Harvard Donkey Trial) matter, just as with many other Indians/NRIs and members of many other Indian organizations. FETNA is a front for LTTE. It is extraordinary that a Harvard academic should be associating with members of such an organization. FETNA in their letter of Feb. 19, 2006 to California State Board of Education wrote thanking Witzel for the efforts in proposing edits in pursuance of the Colorado evangelical church agenda, denigrating the hindu heritage to promote Japhetic biblical creationism theories and to achieve conversions of poor people dubbed 'dalits' by the church. 

 

Here is Anoop’s report of July 19, 2009 on the meet at IIC, Delhi on July 10, 2009:

[quote] I attended the session, and I feel it was not exactly a good experience for Witzel there at IIC.

The main points are:

Kapila Vatsyayan, who chaired the talk, stated many views which were indirectly aimed at Witzel and his designs.

Kapila Vatsyayan gave her opinion after the question hour by taking atleast 10 minutes (very lightly with her trade mark pleasing smile). The main points she made were:

1.     Witzel and all of the academic community working on the AIT are concentrating mainly on comparitive mythology. If myths are dissected for the purpose of finding parallels between civilizations, and historical conclusions are drawn out of them, then myths cease to be 'myths'.

2.     The main background of RgVeda is subjects like cosmology etc.(do not confuse the word cosmology with religion!!). Your studies never highlight that aspect. To create a voluminous text and start a revolution of intellectual work based on very tough subjects like cosmology, just imagination is not enough. We have to accept that. We should study how the Vedic people were able to work in such a higher intellectual plain which can't be seen anywhere else.

3.     RgVeda is poetry of very high level. And such a high level poetry, and that too with a very difficult subject as its base, cannot be made by a people who do not have a good intellectual lineage and practice. 

4.     It is not acceptable that history is tried to be proved just by using comparative mythology, linguistics or one or two other streams. There should be a multi-disciplinary approach towards learning history.

And the most interesting point she made was:

5. Everyone of us recites the Vedas to Upanishads daily without thinking who made it or where it originated. Whether it belong to Mesopotamia, or Greece or India, it never matters much to us..jo research ho raha hai..hone do..we never care for that. Because we understand the reason why we are reciting it. So please take note of this when you do the research.

People including Devendra Swarup ji, and many others attended the programme. 

I felt from the audience that the people in India (the fence sitters) have started a general dissatisfaction with the repeated promotion of the Invasion theory by these academics. Kapila ji's opinions were well enough to boost them.

Anoop [unquote]

He wrote on 19 July 2009, about his ‘conference’ in IIC, Delhi and Dr. Bhagwan Singh’s questions as follows: ‘…Nothing untoward happened, except that the infamous Hindutvavadin Bhagwan Singh (who has identified the Indus and the Vedic civilizations) refused to give his name in the question period. He did so only after the chair, Kapila Vatsyayana, had insisted 3 times. His aim: he wanted me to publicly revoke a one line sentence in an old, 1995 paper. I merely referred him to a paper of mine of 2001, end of discussion. -- This talk at the India International Centre was well attended by the general public. However I saw a watchman there too.’

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Indo-Eurasian_research/message/12741

Now read on the exquisite report of Dr. Bhagwan Singh on Witzel’s pathetic plight in the IIC meet:

 

Michael Witzel: rattled rat at IIC

 

Bhagwan Singh

22 July 2009

 

I was really sorry for Prof. Michael Witzel. After all, he was our honoured guest! Dr. Singh should not have pounced on him so mercilessly, playing the cat and the rat game – the cat looking ascetically resigned tossing the rat, the rat pretending to be dead, breathlessly looking from the corner of his eye to judge the cat’s next move, running for his life, only to be pounced upon and tossed up again. The Chair kept smiling all through at this plight of the powerful brainy Harvard Professor of Sanskrit!

 

Frankly, I enjoyed the wild play. Prof. Witzel was in a state of trauma: nervous, edgy, twitching his lips, dropping his eyelids recurrently, looking askance to avoid his interlocutor, constantly using his hanky to rub his nose, murmuring something inaudible to explain his errors, occasionally seeking help from his votaries who were present in good number, but more ignorant than their demi-god, and hence themselves dazed. Singh smiled all the way, his smile mischievous, eyes sadistically aglitter, untrue to his true nature, but true to the occasion.

 

Rgveda

 

The occasion was a lecture on the Rgveda by Prof. Michael Witzel, at the India International Centre, on 10 July 2009. Presided over by Dr. Kapila Vatsyayan, it was attended by scholars of different hues and expectations. No one suspected that Witzel with his claim to be a ranking Vedic scholar knew so little that he could not answer a single query. Indeed, he appeared blank as far as the Rgvedawas concerned. He rose nervously to speak on the Veda, but actually spoke on the Aryan migration from Afghanistan to Punjab!

 

The lecture merely reiterated what Prof. Witzel has written years ago: that north-western India was populated by Munda speaking people when Indo-Aryan speakers arrived on the scene. Old Indo-Aryan was influenced by the substrate Proto-Munda. He proposed a time bracket of 1500-1250 BC for composition of theRgveda and suggested Book IV and Book VI were the oldest, advantage Book IV.

 

Witzel painted Rgvedic society as nomadic pastoralist, illiterate and with little interest in agriculture and sedentary life. There was virtually nothing in his speech that was not lifted from nineteenth century archives. He showed no awareness of recent researches in archaeology, anthropology, literature or historical linguistics, and presented even Kuiper with his pathological distortions.

 

Many archaeologists and professors of history attended the lecture, including your writer, Vedic scholar Bhagwan Singh. When the floor was thrown open for discussions, Bhagwan Singh introduced himself as the author of The Vedic Harappans, and said that his data contradicted each and every statement made by Witzel; he sought permission to exchange notes on a few issues. With the Chair’s permission, Singh said:

 

- You have reordered the Rgvedic strata, rating IV and VI to be the oldest and the rest belonging to intermediate and late stages. I have no objection to your sequence, but find your chronology miserably on the lower side. There is a reference to white pottery in one verse in Book IV (4.27.5). White pottery is a distinctive feature of Hakra Ware dated to 3000 BC. This goes against your dating of 1500-1250 BC for the Rgveda.

 

Witzel was dumbstruck. He murmured something inaudible, avoiding the audience, looking sideways. He tried to explain that the sequence arranged by him was based on the number of verses in a book, the smallest being the oldest. It caused Kapila ji and others to smile openly. I could not make out the reason and reminded him that Book IV is shorter than Book VI; but the shortest book is Book II! So here again, he was caught on the wrong foot.

 

He hesitantly managed, “There is no evidence of chariot or horse in India earlier than the mid-second millennium.”

 

-         But Professor, the aśva in Rgveda, whatever could it have been, was brought from sea bound areas, even the aśva in the horse sacrifice, mentioned in Book I, hymn 163.

 

Prof. Witzel had no choice but to bite his lips in desperation.

 

-         You say that the wheel and chariot were invented by Aryans when they were in Central Asia, but in the Book IV itself, Bhr.gus are given the credit for manufacturing wheels (4.16.20). Chariot and wheel was therefore not Aryan, but a Dravidian invention.

 

Witzel pretended that the inventors might have been Aryans and manufacturers Dravidians! He now forgot the antiquity of Book IV, which according to his suggestion, could have been written in Central Asia, older even than Book VI, composed entirely in Northern Afghanistan; Dravidian speakers must have been there as well.

 

-         You talk of substrate effect of Proto-Munda and suggest no role of Proto-Dravidian at the early stage. But Kipper had concluded that three ethnic groups participated in a cultural process. The three are conspicuously present in the Rgveda, Bhr.gus Dravidian, Angirasas Mundari, besides the Sanskrit speakers.

 

Prof. Witzel mumbled something for a minute; his nervousness was apparent in his evasive gestures.

 

Kapila ji must have taken pity at his visible discomfort. She invited others to raise doubts, if they had any. Someone at the extreme end of the hall asked a question on the distorted reading of the Sankhyayan Śrautasutra, which had exposed his culpability half a decade back. Witzel responded by referring to an article written by him, without telling us what his defence was!

 

After a few worthless queries, the debate shrunk back to Michael Witzel, Kapila Vatsyayan, and Bhagwan Singh.

 

-         The problem with you, Professor, is that you are not familiar with the content of Book IV even. Hymn 57 of Book IV gives a graphic depiction of advanced agriculture, with a plough almost similar to the one that was common in India up to the mid-twentieth century, drawn by a pair of bullocks and driven by a ploughman in service. And in one of the Ŗics, the poet talks of milking the earth as a cow, year after year. It testifies to advanced agricultural activities with sedentary population and belies the myth of nomadism, pastoralism, and barbarity.

 

The Chair could not hold her laughter; Witzel shook in dismay.

 

The last nail was hammered by Kapila ji herself. In a jocular vein, she said, “The theme of the lecture was Rgveda. Vedic poetry is known for its sublimity and rare beauty. I expected Prof. Witzel to speak something on it, but he did not say even a word on the theme.”

 

Witzel agreed that the Hymns on Uşā are really beautiful.

 

I interjected, “not only Uşā Sūktas professor, the entire Rgveda. Some of it could never be surpassed, such as the Nāsdīya Sūkta, with such expression as tama āsīt tamasā gūlhmagre, darkness was entrapped within darkness. 

 

All in all, it was an interesting evening, if not for the presentation by Prof. Witzel, then for his discomfiture.

 

Prof. Bhagwan Singh is a Marxist scholar who accepted the archaeological evidence against the theory of Aryan invasion of India 

Vedic continuum in Hindusthan

Sangam times are from ca.300 BCE to 300 CE, when the earliest extant works of  Sangam literature). [Kamil Veith Zvelebil, Companion Studies to the History of Tamil Literature, pp12; K.A. Nilakanta Sastry, A History of South India, OUP (1955) pp 105]

The following notes include excerpts from a remarkable article which appeared in Adyar Library Bulletin (1983). These clearly indicate that Vedic culture in India dates back to very ancient times all over Hindusthan, from Gandhara to Kanchipuram. This geographic spread of Vedic culture is matched by the spread of punch-marked coins from ca. 6^th century BCE, all over Hindusthan, from Gandhara to Karur (Tiruchi).

 

Kazanas (2009) has shown that Rigveda predates the Sarasvati-Sindhu culture.

 

Vedic culture in Sangam times

 

There is a temple for Devi Sarasvati in a place called Basara (Vya_sapura) in Adilabad District of Andhra Pradesh, located on the banks of the Godavari River. The sthala pura_n.a states that the Devi was installed by Vya_sa by taking three mus.t.is(handfuls) of sand from the river bed— an extraordinary affirmation indeed of the integrat link of Sarasvati as devi and Sarasvati as river. The appended maps indicate the patterns of ancient settlements right from the foothills of the Himalayas (Ropar) to the Gulf of Khambat (Lothal) and on the Arabian Sea Coast (Prabhas Patan or Somnath and Dwa_raka). It is also significant that Sangam literature of the Tamils notes the claim of the ancient Chera kings that they were the 42nd generation descendants from the rulers of Dwaraka (Tuvarai) and the sage Agastya is revered as the ancient Tamil Muni and the author of the earliest grammatical work in Tamil. Sangam literature is replete with references to the support provided to the growth of Vedic Culture in the Tamil-speaking areas. An important article on the antiquity of relation between Tamil and Sanskrit is: Sharma, K.V. 1983, Spread of Vedic culture in ancient South India, Adyar Library Bulletin 47:1-1.

 

“Among the interesting facts that emerge from a study of the progressive spread of vedic culture from the North-West to the other parts of India, is its infusion, with noticeable intensity, in the extreme south of India where, unlike in other parts, a well-developed Dravidian culture was already in vogue… Tolka_ppiyamwhich is the earliest available work of the sangam classics, is a technical text in 1610 aphorisms, divided into three sections, dealing respectively, with phonetics, grammar and poetics…

 

The other available sangam works are three sets of collected poems, being, pattu-ppa_t.t.u (Ten idylls), et.t.u-ttokai (Eight collections) and patineki_r..kan.akku (eighteen secondary texts), which last appears to pertain to the late period of the saμgam age. The ten poems are: tirumuruka_r.r.uppat.ai, porun.ara_r.r.u-ppat.ai,cir.upa_n.a_r.r.uppat.ai, perumpa_n.a_r.r.uppat.ai, mullaippa_t.t.u, maturaikka_n~ci, net.unelva_t.ai, kuriñcippa_t.t.u, pat.t.inappa_lai and malaipat.ukat.a_m. All the above idylls are compositions of individual poets, and, except for the first, which is devotional and possibly, pertains to late sangam age, are centred round the royal courts of the Cera, Cola and Pa_n.d.ya kings, depicting the contemporary elite scholarly society and youthful life. The second category consists of Eight collections:nar.r.in.ai, kur.untokai, ainkur.unu_r.u, patir.r.ujppattu,paripa_t.al, kali-ttokai, akana_n-u_r.u and pur.ana_n-u_r.u.

 

All these collections are highly poetic and self-contained stray verses of different poets put together in consideration of their contents. The third category consists of eighteen miscellaneous texts, some of them being collections of stray verses of different poets and some composed by individual authors. They are: tirukkur.al., na_lat.iya_r, par..amor..i, tirikat.ukam, na_n-man.ikkat.ikai, cir.upañcamu_lam, ela_ti, a_ca_rako_vai, mutumor..ikka_ ñci, kalavar..i-na_r.patu, initu-na_r.patu, tin.aima_lainu_r.r.aimpatu, aintin.ai-y-er..upatu, kainnilai, aintin.ai-yanpatu, tin.aimor..i-y-aimpatu and ka_r.-na_r.patu. The verses in these works also refer to social customs and local sovereigns. The above works picture a well-knit and well-developed society having a distinct identity of its own.

 

The frequent mention, in sangam poems, of the Cera, Cola and Pa_n.d.ya kings as the munificent patrons of the poets… and the archaeological evidence provided by 76 rock inscriptions in Tamil-Bra_hmi script which corrobate the contents of the sangam works, in 26 sites in Tamilnadu (Mahadevan, I., Tamil Bra_hmi inscriptions of the Sangam age, Proc. Second International Conference Seminar of Tamil Studies, I, Madras, 1971, pp. 73-106) help to fix the date of the classical sangam classics in their present form to between 100 B.C. and 250 A.D… reference to the Pa_n.d.yan kingdom by Megasthenes, Greek ambassador to the court of Candragupta Maurya (c. 324-300 B.C.?) are also in point. On these and allied grounds, the sangam period of Tamil literature might be taken to have extended from about the 5th century B.C. to the 3rd century A.D… It is highly interesting that sangam literature is replete with references to the vedas and different facets of vedic literature and culture, pointing to considerable appreciation, and literary, linguistic and cultural fusion of vedic-sanskrit culture of the north with the social and religious pattern of life in south India when the sangam classics were in the making…

 

The vedas and their preservers, the bra_hmans, are frequently referred to with reverence (Pur.ana_n u_r.u 6, 15 and 166; Maturaikka_ñci 468; tirukat.ukam 70, na_n-man.ikkat.ikai 89, initu-na_r.patu 8). The vedic mantra is stated as the exalted expressions of great sages (Tolka_ppiyam, Porul. 166, 176). While the great God S’iva is referred as the source of the four vedas (Pur.a. 166), it is added that the twice-born (bra_hman) learnt the four vedas and the six veda_ngas in the course of 48 years (Tiru-muruka_r.r.uppat.ai, 179-82). The vedas were not written down but were handed down by word of mouth from teacher to pupil (Kur-untokai 156), and so was called kel.vi(lit. what is heard, šruti)(Patir.r.ippattu 64.4-5; 70.18-19; 74, 1-2;Pur.a. 361. 3-4). The bra_hmans realized God through the Vedas (Paripa_t.al 9. 12-13) and recited loftily in vedic schools (Maturaikka_ñci 468- 76; 656)… the danger to the world if the bra_hman discontinued the study of the veda is stressed intirukkur.al. 560. If the sangam classics are any criteria, the knowledge and practice of vedic sacrifices were very much in vogue in early south India. The sacrifices were performed by bra_hmans strictly according to the injunctions of the vedic mantras (tirumuruka_r.r.uppat.ai 94-96; kalittokai 36). The three sacred fires (ga_rhapatya, a_havani_ya and daks.ina_gni) were fed at dawn and dusk by bràhmans in order to propitiate the gods (Kalittokai 119l Pur.a. 2; 99; 122; Kur.iñcippa_t.t.u 225).Paripa_t.al 2. 60-70 stipulates, in line with vedic sacrificial texts, that each sacrifice had a specific presiding deity, that pas’us (sacrificial animals) were required for the sacrifice and that the sacrificial fire rose to a great height. The vedic practice of placing a tortoise at the bottom of the sacrificial pit is referred to in Akana_n-u_r.u 361… 

 

Patir.r.uppattu 64 and 70 glorify the Cera king Celvakkat.unkovar..iya_tan- who propitiated the gods through a sacrifice performed by learned vedic scholars and distributed profuse wealth amongst them. Another Cera king, Perum-ceral Irumpor.ai is indicated in Patir.r.uppattu 74 to have performed the Putraka_mes.t.hi_ sacrifice for the birth of his son il.amceralirumpor.ai. The Cola ruler Peru-nar.kil.l.i was renowned as Ra_jasu_yam ve_t.t.a co_r..an- for his having performed the ra_jasa_ya sacrifice; another Cola ruler Nar.kil.l.i, too, was celebrated as a sacrificer (Pur.a. 363; 400). The Cola kings were also considered to have descended from the north Indian king S’ibi the munificent of Maha_bha_rata fame (Pur.a. 39; 43). The patronage accorded to vedic studies and sacrifices is illustrated also by the descriptive mention, in Pur.a. 166, of a great vedic scholar Vin.n.anta_yan- of the Kaun.d.inya-gotra who lived at Pu_ñja_r.r.u_r in the Co_r..a realm under royal patronage. It is stated that Vin.n.anta_yan- had mastered the four vedas and six veda_ngas, denounced non-vedic schools, and performed the seven pa_kayajñas, seven Soma-yajñas and seven havir-yajñas as prescribed in vedic texts. The Pa_n.d.yan kings equalled the Colas in the promotion of Vedic studies and rituals. One of the greatest of Pa_n.d.ya rulers, Mudukut.umi Peruvar..uti is described to have carefully collected the sacrificial materials prescribed in vedic and dharmašàstra texts and performed several sacrifices and also set up sacrificial posts where the sacrifices were performed (Pur.a. 2; 15). Maturaikka_ñci (759- 63) mentions him with the appellation pal-s’a_lai (pal-ya_ga-s’a_lai of later Ve_l.vikkud.i and other inscriptions), ‘one who set up several sacrificial halls’. The Pa_n.d.ya rulers prided themselves as to have descended from the Pa_n.d.avas, the heroes of Maha_bha_rata (Pur.a. 3; 58; Akana_n-u_r.u 70; 342)…

 

God Brahmà is mentioned to have arisen, in the beginning of creation, with four faces, from the lotus navel of God Vis.n.u (Paripa_t.al8.3; Kalittokai 2; Perumpa_n.a_r.r.uppat.ai 402-04;Tirumuruka_r.r.uppat.ai 164-65; Iniyavaina_rpatu 1). It is also stated that Brahma_ had the swan as vehicle (Innà-nàrpatu 1). Vis.n.u is profusely referred to. He is the lord of the Mullai region (Tol. Akattin.ai 5) and encompasses all the Trinity (Paripa_t.al13.37). He is blue-eyed (Pur.a. 174), lotus-eyed (Paripa_t.al15.49), yellow-clothed (Paripa_t.al 13.1-2), holds the conch and the discus in his two hands and bears goddess Laks.mì on his breast (Mullaippa_t.t.u 1-3; Perumpa_n. 29-30; Kali. 104; 105; 145), was born under the asterism Tiru-o_n.am (Maturai. 591), and Garud.a-bannered (Pur.a. 56.6; Paripa_t.al 13.4). Of Vis.n.uite episodes are mentioned his measuring the earth in three steps (Kali. 124.1), protecting his devotee Prahla_da by killing his father (Pari. 4. 12-21) and destroying the demon Kes’in (Kali. 103.53-55). S’iva has been one of the most popular vedic-pura_n.ic gods of the South. According to Akana_n-u_r.u 360.6, S’iva and Vis.n.u are the greatest gods. He is three-eyed (Pur.a.6.18; Kali. 2.4), wears a crescent moon on his forehead (Pur.a.91.5; Kali. 103.15), and holds the axe as weapon (Aka. 220.5;Pur.a. 56.2). He bears river Ganga_ in his locks (Kali. 38.1; 150.9) and is blue-necked (Pur.a. 91.6; Kali. 142). He is born under the asterism a_tirai (Skt. àrdra) (Kali. 150.20), has the bull for his vehicle (Paripa_t.al 8.2) and is seated under the banyan tree (Aka. 181). Once, while sitting in Kaila_sa with Uma_ (Pa_rvati), his consort (Pari. 5.27-28; Par..amor..i 124), Ra_van.a, the ra_ks.asa king shook the Kaila_sa and S’iva pressed the mountain down with his toe, crushing Ra_van.a and making him cry for mercy (Kali. 38). When the demon Tripura infested the gods, S’iva shot through the enemy cities with a single arrow and saved the gods (Kali. 2; Pur.a. 55; Paripa_t.al 5. 22-28).Pur.ana_n –u_r.u (6. 16-17) refers also to S’iva temples in the land and devotees walking round the temple in worship. God Skanda finds very prominent mention in saμgam classics, but as coalesced with the local deity Murukan-, with most of the pura_n.ic details of his birth and exploits against demons incorporated into the local tradition (Paripa_t.al 5. 26-70;Tirumuruka_r.r.uppat.ai, the whole work). Mention is also made of Indra. (Balara_ma) is mentioned as the elder brother of Lord Kr.s.n.a, as fair in colour, wearing blue clothes, having the palmyra tree as his emblem and holding the ;lough as his weapon, all in line with the pura_n.as (Paripa_t.al 2. 20-23; Pur.a. 56. 3-4; 58.14; Kali. 104, 7-8). Tolka_ppiyam (Akattin.ai iyal 5) divides the entire Tamil country into five, namely, Mullai (jungle) with Vis.n.u as its presiding deity, Kur.iñji (hilly) with Murukan- as deity, Marutam (plains: cf. marusthali_ Skt.) with Indra as deity, Neytal (seashore) with Varun.a as deity and Pa_lai (wasteland) with Kor.r.avai (Durga_) as deity…

 

The sangam works are replete with references to the four castes into which the society was divided, namely, bra_hman.a, ks.atriya, vais’ya, and su_dra… bra_hman antan.a primarily concerned with books (Tol. Mara. 71), the ks.atriya (a-ras’a, ra_ja) with the administration (Tol. Mara.78) and s’u_dra with cultivation (Tol. Mara. 81)… It is also stated that marriage before the sacred fire was prescribed only for the first three castes; but the author adds that the custom was adopted by the fourth caste also in due course (Tol. Kar.piyal 3)… one cannot fail to identify in sangam poetry the solid substratum of the distinct style, vocabulary and versification, on the one hand, and the equally distinct subject-matter, social setting and cultural traits, on the other, both of the Tamil genius and of vedic poetry. As far as the grammar of Dravidian is concerned, a detailed analytical study of Old Tamil as represented in Tolka_ppiyam, with the vedic s’iks.a_s and pra_tis’a_khyas, has shown that, ‘Tolka_ppiyan-a_r clearly realized that Tamil was not related to Sanskrit either morphologically or genealogically… that he deftly exploited the ideas contained in the earlier grammatical literature, particularly in those works which dealt with vedic etymology, without doing the least violence to the genius of the Tamil language’. (Sastri, P.S.S., History of Grammatical Theories in Tamil and their relation to the Grammatical literature in Sanskrit, Madras, 1934, p. 231)…

 

It would be clear from the foregoing that during the sangam age there had already been intensive infusion of vedic culture in south India… Both the culturescoexisted, the additions often affecting only the upper layers of society… For novel names, concepts and ideas, the Sanskrit names were used as such, with minor changes to suit the Tamil alphabet (e.g. akin-i for agni, vaicikan- for vais’ya, veta for veda, or translated (e.g. pa_pa_n- for dars’aka, ke_l.vi for s’ruti). When, however, the concept already existted, in some form or other, the same word was used with extended sense (e.g. ve_l.vi for ya_ga; ma_l or ma_yan- for Vis.n.u). Sometimes both the new vedic and extant Tamil words were used (e.g. ti_ for agni)… It is, however, important to note that the coming together of the two cultures, vedic and dravidian, was smooth, non-agressive and appreciative, as vouched for by the unobtrusive but pervasive presence of vedicism in the sangam works. The advent of vedic culture into South India was, thus, a case of supplementation and not supplantation…

 

it is a moot question as to when vedic culture first began to have its impact on dravidian culture which already existed in south India… the age of this spread (of vedic culture) has to be much earlier than the times of the Ra_ma_yan.a and Maha_bha_rata, both of which speak of vedic sages and vedic practices prevailing in the sub-continent. Literary and other traditions preserved both in north and south India attest to the part played by sage Agastya and Paras’ura_ma in carrying vedic culture to the south. On the basis of analytical studies of these traditions the identification of geographical situations and a survey of the large number of Agastya temples in the Tamil country, G.S. Ghurye points to the firm establishment of the Agastya cult in South India by the early centuries before the Christian era (Ghurye, G.S., Indian acculturation: Agastya and Skanda, Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1977)… the considerable linguistic assimilation, in dravidian, of material of a pre-classical Sanskrit nature, it would be necessary to date the north-south acculturation in India to much earlier times.”

 

The .Rgveda pre-dates the Sarasvati-Sindhu Culture

 

N. Kazanas, Athens February 2009.

 

(The full pdf text can be read at http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indology/RPSSC.pdf )

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16187093/RPSSC

 

1. Introduction. All dates are BCE except where stated as CE (and after Authors in brackets).

 

There are several important features of the Harappan (=Sarasvati-Sindhu) Culture absent in the .V(=Rgveda). These very features are found in post-rigvedic texts (Br.hma.a, S.tra etc). Then, both the Br.hma.a explications of rigvedic brief allusions and the teachers lists in the B.had.ra.yaka Upani.ad suggest the passing of very many centuries from the composition of the RV hymns. These postrigvedic texts can be assigned to the end of the 4^th millennium on astronomical considerations and the beginning of the 3rd. Finally, the palaeoastronomical examination of star and planet allusions in the Mah.bh.rata suggest dates c 3000 or little after. All such considerations suggest a RV of many centuries earlier.

 

Thus, since the SSC (=Sarasvati-Sindhu Culture) arises c3000 and the RV knows nothing of its important features, then its composition must be placed several centuries earlier. Since the river Sarasvat. was flowing to the ocean only before 3200, and the RV knows it as such, then its bulk must be assigned at c3800-3500.

 

However, before we embark on the presentation of all these types of evidence and the reasoning supporting them, I must clarify three modern misconceptions regarding the terms pur, ratha and samudra which occur frequently in the RV…

 

11. Astrophysicist Achar pursued his palaeoastronomical research into the Mah.bh.rata epic also, examining astronomical references in Books 3, 5 and 18. His sky map showed that all these converge in the year 3067. (Achar 2003; see also Kazanas 2002: 295-7). Achar acknowledged that, in 1969, S. Raghavan had arrived at the same date. Now, it is obvious that the Mbh had acquired many accretions over many centuries and that it was streamlined stylistically perhaps first in the 2nd millennium and finally at about the start of the Common Era. It is obvious that it contains much late material like 2.28.48-9, which mentions Rome and Antiochia (rom. and antakh.): this could not be earlier than 300 BCE since Antioch was founded in 301. On the other hand, the frequent use of the bow and, moreso, the use by Bh.ma of a (tree trunk as a) club show much more primitive conditions. Thus the war took place in 3067 and the core of the MBh in poems and songs was laid down in that year. This and the native traditional view that the Kali Yuga came at 3102 are both correct, according to Achar. He pointed out that the Kali Yuga had no full force until the death of K...a which occurred 35 years after 3067, at 3032 (private communication June 2006); but immorality had set in already, as is shown by the unjust behaviour of the Kauravas and some reprehensible acts during the war itself. Surely no bards (compilers or redactors) in the 3rd cent CE or the 3rd cent BCE could possibly know the star and planet positions relative to the nak.atras or the zodiac signs of the year 3067. The astronomical references examined by Achar (and Raghavan) are so numerous that chance coincidence has to be discarded (Achar 2003). However, that the war took place in 3137 and bards began to sing of these events two generations later should not be precluded. Personally, I still tend towards the traditional view of the War taking place in 3137. The Megasthenes report (from c300 BCE) of the ancient kings from 6000+, surviving in Arrian and other classical writers, supports these long periods of the past (Kazanas 2003). Then, deterioration in behaviour would have started in the sandhy. transitional period before the onset of the Kali Yuga – when also the K.atriyas passed away. Here a question remains: how did the astronomers (and .ryabha.a especially) determine the date for Kali Yuga as 3102?

 

12. The Sarasvat. river furnishes useful literary and archaeological evidence for dating the RV. It is a mighty river extolled in all Books of the RV except the fourth. It is nad.tam., ambitam., devitam. ‘best river, best mother, best goddess’ (2.41.16); it is swollen and fed by three or more rivers pínvam.n. síndhubhi. (6.52.6); it is endless, swift moving, roaring, most dear among her sister rivers; together with her divine aspect, it nourishes the Indoaryan RPSSC - 14 -tribes (6.61.8-13). In 7.95.2 the river is said to flow pure in her course “from the mountains to the ocean” gir.ìbhya. .ì samudr.ìt. Then 7.96.2 and 10.177 pray to the rivergoddess for sustenance and good fortune while 10.64.9 calls upon her (and Sarayu and Indus) as “great” and “nourishing”. Clearly then, we have here, even in the late Bk 10, a great river flowing from the Himalayas to the ocean in the south, fed and swollen by other rivers and sustaining the tribes of the IAs on its banks – not a river known in the past or in some other region, or a river now considerably shrunk (Witzel 2001)3..

 

Some scholars claim that here samudra does not mean ‘ocean’ but confluence and especially the place where a tributary flowed into the Indus (e.g. Klaus 1989 and Witzel 2001). The last point can be discarded since there is not the slightest hint elsewhere that the Sarasvati flowed into the Indus – in which case the Indus and not Sarasvati would have been lauded as the best river (2.41.16) We can also aver with full certitude (as the Vedic Index does under Samudra) that the rig-vedic people knew the ocean (see §4, above; also Prabhakar 1994). The meaning ‘terminal lake(s)’ adopted by Witzel is entirely fanciful. In his Dictionary M. Mayrhofer gives for samudra only ‘confluence’ and ‘ocean/sea’ (1996 EWA). And the Vedic poet would certainly have used (not .ì samudr.ìt but) .ì saìrobhya. ‘to the terminal lakes’ maintaining his – . – – cadence. This phrase would then have indicated clearly the alleged fanciful etymological connection of the name Saras-vat. ‘she who has (terminal) lakes’. The name means rather ‘she who has swirls and currents’, since the primary sense of .s. (>saras) is ‘movement’ (gatau) or ‘flowing, leaping, rushing’. Please, consider also that the Vedic -s- is inherited from PIE, according to all IEnists, whereas Avestan –h- is a devolved, not PIE, sound. Vedic .s. has many primary and secondary cognates like sara, sarit etc. Now Avestan has no cognates for .s. and its products, and the Avestan noun for lake is vairi- while v.r- is ‘rain(-water)’=S v.ri (?). The stem hara- (cognate with Vedic saras) occurs only in the river name Haraxvaiti. Consequently, it is the Iranians that moved away from the Indoaryans as, indeed, is shown by their memory of having lived in a location they called Haptah.ndu = Saptasindhu. The root s. has cognates in other IE branches, Gk hial-, Latin sal-, Toch sal- etc as is shown by Rix H., 1998. Now, it would be ludicrous to claim that the IAs left the common Indo-Iranian habitat, as per the AIt, moved into Saptasindhu and turning the Haraxvaiti name into Sarasvat. gave it to a river there to remember their past while they proceeded to generate the root s. and its derivatives to accord with other IE languages. Occam’s razor, which here is conveniently ignored by AIT adherents, commands the opposite: that the Iranians moved away, lost the root s. and derivatives but retained the memory of the Sarasvat. river in its devolved form Haraxvaiti and gave it to a river in their new habitat. This, together with the fact that, like Greek, Avestan has no obvious system of roots and derivatives (as Sanskrit has), should be enough to question if not refute various IEnists’ claims that Avestan retains older forms of nouns and verbs and that therefore the Indoaryans were with the Iranians in Iran in the common Indo-Iranian period – before moving to Saptasindhu. One should also 3. The mainstream view (Witzel's really) that the Vedic river is merely a memory of the Iranian Haraxvaiti which belongs to the common Indo-Iranian period, when the Iranoaryans lived together in Iran before the IAs moved further southeast (according to the AIT), is no more than modern myth-making. Mainstreamers often invoke Occam’s razor (i.e. that the simpler solution is more probable) but here they forget it and prefer their own complex scenario. RPSSC - 15 -note that these linguists rely entirely on linguistic facts amenable to a reverse interpretation and ignore other aspects – literary, mythological, archaeological and genetic (for which see §14).

 

The river Sarasvat. in Saptasindhu is thought to have dried up almost completely by 1900 (Allchins 1997: 117; Rao 1991: 77-79). In previous years it had lost tributaries to the Indus in the West and the Ganges in the East. Is there any evidence that it flowed down to the Indian (or Arabian) ocean at any earlier period? G. Possehl examined (1998) all the palaeoenvironmental and geological data relevant to the Sarasvat. river and concluded that the river could have flowed down to the ocean only before 3200 at the very latest and, more probably, before 3800! He re-stated his finds in his study of 2002 (pp 8-9). P-H. Francfort has been just as certain of a date 3600-3800 in his survey of 1992.

 

All this helps us place the passages ascribing the grandeur of river Sarasvat. at a date before 3200 at least. (For a detailed examination of this entire issue see Kazanas 2004a; for more recent scientific investigations through satellite showing the course of the old Sarasvat. reaching the ocean see Sharma J.R. et al 2006.) 13. In a recent publication Dr S. Levitt ( of New York), who is by no means an indigenist, examined the development of the “early Indic tradition” and the development of religion in ancient Mesopotamia. After comparing several elements in the Vedic and Mesopotamian religions, Levitt concluded: “We can date the early Indic tradition on the basis of comparable points in ancient Mesopotamia. By this, the R.gveda would date back to the beginning of the third millennium BC, with some of the earliest hymns perhaps even dating to the end of the fourth millennium BC” (2003: 356). However, unaware of Levitt’s paper, I myself made at about that time a very detailed comparative study of Vedic and Mesopotamian religious (mythological) motifs, published in Migration and Diffusion vol 24, 20054.. In this I showed that since more than 20 motifs in the Vedic texts had close parallels in other IE branches (e.g. the horse mythology, the skyboat of the Sungod, the Flood, the elixir from heaven, the creation of cosmic parts from the dismemberment of a divine being, etc) and were therefore of Proto-Indo-European provenance, they could not have been borrowed by the Vedics from the Mesopotamians as is usually alleged (McEvilley 2002; Dalley 1998) but must be inherited and therefore older than the Mesopotamian (Sumerian, Babylonian etc) parallels. Since the Mesopotamian culture (starting with old Sumerian) surfaces c 3000, the Vedic motifs must be earlier. Most of these have no parallels in Ugarite, Hebrew and other intermediate Near-Eastern cultures. Thus again we arrive at a date before 3000 for the bulk of the RV. 14. Since, according to the preceding discussion we must now assign the (bulk of the) RV to c 3200 at the latest and since the RV by general consent was composed in Saptasindhu, then it follows that the IAs were ensconced in Saptasindhu by 3200 and that the SSC was a material manifestation of the early oral Vedic tradition expressed in the RV. A large number of archaeologists, experts on the SSC, insist on the unbroken continuity of this civilization 4. This was badly printed and the Sanskrit transliterations are unreadable! A revised version was published in Adyar Library Bulletin 2007. RPSSC - 16 - and preclude the significant entry of any other culture until the Persian invasions after 600 BCE (Gupta and Lal 1984; Shaffer 1984 and with Lichtenstein;1999; Rao 1991; Allchins 1997; Kenoyer 1998; Possehl 2002/3; McIntosh 2001; et al). This issue was treated by me extensively in preceding papers and no more need be said now. I should only add that, in fact, more and more scholars in the West have re-examined the issue and rejected wholly or in part the mainstream view advocating instead a movement Out of India into Europe: Schildmann 1998; Elst 1999; Klostermaier 1998, 2000; Friedrich 2004; Hasenpflug 2006. To all this I should add the increasing evidence from Genetics which declares that no substantial flow of genes occurred from Europe or the northwestern adjacent areas into India before 600 BCE. On the contrary, recent genetic studies show an outflow from India into countries west and north and Europe (Sahoo et al 2006; Oppenheimer 2003).

 

Why mainstreamers insist on the AIT is a mystery. Lord C. Renfrew wrote of the AIT (1989:182): "this comes rather from a historical assumption about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans" (my emphasis). Then Edmund Leach wrote (1990): “ Because of their commitment to a unilateral segmented history of language development that needed to be mapped onto the ground, the philologists took it for granted that proto-Indo-Iranian was a language that has originated outside India or Iran... From this we derived the myth of the “Aryan invasion".” These are the two legs of clay upon which stands the AIT and its variants. Leach went further saying that after the discovery of the Indus-Sarasvati Civilization "Indo-European scholars should have scrapped all their historical reconstructions and started again from scratch. But this is not what happened. Vested interests and academic posts were involved" (1990). This is still true. But the new genetic evidence will soon perhaps force linguists to reconsider their theories. And we must not forget that there may well have been an IE continuum from the Steppe to Saptasidhu and the IAs did not move from their location. It is worth noting that S. Zimmer admitted (2002) that (although himself a mainstream non-indigenist) he could not be certain of the exact location of the PIE homeland since the facts are so obscure in those far-off times. More recently, H-P Francfort, the eminent excavator of Shortughai, expert on Central Asia Oxus area (or BMAC) and NW India, critiqued V. Sarianidi, E. Kuzmina and J. Mallory and their theories about [proto-]Indo-Iranian movements through Oxus region (2005: 262-8); further on (p 283 ff) he pointed out that the pantheon in the Oxus iconography has a dominant goddess and so does not tally with Iranian and Indoaryan religions: on the whole he is most reluctant to accept Indo-Iranians (or Aryans) passing through that area c 1800-1400 BCE. So even some mainstreamers have now serious doubts about the alleged Aryan immigration/invasion.RPSSC - 17 –

 Rigveda is Pre-Harappan

Rigveda and Sarasvati-- Hindu (Sindhu) Civilization

SARASVATI RIVER

The discovery of the ancient courses of the Sarasvati river is the discovery of the millennium and the date of desiccation of this great river is fundamental in providing a broad range of dates for the Rigveda. Rigveda refers to the might of this river flowing from the mountain to the ocean and relates to a period when the river was in full flow, fed by the glacier waters from three sources: (1) Mt. Kailas (S’atadru), (2) Yamuna (erstwhile Chambal river) fed by the glacier waters of Yamunotri and (3) Tons and Giri rivers fed by the Har-ki-dun glacier complex (Rupin and Supin) of the Bandarpunch massif (20 kms. NW of Yamunotri, in W. Garhwal, UP)

The desiccation of the river over an extended period of about 300 years (ca. between 1700 to 1300 B.C.), is the central cause for the migration of the peoples eastward, northward and southward from the settlements on the banks of the Sarasvati river which had nourished the civilization ca. 3000 to 1700 B.C. (See web: http://www.probys.com/sarasvati)

The river also binds the Rigvedic culture and the Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization since the Sarasvati river is the locus of over 1200 ancient archaeological settlements and sapta-sindhu is the Rigvedic domain.

Archaeology has provided C-14 dates for the settlements on the banks of the Sarasvati river and work in historical metallurgy has established the antiquity of the Ganeshwar mines in Rajasthan which provided the mineral sources to sustain the bronze age civilization.

Tritium (hydrogen isotope) analysis of deep water samples taken by BARC (Bhabha Atomic Research Centre) has provided a broad spectrum dating for the waters of the Sarasvati river now revealead as groundwater sanctuaries and aquifers. The waters range from 4000 to 8000 years Before Present (B.P.).

Glaciological studies have shown the secular sequence of desiccation of the Sarasvati river: (1) the streams were flowing through Markanda river; (2) the streams migrated towards the Drishadvati river; (3) Drishadvati river migrated eastwards, linked up with Chambal which captured the Tons river stream flowing into Sarasvati river at PaontaSaheb (H.P.); (4) S’atadru river stream which had joined Sarasvati river at Shatrana migrated westwards with a 90-degree turn at Ropar and ultimately became a tributary of the Sindhu river. Glaciological studies have also showed the existence of quartzite and metamorphic rocks in Paonta Doon valley and near Ad Badri in Siwalik ranges attesting to the existence of the mighty Vedic Sarasvati river which had brought in these signature rocks.

After the rise of the Himalayas, S’atadru became the anchorage river of Sarasvati; what is now called Yamuna joined the Sarasvati river at PaontaSaheb. Ganga which had emerged from Gangotri received Chambal (now Yamuna) as its tributary at Prayag, Allahabad. An important glaciological dating tool is the fact that each glacier can supply waters into a major stream like the Ganga for a period of 10,000 years. The conclusions from these earth science perspectives are that when the Sarasvati river was in its mighy flow, it had carried the glacier waters which are now carried by S’atadru and Yamuna.

RIGVEDIC CULTURE: SOMA AND MAHA_VRATA

Rigvedic culture was governed by a cooperating society among the yajn~ikas and others, both endeavouring to generate wealth:

sama_ne u_rve adhi sangata_sah sam ja_nate na yatante mitha-s-te te deva_na_m na minanti vrata_nyamardhanto vasubhir-ya_dama_na_h (RV. 7.76.5)

Being united with common people they become of one mind; they strive together as it were, nor do they injure the rituals of the gods, non-injuring each other they move with wealth. (Sa_yan.a explains sama_ne u_rve as cattle --common property of all: sarves.a_m sa_dha_ran.e go-samu_he).

The Sarasvati-Sindhu rivers supported the cultivation of wheat and barley, as evidenced by the archaeological finds. ( John Marshall, Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization, vol. 1, p.27) s’unam nah pha_la vi kr.santu bhu_Umim... suns_s’i_ra_ s’unam-asma_su dhattam: the ploughshare ploughing makes the food that feeds us and with the feet cuts through the path it follows (RV. iv.57.5-7).

Many vedic people were herdsmen, pastoralists: ja_to-yad-agne bhuvana_ vyakhyah pas.un na gopa_: agni looks upon the people of the world as a herdsman watches his cattle. (RV. x.19.3-5).

The vedic period was a nascent material culture: the period had weavers; the words siri_ and vayitri_ denote a female weaver. (RV. x.71.9; PB, I.8.9); tasara is reffered to which is a shuttle (RV. xiv.2.51). Reference to women workers engaged in weaving is provided: tantum tatam samvayanti (RV. ii.3.6).

Like the people of the Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization who were fire- and metal-workers, the people of the Rigvedic culture were fire-workers par excellence. Gold (hiran.yapin.d.a_n, hiran.yayuh) was highly valued (cf. RV. vi.47.23, vii.78.9). Divoda_sa gave golden treasures to the r.s.i Garga. Rigveda refers to nis.kagri_va (RV. v.19.3) which is a golden ornament on the neck and necklaces of gold reaching down to the chest.hiran.ya (pl.) means gold ornaments (RV. 1.122.2). Gold was smelted from the ores (PB, xviii.6.4, JB I,10) which evoke the Indian alchemical tradition enshrined in the soma rasa, later elaborated as the science of alchemy: rasa-va_da. In Tamil soma-man.al means, sand containing silver ore. In Egyptian, assem means electrum; in Gypsy, somnakay means gold. Gold was won from the river-beds: Sindhu is called the hiran.mayi_ (RV. x.75.8); Sarasvati_ is called hiran.yavartani_ (AV. vi.61.7). [cf. the reference to vasati_vari waters in vedic hymns related to soma, an apparent reference to panned-gold from the Sarasvati_ river-bed.]

SOMA

With this background information on the locus of Rigvedic culture and the Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization, we can revisit the archaeological evidence and the textual evidence.

The Soma yajn~a is the soul of the Rigveda (a_tma_ yajn~asya: RV. IX. 2,10; 6,8). Linking with Indra, Soma is called in RV. IX.85,3 the ‘soul (a_tma_) of Indra’, the bolt (vajra) of Indra’ (RV. IX.77,1) and even ‘generator of Indra’ (RV. IX.96.5).

What is Soma? Soma which was the ‘soul’ of the vedic sacrifice was put through three daily pressings, while worshipping all the gods. (Avesta Yasna X.2 mentions only two pressings). Soma/haoma literally means ‘extract’, from the root su – hu ‘to press’. Scores of decipherments have been claimed as summarized by Harry Falk (Soma I and II, 1989, BSOAS, LII, Pt. 1, pp. 77-90). It would appear that a new interpretation is possible: Soma was electrum (gold-silver ore) which was purified in the pavitram to yield potable gold and silver after reducing and oxidizing the baser metals using ks.a_ra supplied by plants and using bones also as reducing agents. (Kalyanaraman, Indian Alchemy: Soma in the Veda, Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal, in press). This metallurgical, allegorical interpretation is consistent with the decipherment of the script of the civilization revealed through over 3000 inscriptions on seals, tablets, copper tablets and on metallic weapons. The decipherment claims that the inscriptions are lists of bronze-brass-copper weapons produced by the fire- and metal-workers of the civilization. The dawn of bronze age in the civilization area is attested by many hundreds of artefacts of weapons and tools, apart from exquisite articles of jewellery using gold, silver, electrum, bronze, copper and artificial stones.

In the early stages of the use of Soma, mythology was not the dominant characteristic; it was simply a product which had to be processed. (See also Falk, Harry, Soma I and II, 1989, BSOAS, LII, Pt. 1, pp. 77-90; Falk analyses Soma as a plant and concludes that it was ephedra, used as a stimulant). In the context of the poetics of the Rigveda which abounds in allegories, puns and metaphors, it is hypothesised that only Soma, and Soma alone was a product refined using Agni; all the other references to gods are poetic degrees of freedom to invoke gods into artefacts used in the processing of Soma. Perhaps, even Indra was relatable to the lexeme: indh (semant. firewood or charcoal):

i~dhaur.a_ = room for storing wood (H.); idho_n = tripod to put over the fire (Kal.); indhana = fuel (Pali); e~_date = fireplace (Wg.); saminddhe_ = sets fire to, takes fire; samiddha = ignited; samidh = fuel (RV.); samidha_ = fuel (Pali); samiha_ = fuel (Pkt.); su~dhkan.a_ = to be kindled (P.); negad.i = large fire lighted for warmth in cold weather or to keep off wild beasts (Te.); iruntai, iruntu, iruntil = charcoal (Ta.); cirun = charcoal (Pa.); sindi = soot (Kol.); sirin (pl. sirnil) = charcoal, cinders (Ga.); irk, sirik = charcoal (Go.); ri_ka, ri_nga = charcoal (Pe.); si_nga = charcoal (Kui); ri_nga, ri_ngla charcoal (Kuwi)

Gernot L. Windfuhr, [Haoma/Soma: the plant, in: Acta Iranica 25 (= Papers in Honour of Professor Mary Boyce, Hommages et Opera Minora, 11) (Leiden, 1985), 699-726, see pp. 703, 707] has pointed out that Soma was neither hallucinogenic nor intoxicant and proceeds to identify Soma as ginseng, a root used as a stimulant. The identification of Soma as a root is questionable because ginseng has no component to connote am.s’u/asu.

RV 10.34.1 states: Somasyeva maujavatasya bhaks.o vibhi_dako ja_gr.vir mahyam accha_n (an alerting eatable or food from mount mu_javat). Soma keeps Indra awake (vivyaktha mahina_ vr.s.an bhaks.am. Somasya ja_gr.ve (RV. 8.92.23). Soma is the inspirer or vipra of Angiras (RV. 9.107.6). [cf. an:ga_ra = glowing charcoal (RV.); angar id. (Gypsy). in:gha_l.a = growing embers (Pali); i~gal., i~gl.a_ charcoal-burner (M.); aggi = fire (Te.)] In the context of processing (refining or purifying or smelting) Soma (electrum ore or quartz ), charcoal is a vital component; since charcaol combines with the baser metals and oxidizes them leaving the residual potable, gold-silver compound which is electrum. When Soma is referred to as indrapi_ta or ‘drunk by Indra (indav indrapi_tasya )(PB 1.5.4), the reference is indeed to the reducing action of glowing charcoal embers during the process of smelting the electrum ore. Naturally, Indra received the major share of Soma. (RV. I.2,3; II.41 indicate the sequence of offerings of Soma: va_yu, indra-va_yu, mitra-varun.a, as’vins, indra, vis’ve deva_h, Sarasvati_.) Thus, Indra, as the chief partaker of Soma, is linked with Soma from the mountains (the ore) and some on the earth (ground in pressing-stones): ‘May heavenly drink exhilarate theee, Indra, and also what is pressed in earthly places’. (RV. X. 116,3).

RV. X. 85,3 refers to the Soma known only to the brahmans; this is an early indication of the mystery or secret doctrine that would surround the Soma pressing process in later-day texts. The nature of Soma would be mystified in later texts by references to the moon (the colour of silver component of electrum). Tamil tradition has it in a lexeme: co_ma man.al = sand containing silver ore. (Winslow’s lexicon).

The water element is the potable metal; Vr.tra withheld the waters. Indra frees the waters. Soma is described as having ‘hanging branches bending down’ (naica_s’a_kha: RV. III.53,14) It is not necessary to interpret the term ‘ti_vra’ (sharp) in the context of taste; ti_vra connotes the sharpness of the metallic components of the ore blocks. a~_su = fibrous layer at root of coconut branches, edge or prickles of leaves; a~_s = fibre, pith (Or.); a~_si~_ fine particles of flattened rice in winnowing fan (M.); these lexemes provide a semantic lead to the am.s’u/asu used to describe Soma; the term connotes the streaks of metal, seen like fibres of a stringy fruit or nap of cloth [a~_s (B.)]. The am.s’u was ruddy (RV. VII.98,1). The RV reference to Soma ‘growing’ on the mountains (giris.t.ha_) is explained in the context of the ores obtained from the mines in NW India. (giris.t.ha: RV. III.48,2; V.43.4; IX.18.1, 62,4; parvata_vr.dh: RV. IX.46.1) Hence, the reference to Somam adrau (RV. 5.85.2) plucked in two rocks. The colour of the Soma filaments contained in the ore block are ‘reddish’ or ‘yellow’ (arun.a/arus.a or hari/za_iri). Za_iri = golden-hued (Yasna IX.16,30). RV. 10.97.18, 19 refer to the group of herbs having Soma as their king (Somara_jn~ih); the growth of herbs on the mountains is the obvious reference here. ‘Ma_taris’van fetched one of you (Agni and Soma) from heaven; the eagle twirled the other from the cloud-rock’. (RV. I.93,6). The links of Soma with rocks are vivid. (adri: RV. V.85,2; I.93,6)[See Bloomfield, The Legend of Soma and the Eagle, JAOS, 16, 1896, pp. 1-24). ‘High is the birth of thee, the plant; thee being in heaven the earth received’. (RV. IX. 61.10). Yasna (X.4,10-12,17) places haoma on the high mountain haraiti; it is placed there by a skilful god, wherefrom holy birds carried it everywhere to the heights. Rigveda connects Soma with the mount Mu_javant: ‘As draught of Maujavata Soma, so doth, the enlivening vibhi_daka delight me’ (RV. X.34,1). Griswold notes: ‘The mountain Mu_javantt (if it was a mountain and not simply the name of a people), being closely connected with the Gandha_ris (AV. V.22,5,7,8,14) must have been situated somewhere between Bactria and the Punjab. In the Tait. Samh. I. 8,6,2 and the AV. Passages referred to above the Mu_javants are taken as a type of distant folk, to which Rudra with his fever-bearing bow is entreated to depart. In fact Mu_javant is as far off and mysterious as the river rasa_. Possibly both embody dim reminiscences of the undivided Indo-Iranian days." (p. 217). Soma flourished during the rainy season, swelling with milk (RV. II.13,1), strengthened by the rain-cloud, parjanya (RV. IX.82,3; 113,3). Yasna (X.3): ‘I praise the cloud and the waters that made thy body to grow upon the mountains.’ Later rituals state that Soma had to be purchased from a s’u_dra, who was a trader in Soma who was like the gandharva who held back the celestial Soma. (cf. ks.udraka = maker of minute beads or minor work in gold (Arthas’a_stra: 2.13.37 and 40). There is a reference to ki_kat.as in the context of the sacrifice: ‘Amid ki_kat.as what do thy kine, O Indra? That tribe nor mixture (a_sir or milk for mixing with Soma) pours nor heats oblation; bear thou to us the wealth of pramaganda, give up, O Maghavan, to us the ‘low-branched’. (RV. III.53,14). Regarding the ritual purchase of the Soma, TS. 6,1,6,7 states that one buys the Soma with a ruddy, yellow-eyed cow; ‘this, one should know, is the form of Soma: then one buys it with its own deity. That became gold… Those who discourse on brahman say, ‘how is it that offspring are produced through that which is boneless, and yet are born with bones?’ Because one offers the gold, placing it in the ghee, therefore offspring are born… with bones."

In the tradition of the Black Yajurveda, A_pS’. 10,25,11 states that the adhvaryu should buy the Soma with gold saying: " I buy the bright (s’ukra, Soma) with bright (gold), the glittering (candra) with glittering, the amr.tam with amr.tam to match thy cow" (TS. 1,2,7,1); the Soma-dealer answers: "King Soma deserves more than that". Adhvaryu washes king Soma with water and unfolds him (A_pA’. 11,1,11). "Every shoot of thee, O Soma, must swell for Indra…" (TS. 1,2,11,1). The purpose of the yajn~a is: ‘ by means of ghee as the vajra and two sacrificial ladles as their arms the gods slew Vr.tra. Vr.tra is the Soma. One should know that they slay Soma, when they sacrifice with ghee in his presence. By means of these mantras one makes Soma swell again." (TS. 6,2,2,4)

The Avestan references to Haoma as a plant can be explained as a ritualistic representation of the Soma refining process of the earlier days on the banks of the Sarasvati river. Yasna refers to the scent of the plant (Yasna, 10,4) but RV does not. There is, however, reference to the intense smell of the type common in the workshop of a metalsmith who uses ks.a_ra (plant-based alkalis) to oxidise the impurities or baser metals in an ore block. Griswold notes that there are only two references to haoma in the Ga_tha_s of Zoroaster, one mentioning du_raos’a ‘ the averter of death’ (Yasna, XXXII.14), the standing epithet of haoma in the later Avesta, and the other alluding to ‘the filthiness f this intoxicant’(Yasna, XLVIII.10).These allusions are sufficient to prove that the intoxicating haoma was under the ban of the great reformer (H.D. Griswold, 1923, The Religion of the Rigveda, London, Oxford University Press, p. 14)

Next in importance to Agni and Indra, Soma is addressed in about 120 hymns of the Rigveda. Indra and Varun.a gain anthropomorphic status as gods; but Soma is generally represented in its physical nature.

Soma pavama_na. Soma in the process of passing through the refining instrument (potr.). [The actors are: Hotr., connected with Indra; the Potr. connected with the Maruts (Potr. is the purifying priest; also the ‘cleaning’ insrument); the Nes.t.r. linked with Tvas.t.r.; the divine wives, agni_dh with agni, the brahman with Indra and the pras’a_s.t.r. with mitra-varun.a]. ulu_khala (mortar) is used to press Soma (RV. I.28,1,5; gra_van is rendered as a ‘press-stone’). This is a reference to the pounding of the ore block to pulverize the ore. In Yasna (XXIV.7; XXV.2) ha_vana (hu = to crush) is ‘the utensil in which the twigs of the haoma plant are pounded’. Another method refers to the gra_va_n.ah (press-stones) are placed on the’ox-hide’, held by the hands and with ten fingers and activated through two boards. (RV. X.76,94 and 175). Dhis.an.a_ (RV. X.17,12) is perhaps a reference to a hollow in which the press-stones work. This may be a reference to a hollow covered with ox-hide specially prepared on the sacrificial ground. The ox-hide is refered to in RV. IX.79,4; IX.66,29; IX.101,11 and was used to catch the drops of Soma (apparently, the pulverized bits of the electrum ore block). The later rituals state that the pressing-boards are adhis.avan.a phalaka and are also laid across a sounding-hole dug beneath (See Hillebrandt, VM. I.148). A reference to the sacrificial ground with the hollow is mirrored in the term: r.tasya yoni (RV. IX.64,11,22): the home of the yajn~a. The reference to r.tasya dha_ra_ (RV. IX. 63,14,21) is a reference to the process of flowing through the wool strainer.

Indra’s outward appearance flowed away from his semen and became suvarn.am hiran.yam when he had drunk Soma that was exposed to witching. (S’Br 13,1,1,4: S’Br. 12,7,1,1: retasa eva_sya ru_pam asravat; tat suvarnam hiran.yam abhavat; cf. J.Gonda, 1991, The Functions and Significance of Gold in the Veda, Leiden, E.J.Brill, p. 5). [Note: S’Br. 12,7,2,10: lead (s’i_sa) is ‘a form of both bronze and gold’; ahi is a snake; na_ga is a snake; na_ga = lead (Skt.)] RV. 4,17,11 relates how Indra gained cows, gold, troops of horses. When Soma purifies itself, Soma wins cattle, chariots, gold, the light of heaven, and water for them (RV. 9,78,4). The river Sindhu is rich in excellent horses, good chariots, good garments, rich in gold (RV. 10,7,5,8). RV. 9,112,2 recounts how the blacksmith searches for a customer who possesses (much) gold. Gold is described as s’ukram hiran.yam (RV. 8,65,11) or shining with a light of its own. "He who buys the (Soma) with gold buys it as sas’ukram" (Taittiri_ya Sam.hita_: 6,1,10,1). Even the sun is equated to gold: hiran.yam prati su_ryah (RV. 1,46,10: sun is equivalent to gold). Agni is called hiran.yaru_pa (RV. 4,3,1: gold-like). Apa_m Napa_t (the Child, Descendant of the Waters) has a terrestrial form of the earthly fire and is associated with gold (RV. 2,35,10: hiran.yaru_pah; RV. 2.35,9: hiran.yavarn.a_h). Indra and Va_yu’s chariot (which is ‘heaven-touching’) is made of gold (RV. 4,46,4). RV. 2,35,10 reports that Apa_m napa_t in his earthly manifestation as the sacrificial fire, comes out of the golden yoni (yoni hiran.yaya which is Soma’s seat (RV. 9,64,20).

References to electrum may be noticed in RV. 8,45,22 where the metal silver is called ‘whitish hiran.ya’; rajata is used as an adjective to mean ‘whitish, silver-coloured’. [See A_pS. 5,29,2 which states that rajatam hiran.yam should not be given as a daks.in.a_.]

Pu_s.an has golden ships which sail in the sea (RV. 6,58,3) and bears an axe made of gold (RV. 1,42,6).

RV. 9,86,43 refers to Soma as hiran.yapa_va_h which can be interpreted as ‘purified golden Soma.’

Soma was poured through through a sieve made of wool. Every hymn of Book IX of the Rigveda refers to the filtering through the strainer. (pavitra = sieve, means of purifying, filter; pu_ = to purify; pavate = he cleanses himself; pavama_na = self-purifying). References to filtering are in : RV. IX.1, 1 and 6; IX.28, 1,2,6. ‘Soma while filtering himself, flows thousand-streamed, across the wool’ (RV. IX.13,1). In this filtering process, Soma is tawny in colour; and sounds like the thunder of the sky or the bellowing cattle. In RV. IX.97,33 the word ‘karman’ is used to denote the toil involved in the sacrifice.

Soma is mixed with milk (gava_s’ir = addition of milk to Soma), curd and grain. These are intended to stoke the burning embers and to act as oxidizing agents to remove the baser metals.

The rasa of the Soma is emphasized (RV. 8,3,20; 9,67,8; 15; 9,76,1 describes the rasa as kr.tvya or efficacious, as daks.a or ability. Somya rasa (RV. 9,67,8) is the ‘sap, which constitutes the essence, best, beneficial element of Soma’. The colour of the rasa is hari (yellow, tawny)(RV. 9,19,3; 9,25,1; 9,103,4; 9,78,2; 10,96,6 and 7. RV. 8,29,1 refers to Soma as babhru (reddish-brown) and a youth who is applying a golden ointment (an~ji… hiran.yayam) to himself. RV. 9,107,4 refers to Soma as utsah hiran.yayah: a spring of gold [Geldner, Rig-Veda ubers, K.F. Geldner, Der Rig-Veda ubersetzt, Cambridge, Mass., 1951, III, p. 110). RV. 9,86,43: sindhor ucchva_se patayantam uks.an.am hiran.yapa_va_h pas’um a_su gr.bhn.ate: "purifiers of gold seize in them (i.e. the vasati_vari_ water left standing overnight) the animal (pas’u_), i.e. the bull (Soma) that flies in the upheaving of the river." Thus in this hymn, the gold which is purified referes to the juice of Soma which is golden.

RV. 6,61,7 refers to Sarasvati_ as hiran.yavartani or one endowed with a golden course. RV. 9,8,39; 38 implore Soma to clarify itself while procuring gold.

RV. 9,75,3: ava dyuta_nah kalas’am acikradan nr.bhir yema_nah kos’a a_ hiran.yaye = Soma rushed down in the jars with loud cries, held (in hands) by the men in the golden vessel (kos’e).

Soma is pita_ deva_na_m (RV. IX.109,4) or father of the gods.

Hiran.yagarbha, the golden germ was evolved in the beginning (RV. 10,121,1`). Hiran.yagarbha is the title of Praja_pati, who is declared as the only god who encompasses all the created things (ja_tah patir). "(he) who by his might has ever been (babhu_va) the sole lord of the world that breathes and blinks, who rules over these two-footed and four-footed (beings), to what god shall we pay homage with oblation?" (RV. 10,121,3). This reference is considered by some to be a later addition. (for e.g., cf. Edgerton, F., The Beginnings of Indian Philosophy, London, 1965). The Being who evolved in the beginning is also the lord of the snow-clad mountains, the ocean and the river Rasa_. He is the fashioner who tied heaven and heaven. When the waters moved producing Agni, from the waters evolved the asu (life-principle?) of the gods. [Note the use of am.s’u as an epithet of Soma.] Hiran.yagarbha is the only god over the gods: yo_ deves.v adhi deva eka asi_t.

Rigveda riddled with allegory and metaphor enters the philosophical domain with these descriptions of Hiran.yagarbha. Post-Rigvedic texts and philosophical tracts abound in references to Hiran.yagarbha as attested by J. Gonda (opcit., ppo. 217-246). Ma_nava S’rautasu_tra (MS. 6,2,3,9) stipulates the use of stanzas 1,3, 2-7 of RV. 10,121 (Hiran.yagarbha su_kta) in connection with the naturally perforted ‘brick’ (agnicayana). It has been argued elsewhere that the perforated bricks are integral to the later-day alchemical processes of transmuting baser metals into gold. (Kalyanaraman, opcit., in press)

MAHA_VRATA

Maha_vrata is the last day but one of the Gava_mayana Sattra which represented the whole year. The middle day was the vis.uvat or summer solstice and the last day but one was the Maha_vrata or the winter solstice. The rites are related to the increase of ths sun’s heat after the solstice. [gava_ can be interpreted as ‘earth’ and hence, gava_mayana connotes the reference to the wintersolstice which records the apparent shift in the motion of the sun.]

Some typical activities on this ancient festival day were: warriors fully armed would pierce with arrows the stretched skin of a barren cow. On a rough hide, an a_rya and a s’u_dra wrestle. The Ma_rjali_ya fire is lit and maidens carrying jugs of water on their heads encircle the fire. Maithuna is an attempt to produce fertility as a form sympathetic magic. Music by drumming is played accompanied by obscene language to drive away the demons.

Maha_vrata (as a remarkable example of the continuity of the civilization and culture on the banks of the Sarasvati). Maha_vrata is the day of the winter solstice which is celebrated as the New Year’s Day in Punjab, Assam and Tamil Nadu (cf. Festivals of Rohri, Bogali Bihu, Bhogi-Pongal; the tradition is to burn out the old and herald the new by using the fresh produce from the harvest.) Aitareya a_ran.yaka is an integral component of the Rigveda. The a_ran.yaka has three books: (1) the first book explains the maha_vrata as a ritual and as an allegory and described the ‘sastras of the morning, midday and evening libations of the maha_vrata day of the gava_mayana; (2) the second book explains the allegory of the uktha, which is the nis.kevalya s’astra (midday s’astra as the pra_n.a or purus.a); the second book also has the superb upanis.ad (adhy_ayas 4-6); (3) the third book discusses the mystic meaning of the various forms of the text of the sam.hita_, the nirbhuja, pratr.n.n.a and ubhayamantaren.a, and of the vowels, semivowels and consonants. These terms are used to described the sam.hita_, pada and krama pa_t.has of the sam.hita_. The fourth book has maha_na_mni_ verses to be studied in the forest. The fifth book has the nis.kevalya s’astra of the midday libation of the maha_vrata. The fifth book is attributed to S’aunaka (ca. 500 B.C.) who is anterior to Pa_n.ini by about 100 years. (A.B.Keith, 1909, Aitareya A_ran.yaka, Oxford, Clarendon Press).

"Now begins the Maha_vrata rite. Indra having slain Vr.tra became great. When he became great, then there came into being the Maha_vrata." (Sa_yan.a explains the term mah_vrata: maha_n bhavaty anena vratena or mahato devasya vratam or mahac ca tad vratam. (Aitareya A_ran.yaka I.1)

"In the Maha_vrata ceremony there are twenty-five verses to accompany the kindling of the fire (Aitareya A_ran.yaka: V.1)

Maha_vrata is an agnis.t.oma and has the morning, midday and evening pressings of the Soma.. The fire-altar is in the shape of a bird. The activity of the Hotr. in the Maha_vrata rite is recorded only in the Aitareya A_ran.yaka and the S’a_n:kha_yana A_ran.yaka. The activity is shrouded in total secrecy. "The Adhvaryu brings up the vessel containing the libation and the (three) atigra_hya bowls. As soon as he perceives the food, the Hotr. Descends from the swing towards the east. Then they tie up the swin to the west that it may not slay the reciter when about to eat. For the Hotr. eats seated on the place of the swing. Then the Hotr. consumes the (libation in the) vessel with the words uttered in response, ‘May speech, the deity, rejoice in the Soma,’ ‘May Soma, the king, shower life on me for my breath,’ ‘May my breath milk mightily all life… At the proper time they should carry the swing to the bath, and burn together the seats.’ " (Aitareya A_ran.yaka : V.3,2) As it is completed, the vedi and the br.si_s are both consumed by fire.

RIGVEDA: REFERENCES TO METALSMITHY

taks.a, tvas.t.r., r.bhu

In the Rigveda, the lexeme taks.am is used to define composition or fashioning. apu_rvya_ purustamanyasmai mahe vi_ra_ya tavase tura_ya; virips'ane vajrin.e s'antama_ni vaca_msya_sa_ sthavira_ya taks.am (RV. VI.32.1): a seer has composed unprecedented, comprehensive and gratifying praises for the mighty Indra. agnaye brahma r.bhavastataks.uh (RV. X.80.7):the fashioning of hymns for agni is done by the r.bhus. Avestan tradition, Ahur Mazda_ is conceived as a carpenter who fashions the earth from wood and who fashions bodies and souls: ga_us'-tas'a_: da_idi mo_i ya_ gam ta'so_ apas ca urvaras ca: 'grant me thou -- who has created Mother Earth and the waters and the plants' (Yasna 51.7); hyat na_ mazda_, paourvi_m ga_eoasca tas'o_ dae_nasca_: 'since for us, O Mazda, from the beginning Thou didst create Bodies and also Souls' (Yasna 31.11)(The Divine Songs of Zarathushtra, pp. 682-3, pp. 210-1). gaus = ga_v (Skt. gau). The phrase mahigauh in RV refers to the earth. Tas'a is from the root tas' (Skt. taks.) = to create, to fashion; to hew, to cut. The cognate lexemes are: technos (Greco-Roman), tas'yati (Lith.)

The gavam-ayanam is a sattra related to the turning of the earth which is related to the solstice or the apparent shift of sun's motion. Maha_vrata day is the last day but one of the year; it was, as Tilak observed, a link between the dying and the coming year. (Tilak, Arctic Home in the Vedas, p. 122).

gavam-ayanam is a sattra similar to a_ditya_na_m-ayanam and an:gi_rasa_m-ayanam. Aitareya Bra_hman.a (iv,17) notes: "They hold the gava_m-ayanam, that is, the sacrificial session called the 'cows' walk'. The cows are the a_dityas (Gods of the months). By holding the session called 'the cows' walk', they also hold the a_ditya_na_m-ayanam (the walk of the a_dityas)." The origin of the sattra is described as follows (Dr. Haug's trans. Vol. II, p. 207): "The cows being desirous of obtaining hoofs and horns held (once) a sacrificial session. In the tenth month (of their sacrifice) they obtained hoofs and horns. They said, we have obtained fulfillment of that wish, for which we underwent the initiation into the sacrificial rites. Let us rise (the sacrifice being finished). Those that rose are those who have horns. Of those who, however, sat (continued the session), saying 'Let us finish the year', the horns went off on account of their distrust. It is they who are hornless (tu_para_h). They (continuing their sacrificial session) produced vigour (u_rjam). Thence after (having been sacrificing for twelve months and) having secured all the seasons, they rose (again) at the end, for they had produced vigour (to reproduce horns, hoofs when decaying. Thus the cows made themselves beloved by all (the whole world), and are beautified (decorated) by all."

The sememe taks. refers to the technical skill of fashioning metallic objects. r.bhus do great deeds and have dexterous hands (svapasah suhasta_h) and frame a chariot for the as'wins (RV.1.111.1; X.39.4), fashion the vigorous horses for Indra (RV. 1.20.2; 1.111.1; III.60.2) and divide the single camasa into four (RV. I.161.2). The r.bhus fabricate the ratha (chariot)(RV. 1.111.1; IV.33.8), fashion agni for manu's sacrifice: dya_tva_ yamagnim pr.thive_ janis.t.a_ma_pastvas.t.a_ mr.gavo yam sahobhih, i_d.enyam prathamam ma_taris'va_ deva_stataks.urmanave yajatram (RV. X.46.) ye as'vina_ ye pirata_ ya u_ti_ dhenum tataks.urr.bhavo ye as'va_; ye amsatra_ ya r.dhagrodasi_ ye vibhvo narah svapatya_ni cakruh (RV. IV.34.9): r.bhus fashioned the chariots for as'vins, renovated their parents, restored the cow, fabricated the horses, made armor (am.satra) for the gods, separated earth and heaven and accomplished the acts of good results. Sa_yan.a explains the equivalence of tvaks. and taks. in re: RV. I.100.15: taks.u_ tvaks.u_ tanu_karan.e (to accomplish by reducing, scraping, cutting) in the context of the skills of carpentry, using tools. Taks.a is a professional like the bhis.ak (physician) and priest (Brahman): taks.a_ ris.t.am rutam bhis.agabrahma_ sunvantamicchati_ndra_yendo pari srava (RV. IX.112.1) The major wood-work included cutting of the sacrificial stake (yu_pa), fastening of the wooden ring (cas.a_la) on its top and fashioning of the wooden vessels: yu_pa vraska_ uta ye yu_pava_ha_s'cas.a_lam ye as'vayu_pa_ya taks.ati; ye ca_rvate pacanam sambharantyuto tes.a_mabhigu_rtirna invatu (RV. I.62.6) Tvas.t.r. carved the vajra, the weapon wielded by Indra to severe the limbs of vr.ttra (RV. 1.32.2; 52.7; 61.6; 121.3; X.48.3; 99.1); it is a_yasam (metallic)(RV. X.48.3) atha tvas.t.a_ te maha ugra vajram sahasrabhr.s.t.im vavr.tacchata_s'rim nika_mamaraman.asam yena navantamahi sam pin.agr.ji_s.in (RV. VI.17.10): fierce Indra, Tvas.t.r. constructed for thee, the mighty one, the thousand-edged, the hundred-angled thunderbolt, wherewith thou hast crushed the ambitious audacious loud-shouting ahi = vr.ttra. RV. I.85.9: tvas.t.a_ yadvajram sukr.tam hiran.yayam sahasrabhr.s.t.am svapa_ avartayat: refers to the shaping of the thunderbolt, vajra, by skilful (svapa_ = s'obhanakarma_); Sa_yan.a explains sukr.tam as samyak nis.pa_ditam or well made; hiran.yayam as suvarnamayam or golden; sahasrabhr.s.t.im as aneka_bhir dha_ra_bhir yuktam or 'of numerous edges'. Tvas.t.r. augments the strength of Indra by fashioning a vajra of overpowering vigour: tvas.t.a_ citte yujyam va_vr.dhe s'avastataks.a vajramabhibh_tyojasam (RV. I.52.7)

The transition from the lithic age to the bronze age is apparent from the description of adze or va_s'i as either metallic or made of stone and used for shaping wooden vessels: va_s'i_bhih as'manmayi_bhih (RV. X.101.10) Rigveda refers to smelter of metals (dhma_ta_: RV. V.9.5) and the smith (karma_ra: RV.X.72.2)[Schrader notes that the names of smiths in IE languages are often derived from the old Indo-Germanic names for stone of which the smiths' tools were originally made; e.g. hamarr (OHG); akmo_n (= anvil)(Gk.); as'man (=hammer, anvil, oven)(Skt.)

Tvas.t.r. is shown sharpening his metallic axe while fabricating the camasa bowl used for soma (apparently, the axe is used to fashion the bowl): s'isi_te nu_nam paras'um sva_yasam (RV. X.53.9) The camasa created by Tvas.t.r. is later divided into four parts by his disciples, the r.bhus: uta tyam camasam navam tvas.t.urdevasya nis.kr.tam (RV. I.20.6); akarta caturah punah (RV. IV.33.5-6)[Commenting on RV. I.20.6, Sa_yan.a says that r.bhus are the disciples of Tvas.t.r.: tvas.t.uh s'is.ya_r.bhavah. Elsewhere, Sa_yan.a refers to Tvas.t.r. as the preceptor of the r.bhus: r.havah tvas.t.a_ yus.madguruh (RV. IV. 33.5)]

The reference to ratha is: ratham suvr.tam (RV. 1.111.1). Sa_yan.a interprets this as well-built or good-wheeled: s'obhanavartanam sucakram va_ The carpenters' tools are: svadhiti which is used to cut and trim the wooden post: ya_nvo naro devayanto nimimyurvanaspate sva_dhitirva_ tataks.a (RV. III.8.6) va_s'i_ and paras'u are also creations of divine artificers: tvas.t.r. and r.bhus (RV. I.110.5; X.53.9-10) Vis.n.u prepares the womb and Tvas.t.r. adorns the forms: vis.nuryonim kalpayatu tvas.t.a_ ru_pa_n.i pim.s'atu (RV. X.184.1) svadhiti is used to create a well-made form (tvas.t.reva ru_pam sukr.tam svadhityaina_:AV. XII.3.33) Atharva Veda refers to the use of va_s'i_ by taks.an: yat tva_ s'ikvah para_vadi_t taks.a_ hastena va_sya_ (AV.X.6.3) RV I.32.5 alludes that Indra strikes Vr.ttra with vajra, as the kulis'a (=axe) fells a tree-trunk: ahanvr.tramk vr.trataram vyamsamindro vajren.a mahata_ vadhena; skandha_msi_va kulis'ena_ vivr.kn.a_ hih s'yata upapr.kpr.thivya_h. A cognate Indian lexeme is: kulha_d.i_ (a metallic blade with a cutting edge and a handle). r.bhu, vibhu, va_ja constitute a trinity; the r.bhus are saudhanvana_h (sons of Sudhanvan). The r.bhus are mortals who attained immortality by dint of their workmanship: marta_sah santo amr.tatvama_nas'uh (RV. I.110.4) Commenting on RV. I. 20.1, Sa_yan.a observes that r.bhus were pious men who through penance obtained deification: manus.yah santastapasa_ devatvam pra_ptah. Aitareya Bra_hman.a describes them as men who by austerity (tapas) obtained a right to partake of soma among gods (AB. III.30.2) ya_bhih s'aci_bhis'camasa_m apis'ata yaya_ dhiya_ ga_marin.i_ta carman.ah; yena hari_ manasa_ nirataks.ata tena devatvamr.bhavah sama_nas'a (RV. III.60.2): With those faculties by which you have fashioned the drinking bowl; with what intelligence wherewith you have covered the (dead) cow with skin, -- with what will by which you have fabricated two horses (of Indra); with those (means) r.bhus, you have attained divinity. Macdonell derives the term r.bhu from the root rabh, to grasp and explains it as handy or dexterous and identifies it with German elbe and English elf. (opcit., p. 133)

tvas.t.r., soma

Tvas.t.r. is the master of all forms and shaper of all animals (tvas.t.a_ ru_pa_n.i hi prabhuh pas'u_nvis'va_ntsama_naje)(RV I.188.9) He is the fashioner of the quick-moving horse: tvas.t.urva_ja_yata a_s'uras'vah (TS. V.I.11.3; KS. XLVI.2) The lexeme also means a fashioner or artificer (A.A.Macdonell, Vedic Mythology, p.117) Indra drinks soma in the house of Tvas.t.r. : tvas.t.ugr.hi apibat somamindrah (RV. IV.18.3) Tvas.t.r. is referred to as supa_n.im, beautiful-handed; sugabhastim beautiful armed and r.bhvam shining or glorious (RV. VI.49.9) sukr.tsupa_n.ih svavau r.ta_va_ devastva.s.t.a_vase ta_ni no dha_t (RV. III.54.12): May the divine Tvas.t.r., the able artificer, the dexterous handed, the possessor of wealth, the observer of truth,bestow upon us those things (which are necessary) for our preservation. ugrastura_va_lamibhu_tyoja_yatha_vas'am tanvamcakra evah; tvas.t.a_ramindro janus.a_bhibhu_ya_manus.ya_ somamapibaccamu_s.u (RV. III.48.4): fierce, rapid in assault, of overpowering strength, he made his form obedient to his will; having overcome Tvas.t.r by his innate (vigour), and carried off the soma, he drank it (or deposited) in the ladles. These and other references lead Macdonell to surmise that Indra's father whom he slays in order to obtain the soma, is Tvas.t.r. (opcit., p. 57) [cf. Chaturvedi, P.S., 1969, Technology in Vedic Literature, Delhi, Books and Books]

MARITIME, RIVERINE RIGVEDIC CULTURE

The maritime/riverine nature of the Sarasvati Sindhu civilization is borne out by the archaeological finds of contacts with Sumeria, particularly in the trade of copper/bronze weapons exported from ancient India.

Rigveda has a number of allusions to the use of boats.

The vedic people had used ships to cross oceans: anarambhan.e... agrabhan.e samudre... s’ata_ritram na_vam... (RV. I.116.5; cf. VS. 21.7) referring to as’vins who rescued bhujyu, sinking in mid-ocean using a ship with a hundred oars (na_vam-aritraparani_m). There is overwhelming evidence of maritime trade by the archaeological discoveries of the so-called Harappan civilization, which can now be re-christened: Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization. Some beads were reported to have been exported to Egypt from this valley (Early Indus Civilization, p. 149); Sumerians had acted as intermediaries for this trade (L. Wooley , The Sumerians, pp. 46-47; cf. Ur Excavations, vol. II, pp. 390-396).which extended to Anatolia and the Mediterranean.

Boats drown in the river Sarasvati when the river was in spate (RV. 6,61,3); Devi Aditi comes in a boat for the reciters to board (RV. 10,63,10); Soma, the king of the waterways, who covers the universe as a cloth, has boarded the boat of sacrifice; the su_rya descends the heavens on a boat (RV. 1,50,4; 5,45,10; 7,63,4; 10,88,16,17). Sudasa built an easily pliable boat to cross the Purus.n.i river (RV. 7,18,5); Agni is a boat which carries the sacrificers over the difficult path of sacrifice (RV. 1,9,7, 7-8: 5,4,9); Agni is the boat of the reciters in troubled times (RV. 3,29,1), to ford enemy lines (RV. 3,24,1); Agni is the carrier-boat of oblations to the gods (RV. 1,128,6); Agni is the boat of all wishes (RV. 3,11,3); Indra was like a ferry-boat (RV. 8,16,11); Indra protected the boats (RV. 1,80,8); Indra is invoked to carry the reciters over the ocean of misfortune (RV. 3,32,14); Indra takes the reciters in his boat across the ocean (RV. 8,16,11); Indra saved the ship-wrecked Naryam, Turvasu, Yadu, Turviti and Vayya (RV. 1,54,6); Indra-Varun.a sail on the boat on the celestial ocean (RV. 7,88,3); Purus.an’s golden boat moves on the sky (RV. 6,58,3) Varun.a’s boat will carry the reciter on to the mid-ocean of the sky (RV. 7,88,3); Maruta helped the reciters to cross the ocean of war in a boat (RV. 5,54,4); Maruta was compared to a tempestuous ocean in which had sunk a laden ship (RV. 5,59,2); there are references to: house boat (RV. 1,40,12); long boat (RV. 1,122,15); well-furnished boat with oars (RV. 10,101,2); boats carrying foodgrains for overseas markets (RV. 1,47,6; 7,32,20; 7,63,4); boats fit to cross the ocean with oars (RV. 1,40,7); ocean-trading boats (RV. 1,50,2). [See also Swami Sankarananda, Hindu States of Sumeria, Calcutta, K.L.Mukhapadhyay, 1962 for the story of Bhujyu who was the son of a king named Tugra (a worshipper of As’vina) whose boat was sunk in the mid-ocean, p. 32].

Riches are obtained from the samudra (i.e. by maritime trade) (RV. 1,47,6); there were two winds on the ocean, one to put the boat to the seas and the other to bring it to shore (RV. 10,137,2).

INDIA OF THE SARASVATI SINDHU CIVILIZATION AS A LINGUISTIC AREA

The decipherment of the inscriptions of the civilization uses an Indian Lexicon which integrates the lexemes of all the languages of India in semantic clusters, as an exercise in general semantics. (http://sarasvati.simplenet.com) Many lexemes of the substrate language of Sumer are relatable to the Indian Lexicon entries. So are many lexemes relatable to the artefacts of weapons made by the kut.ha_ru (armourers). The lexicon heralds a change in paradigm in philology establishing India of the days of the Rigvedic culture and Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization as a Linguistic Area as the bronze age dawned ca. 3000 B.C. and matured for the next two millennia with further advances in philology, philosophy, mathematics, alchemy, architecutre, iconography and other cultural phenomena, resulting in the formation of Indian languages. The story of the formation of Indian languages is as yet an untold story.

NOTES

Websites:
http://www.probys.com/sarasvati http://sarasvati.simplenet.com

Sir A. Burnes, Memoir on the Eastern Nara Branch of the River Indus, giving an account of the alternations produced on it by an earthquake, also a theory of the formation of the Runn, Trans. RAS, III, 1834, pp. 550-88; Major F. Mackeson, Report on the Route from Seersa to Bahawulpore, JAS Beng., XLII, Pt.1, 1844, No. 145 to 153 recomming the conversion of Sarasvati river bed into a great road from the sea-coast in Sind to Delhi via Bahawalpur, Marot., Anupgarh, Suratgarh, D.a_bli, Ka_libagga_n., Bhat.ner (modern Hanumangarh), T.ibi and Sirsa.

Falk, Harry, Soma I and II, 1989, BSOAS, LII, Pt. 1, pp. 77-90: "…between the Iranian and Indian Soma/Haoma… the most important descriptive terms are identical (am.s’u/asu, hari/za_iri), the processing tools are comparable (cf. Visp. 10.2; 11.2), but the mythologies show marked distinctions. In India, Soma and Agni occasionally represent the dual forces of cosmic evolution. Nothing similar is known from the Avesta. Again, in India Soma as a drink helps Indra to become strong enough to fight Vr.tra… Indra kills Vr.tra many times, either without Soma or with the help of other gods. And likewise, Soma as a complementary element of Agni is by no means indispensable… In Iran, (Haoma) it functions as a mythological priest and as an energizing offering to different gods… This tendency of Soma/Haoma to look for a suitable place in already existing mythologies proves to my mind that the mythological qualities of Soma/Haoma did not stand at the beginning of its career."

Keith, Arthur Berriedale, The Aitareya A_ran.yaka, 1909, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Aloys Arthur Michel, The Indus Rivers: A study of the effects of partition, 1967, Yale University Press, New Haven.

"… the uplift of the Himalayas, including the Siwaliks, is apparently still continuing, offset by rapid erosion of course, and earthquakes are by no means uncommon as a result... (p.25)... there would seem to be little doubt that the present, almost imperceptible watershed between the Ganges and Indus drainage is very recent in origin. Here the key seems to lie in the shifting or migration of stream beds across the alluvium of the plains, and key role to have been played by the Jumna and a former stream (possibly the legendary Sarasvati) the course of which is now marked by the bed known as the Ghaggar in the Indian Punjab and Rajasthan, and as the Hakra in Pakistan Bahawalpur, that parallels the Sutlej towards the Indus. The enormous amounts of detritus brought down by the Punjab rivers and the present affluents of the Ganges are more than sufficient to explain stream blockage and shifting without invoking tectonic forces, and capture of one stream by another is well-attested. The Beas, for example, was captured by Sutlej at the end of the eighteenth century. Its old course near Harike to the Chenab above Panjnad is well marked in the landscape of the southern Pakistan Punjab, with the town of Kasur and a series of villages still lining its 'banks'. The Ghaggar, which is used in part by modern canals and which has begun to flow again as water tables have risen, may very well represent the former course of such a truncated river. Spate suggests that it could have been fed either by the Sutlej, itself occupying a different channel, or by the Jumna. If it was the Jumna, then the Jumna clearly has been captured by the Ganges... in the broadest sense the Indus Plains may be regarded as one vast and fairly homogeneous aquifer, a sort of vast sponge, capable of absorbing runoff from the foothills as well as rainfall and seepage from the rivers and canals that cross them, and of transmitting this subterranean flow downslope to the Arabian Sea. (Notes: cf. the legends regarding the disappearance of Sarasvati underground-antah salila_ sarasvati_!) The water table or top level of this vast reservoir varies with distance from the foothills and from the rivers and canal, as well as with local alterations in the nature of the matrix, and it varies from season to season and year to year. Recent investigations in the Pakistan Punjab have been sufficiently detailed to allow preparation of contour maps showing depth to water table, and comparisons with older data from wells indicate its general rise since irrigation was introduced (cf. Greenman et al, Maps 11, 12, 16-20). Variations in the salt content of the groundwater have also been charter over much of Punjab... The groundwater reservoir apparently represents at least ten times the annual runoff of the Indus Rivers, and in many areas offers an additional source of irrigation water when tapped by tubewells. The control of the water-table level by means of pumping from wells or by drains is also essential to the success of the surface-water irrigation, for in many areas the salt-carrying groundwater has risen perilously close to the surface (pp. 27-28)(Note: see the situation hu_daka-in Sarasvati Ghat and Brahma yoni near Vasis.t.a_s'ramam where the river becomes pra_ci_va_hini_; sarasvati is so named in the revenue maps of Haryana and also in Bharat Bhu_racana_, Survey of India maps.)

Puri, V.M. and S.P. Verma, Glaciological and Geological Evolution of Vedi Sarasvati in the Himalayas, Paper presented in Delhi on 5 October 1997, Itihasa Sankalana Samiti (repr. in: Itihas Darpan, Special Issue on Sarasvati River).

Alex Rogers, 1869, A few remarks on the geology of the country surrounding the Gulf of Cambay, in Western India, Proceedings of the Geological Society, in: Quarterly Journal of Geological Society of London, Vol. 26, 1870, pp. 118-123. [Explains the remarkable presence of alluvium in the Gulf of Khambat thanks to the mighty Sarasvati river bringing down enormous amounts of detritus.]

Sarasvati-Sindhu Research Centre, Chennai (Kalyanaraman) has established in a technical monograph (by Dr. K. R. Srinivasan, ex-Director, Central Ground Water Board) that the central Sarasvati River basin in Rajasthan alone can support one million tube wells on a sustainable basis with recharge principally from the Rajasthan canal. Itihas Darpan (Hindi magazine) is bringing out a special issue on Sarasvati river.

Srinivasan, K.R., Paleogeography, Framework of Sedimentation and Groundwater Potential of Rajasthan, India-Central part of Erstwhile Sarasvati Basin, Group Discussion, Geological Society of India: Drainage Evolution of North-western India with particular reference to the Lost Sarasvati, December 1997, Baroda

Valdiya, K.S., River Piracy, Sarasvati that disappeared, Bangalore, Indian Academy of Sciences, Resonance, I, 5: 19-28, 1996. [explaining the river piracy-capture of the Yamuna by Ganga; explaining how through the Sarasvati River had flowed the combined molten glacier waters of Sutlej and Yamuna.]

Wilhelmy, Herbet, 1969, Das Urstromtal am Ostrand der Indusebene und der Sarasvi-Problem, Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie, Supplementband 8: 79-93. [explaining the secular sequence of desiccation of Sarasvati River, first, the diversion of Sutlej westwards and second, the joining of Beas with Sutlej.]

 'Diffusion of Indo-European Theonyms: what they show us'

 

This paper was published in the Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society (Bangalore) Vol 97, No 1 (Jan-March 2006).
In presenting this collection of 20 Vedic and Indo-European theonyms the writer discusses the derivation of some and argue that, since the Rigveda alone contains all these names, it must be older than other IndoEuropean texts and more clearly indicative of the Proto-Indo-European culture, while Vedic is both older and closer to Proto-Indo-European than any other branch. Moreover, since the RV is richer in cultural and linguistic elements than other early IE traditions we can conclude that the Vedic speakers moved very little or not at all from the PIE homeland. These ideas have been published elsewhere and attracted some criticism mainly from J. P. Mallory; this is now being refuted.

 

'Sanskrit and Proto-Indo-European' by N. Kazanas

This essay is published in 2004 Indian Linguistics. It challenges many generally accepted notions in IndoEuropean linguistics like the 5-grade ablaut, labio-velar sounds, roots etc. At the same time it discloses the great antiquity of Sanskrit (or Vedic) and argues that the Sanskrit retroflex sounds are ProtoIndoEuropean, but lost in the other IE stocks.

 

'Coherence and Preservation in Sanskrit' 

Published in VVRI 2006
This paper examines more than 400 lexical items that have cognations in 3 or more IE branches (Vedic, Greek, Italic etc) and denote as far as possible invariable things, qualities and activities (bodily parts, relations and actions like breathing, dressing, rising etc). Sanskrit appears to have lost far fewer items and preserves much greater inner organic coherence than the other branches. This supports the general idea that Sanskrit is much closer to Proto-Indo-European and that, since this could happen only in sedentary conditions, the Indoaryan speakers of Sanskrit did not move (much) from the original homeland. Moreover, the criticism that this conclusion does not take into account the large literature in Sanskrit is shown to be fallacious. This collection of words is a good treasury for any comparisons.

 

'A new date for the Rgveda', by N. Kazanas. (2000)

This was published in Philosophy and Chronology, 2000, ed G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Coucil of Philosophical Research (June, 2001). A shorter, slightly different version with the title 'The Rgveda and Indo-Europeans' by N Kazanas was published in the Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (ABORI), vol 80, 1999 (Pune, India, 2000). It presents the thesis that the RV is far older than mainstream indologists maintain and ascribes the composition of the bulk of it to the fourth millennium BC (some hymns even earlier). It argues that the IndoAryans were natives of Saptasindhu (ie the land of the Seven Rivers in what is today north-west India and Pakistan) examining archaeological, literary, linguistic and comparative-mythological material. Some of the arguments would need reformulation in view of new and firmer (mainly archaeoastronomical) evidence, which in fact reinforce the conlusions on the early date of the RV.

 

'The RV Date - a Postscript', by N. Kazanas

This examines some of Prof M Witzel's (erroneous) notions which perpetuate the AIT (=Aryan Invasion Theory) and which had not been discussed in 'The RV and IndoEuropeans'. It presents some new evidence and new ideas for a pre-3100 BC date of the RV and the indigenous origin of the IndoAryans and criticizes Prof Witzel's vicious attacks on some Indian and non-Indian scholars, who promote the indigenist point of view.

 

'The RV is pre-Harappan'

This paper was presented as a talk in June 2006 at the Center for Indic Studies in the University of Massachusetts.
This paper presents the evidences and arguments for a Rigveda composed in its bulk in the 4th millennium BCE. A basic consideration (but not the only one) is that the RV has no knowledge at all of many features that characterise the Harappan culture which began to emerge solidly c3000. Since the bulk of the RV must be assigned to a period before 3000 and since this is by general consensus stated to have been composed in Saptasindhu, then the Indoaryans or Vedic people were present in that location before 3000 and must therefore be regarded as indigenous by 1500, when, they are alleged to move in by the Aryan Invasion/Immigration Theory.

 

'Indo-Aryan indigenism and the Aryan Invasion Theory arguments' (refuted)
by N. Kazanas

This paper examines the general IndoEuropean issue and argues in favour of Indoaryan indigenism against the AIT (Aryan Invasion/Immigration Theory) which has been mainstream doctrine for more than a century. The extreme positions that there was no ProtoIndoEuropean (PIE) language or that this language is as currently reconstructed are refuted: the evidence suggests there was a PIE language but this cannot be reconstructed and all efforts and confidence in this reconstruction are misplaced. Indeed, all reconstructions of Proto-languages seem futile and, since they are in no way verifiable, should not be used as evidence for historical events. Indeed all the data used as evidence by the AIT are wholly conjectural and arbitrary and often consist of misrepresentations and distortions, as will be clearly demonstrated in detail. All the arguments used for the AIT have been analytically presented by E. Bryant (2001) and summed up in his concluding chapter. These will be examined one by one and shown to be fallacious. We shall also refer to some material not in Bryant - e.g. genetic studies after 2001CE and mythological motifs never examined in this connection.

 

'Indigenous Indoaryans and the Rigveda', by N. Kazanas

In this paper I argue that the IndoAryans (IA hereafter) are indigenous from at least 4500 (all dates are BCE except when otherwise stated) and possibly 7000. In this effort are utilized the latest archaeological finds and data from Archaeoastronomy, Anthropology and Palaeontology. I use in addition neglected cultural and linguistic evidence. I find no evidence at all for an invasion. The new term "migration" is a misnomer since a migration could not have produced the results found in that area. The Rigveda (=RV) is neither post-Harappan nor contemporaneous with the ISC but much earlier, ie from the 4th millennium (with minor exceptions) and perhaps before.
The bibliography of this study is available as a separate pdf file.
This paper was published in the Journal of IndoEuropean Studies 2002.

 

'Samudra and Sarasvati in the Rgveda', by N. Kazanas

The Hindu printed in several issues (18th, 25th June, etc, 2002) letters from Dr D. Frawley and Prof M.Witzel amounting to a controversy whether the rigvedic people had towns/forts and knew the ocean; also whether the river SarasvatI flowed down to the ocean. I sent a letter to that newspaper in mid-September 2002 giving my own views, but for unknown reasons my letter was not published. I have since revised the whole piece. Here I show that samudra does denote the ocean/sea and that SarasvatI did flow to the ocean prior to 3200 BC.
This paper was published in Man and Environment (Poona, India), 2001(1).

 

'Rigvedic Town and Ocean: Witzel vs Frawley', by N. Kazanas, March 2003.

In this paper is examined the controversy between D. Frawley and M. Witzel in the newspaper The Hindu (June and July 2003). Frawley claimed that the Rigveda knew of both towns and ocean citing pur 'fort, town' and samudra 'ocean, sea'. Witzel attacked both claims writing that pur means only some mud-palisade or simple fortification while samudra means confluence or heavenly ocean. N Kazanas shows that pur means not a material structure at all but a magical, occult protective shield and that samudra does in many cases mean 'ocean'.

 

Rigvedic pur', by N. Kazanas, October 2004.

This paper was published first by Adyar Library Bulletin in 2002. It was revised subsequently several times but found no acceptance (in the West). In 2006 Man and Environment published a revised version.
The paper examines the use of pur and shows that in the RV it never denotes 'city, fort' as is usually taken to mean but a magical, occult defence in the non-material world.

 

'Anatolian Bull and Vedic Horse'

'Anatolian Bull and Vedic Horse' was first published in the Adyar Library Bulletin (2003) but this version is revised and expanded.
In this paper the writer examines the presence of bull and horse in the various IE branches. It is noteworthy that the IE stem for 'horse' is absent in Hittite while all other major branches have it. The horse has no place at all in the religion, ritual or mythology; the horse's function is taken over by the bull. This alone suffices to show that the Hittites are not indigenous in Anatolia as some scholars claim and that therefore, Anatolia is not the original PIE homeland. Other types of evidence are used from mythology and linguistics to support this conclusion. The myth of the Weather god killing the dragon, which is a common IE theme (India, Greece, Scandinavia etc), is quite swamped by Near-eastern material. The Hittite language itself has some IE relics but is otherwise flooded with Mesopotamian, Hurrian and Assyrian elements.

 

'Planetarium Software and the Date of the Mahabharata War', by B. N. Narahari Achar

The University of Memphis, Memphis TN 38152
The importance of determining the date of the Mahabharata war for ancient Indian chronology can hardly be overstated. A plethora of dates, derived on the basis of a number of diverse methodologies have been proposed and a consensus has yet to be reached. A number of authors have concentrated on the references to astronomical events such as eclipses found in the epic as a basis for determining the date of the war. However, it has not been possible to arrive at a definite date on the basis of astronomical references either. A new tool in the form of Planetarium Software has become available for examining the astronomical references. It is the purpose of this paper to report some preliminary results that have been obtained in applying this tool for the purpose of determining the date of the Mahabharata war.
Preliminary results indicate that Planetarium software can be used with advantage by simulating views of the ancient skies to determine the date of the Mahabharata war .
The work is supported in part by a Faculty Research Grant of the University of Memphis. The author also wishes to thank Dr. Kalyanaraman for suggesting this problem and for bringing Raghavan's work to his notice.

 

'Edmund Leach on Racism & Indology', by S Kak 

Sept 1999, with Prof. Kak's permission (kak@ee.lsu.edu).

 

'What is the Aryan Migration Theory?', by V. Agarwal 

May 2001, with author's permission (vishalagarwal@hotmail.com)

 

'A Reply to Michael Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda'' by Vishal Agarwal, 
11 August 2003.(Journal of Indo-European Studies, Vol. 31, No.1-2: pp.107-185, 2003).

The " A Reply to Michael Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda' " was sent to us by V.Agarwal (Minesotta, USA). It was written in July 2003 as a reply to Prof M. Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda', 2003, Journal of Indo-European Studies, and was posted on the Journal's website. It provides supplementary material to N. Kazanas' 'Final Reply' covering various aspects not dealt with by, or unknown to the latter. One should note that when Kazanas mentions "black copper" (kRshNa-/karshaNa-ayas or Syama- 'swarthy metal') he nowhere means bronze as Witzel takes it (p 175) and Agarwal need not have elaborated the bronze-aspect.

 

'Is There Evidence for the Indo-Aryan Immigration to India? ', by Vishal Agarwal
The complete lack of mention of an Aryan immigration into India in the vast Vedic literature has been considered a moot point by historians for several decades. Recently however, some scholars have claimed that a Vedic text finally provides evidence for the migration of Indo-Aryan speakers from Afghanistan into India.

 

'AIT and Scholarship', by N. Kazanas 
N Kazanas wrote 'AIT and Scholarship' in May-June 2001. This was first posted here. It deals with some additional (erroneous) notions of Prof M Witzel and the major (but not all) aspects of his 'Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts' (EJVS 7-3, pp 1-93, 2001). Apart from the AIT, this study examines other cases of corruption in academic disciplines like Egyptology, Anthropology etc, where evidence against maistream views is discarded, as well as the etymology of the terms 'academia' and 'academic' and the development from Plato's Academy in Athens to modern notions.

 

'Reply to prof. Witzel', by N. Kazanas 
Prof Witzel wrote a very superficial critique of 'AIT and Scholarship' ignoring the title, lampooning the presentation of the development of modern academia and making all kinds of irrelevant remarks (5/7/01). So N Kazanas wrote a reply selecting some of the mosts salient points in 'Addendum to "AIT and Scholarship"': reply to Prof Witzel and incorporating some (lengthy) remarks of V Agarwal. All this was completed and posted in sept 2001 here. The most significant point, apart from Prof Witzel's irrelevances, is N Achar's firm discovery that some astronomical dates in the Mahabharata indicate the date of 3067 BC for the Great War.

 

'Economic principles in Ancient India', by N. Kazanas

This study deals with principles as found in the most ancient sources of the Vedic period in so far as this is possible. Practices and applications of economic laws are not examined, since the focus is set on unchanging economic principles. The same concern about the distribution of wealth that occupies the mind of modern economists is found in the Vedic and later texts, with the surprising principle of free access to land and the Land Value Tax, thought to be quite a modern concept, promoted first by Smith's contemporaries and later by Henry George. Another astonishing point is that the Vedic tradition emphasizes duty (dharma) and does not seem to care much for rights, as western traditions do with the American Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the French Revolution in 1789. In ancient India, one's entire embodiment was regulated by duties that led through the four aashramas 'stages of life' (student, adult householder, retired anchorite, sannyaasin). Discovering these principles in the early Vedic texts is a real awakening to the great knowledge enshrined in the Vedic tradition.
The bibliography of this study is available as a separate pdf file.

 

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/en/indology_en.asp

Indo-Aryan Debate 
The presence or absence of the equus, horse in Indian Civilization

Sources:

[From a collation made by Dr. Jan E.M. Houben and posted on the 
Indology mailing list on 11 May 1998].

Suggestions on literature connected with "Indo-Aryan Invasion / 
im/e-migration" (a personal bibliographical collage):

Several people requested me to send them my collation of bibliographical references in the Indo-Aryan im/e-migration discussion, in spite of my warning my collation is very incomplete and only partly edited. I want to add that I left the references mostly in their shape as they were given, whether complete or incomplete, and that I did not check them (I hope to do this for a few which interest me most).

Well, here follows what I collected the last few months: 
*** 
Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Lmfosse@online.no, on Indo-Aryan Invasion 
. . . 
magnum opus on the genetics of the world by Cavalli-Sforza called The History and Geography of the Human Genes, Princeton University Press, 1994 
. . . 
**** 
G. Thompson mentioned (somewhere in March?): 
Hock H.H. "Pre-rgvedic convergence between Indo-Aryan and Dravidian: A survey of the issues and controversies" [esp. relevant for discussion on retroflexion] in: Ideology and Status of Sanskrit: Contributions to the History of the Sanskrit Language, ed. by J.Houben, Leiden, Brill 1996. 
**** 
G. Thompson, 16 Mar: 
P. Oktor Skjaervo's article in Erdosy, Indo-Aryans of Ancient South 
Asia, 1995; and his: "The state of Old Avestan scholarship" JAOS 117.1 (1997). 
**** 
Lars Martin Fosse <lmfosse@ONLINE.NO>, ca. 10 March, on Indo-Aryan Invasion (proposal for virtual sattra)

I would like to suggest another paper appearing in the same volume as Erdosy's (The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity). [The paper is written by Michael Witzel and is called "Rgvedic history: poets, chieftains and polities"). Then not only the linguistic and the archaeological dimension would covered, but also the historical. [note JH: publisher: Walter de Gruyter: Berlin/New York, 1995; 
According to a note in Witzel's "The Vedic Canon and its Political milieu" in Inside the Text -Outside the Text, ed. by M. Witzel, Harvard Oriental Series, Opera minora vol. 2 (p. 262 note 21): "The Volume has now been reprinted, at an affordable rate, by Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi."] 
******** 
Palaniappa <Palaniappa@AOL.COM>, 12 March

The views of late Candrasekaraendra Sarasvati (ZankarAcArya) of Kanchi should also be considered here. According to him, the racial connotation of the terms Arya and Dravida was due to the Divide and Rule policy of the Whites.  (teyvattin2 kural, vol.2, 35). In a discussion of the 'research of the Whites: good and bad' ("veLLaiyar ArAycci:nallatum keTTatum" teyvattn2 kural, vol. 2, p. 234-244), he discusses the work of Indologists and Orientalists (Max Mueller, William Jones, Arthur Avalon) and their approach to Vedic 
studies and Vedic chronology.

By the way, is there any reason why the IA experts do not seem to 
consider Kuiper's book (in which he discusses Deshpande's thesis) as worthwhile to include in their discussion, Indo-Aryan Invasion "focussed discussion"? 
************ 
Luis Gonzalez-Reimann <reimann@UCLINK.BERKELEY.EDU>, 13 March on Indo-Aryan Invasion (proposal for virtual sattra)

A topic that I have never seen mentioned when the discussion comes up is whether we can draw any conclusions from references to weather or the environment in the Rg Veda and Iranian texts. More specifically, the fact that whereas water plays an important role in both Rg Vedic and Iranian mythologies, in Iran it is mainly through images of rivers, while in the Rg Veda rain is added as an important element, and it grows in importance as times goes on. This coincides with the fact that monsoon weather covers the subcontinent but it doesn't reach Iran. A recent article that mentions this is G. V. Vajracharya's "The Adaptation of Monsoonal Culture by Rgvedic Aryans: A Further Study of the Frog Hymn," in the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 3,2 (1997). 
***** 
JH: For instance, Hock's article on retroflexes (see earlier postings) 
pre-fixes a period of Aryan-Dravidian harmony to the Vedic period, but it does not say anything directly on Aryans coming into or going out of India. It is only relevant to the Indo-Aryan im/e-migration debate to the extent that it places great question marks behind ONE of the traditional arguments for emigration. On the other hand, Erdosy's "Language, material culture and ethnicity" (see earlier postings) seems more centrally important for the debate.

In the mean time, in the archive of this very Indology List I found a 
posting of Raoul Martens, dated 16 Jan 1998, with several references on "the Indus script", "Aryan Invasion Theory" and "horse in Indus valley". This could form the basis of a list of literature for "the other side of the argument".

The posting mentions also addresses of various websites, but several of these seem to have become outdated. I was only successful at the site http://www.indiastar.com This contains postings with reviews of recently appeared books, and it seems that books "debunking Aryan Invasion" are extremely popular (does this reflect the popularity of the subject with Indian readers or the policy of the maintainers of the site?). Under the sub-address 
http://www.indiastar.com/ancient.htm a review of four "new age" 
antiAryanInvasion books may be found: In search of the Cradle of Civilization, by Feuerstein, Kak and Frawley; Myth of Aryan Invasion by Frawley; Politics of History: Aryan Invasion and Subversion of Scholarship, Navaratna Rajaram; Return of the Aryans by Bhagwan S.Gidwani. 
*** 
"N. Ganesan" <GANESANS@CL.UH.EDU>on Indo-Aryan invasion

A) Language Change: 
******************* 
When the incoming Indo-Aryans have attained sufficient political power and population numbers, the existing people abandoned and/or were made to abandon their native language (some form of Dravidian?) and started to use Indo-Aryan tongues. Is this formulation written by anyone? Much like how Spanish in Mexico or Portugese in Brazil spread as a "prestige" language, as suggested by Dr. Fosse. I searched academic databases, could come up with interesting, but did not see anything for Indic situation. Is this because scarce written data from Dravidian side exists, to a 
lesser extent from Indo-Aryan.

William Labov, On the mechanism of linguistic change, NY 
J. P. Lantolf, Linguistic change as a socio-cultural phenomenon, PhD 
P. S. Ureland, Prehistoric bilingualism and pidginization as forces 
of Linguistic change, J. IE studies, 7, 77-104, 1979 
L. M. Torres, Linguistic change in a Language contact situation: A 
cross-generational study, PhD, 1988 
etc., 
************************************************************************* 
B) Place Names: 
*************** 
The vast databank of Indian settlement names is under-researched. 
Lot more work can be done. For example, I give a section of an old 
posting in Indology. Old names from inscriptions should be special, in this 
regard.

MICHIGAN-LAUSANNE INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR 
"ARYANS AND NON-ARYANS IN SOUTH ASIA : 
EVIDENCE, INTERPRETATION, AND IDEOLOGY"

October 25-27, 1996 
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

DRAVIDIAN PLACE NAMES IN MAHARASHTRA

F. C. Southworth (University of Pennsylvania)

In their book _The_Rise_of_Civilization_in_India_and_Pakistan_ (1982), the Allchins state that there is a substratum of Dravidian place names in Maharashtra. This statement, based probably on the ideas of H. D. Sankalia, has never been properly investigated. Fortunately there exist two lists of Maharashtrian village names which provide the data for such a study. My investigation of these names turned up a number of candidates for Dravidian origin among the suffixes of Marathi place names. Among these suffixes, the most promising is -vali/oli, both because of its high frequency and because its Dravidian origin is not questioned (< Drav. paLLi 'hamlet, camp, place to lie down' < paT- 'lie,fall').

A study of the spatial distribution of village names with the suffix 
-vali/oli shows 90% or more of them concentrated in the coastal region known as Konkan. In the remainder of the Marahi-speaking area, the greatest concentration is in the southern part of the Desh, i.e. in the districts of Kolhapur and Solapur. A number of other suffixes of probable Dravidian origin are also found in these areas, though they are of lower frequency of occurrence. Thus these suffixes of Dravidian origin are in a continuous distribution with the Dravidian paLLi, as well as with similar suffixes in the state of Gujarat (discussed in Sankalia's doctoral thesis, which is based on early inscriptions in Gujarat). Thus there can be little doubt that these areas were previously inhabited by speakers of some Dravidian language(s).

>The paper will also discuss reflexes of Dravidian paLLi in place names in >Sindh and Pakistani Panjab, where the evidence is somewhat less clear. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Satyanarayana Dasa, Dravidian in North Indian toponymy, Varanasi, 1987 
V. Khaire, Dravida Maharashtra, 1977 K. Nachimuthu (editor), Perspectives in place names, 1987, Trivandrum has a paper by Lalitha Prabhu on Palli and its variants in Central India. (I don't know whether Prof. F. C. Southworth has seen this one) Parso Gidvani has written on Sindhi names from Dravidian. Krishnapada Goswami, Place names of Bengal, 1984 H. D. Sankalia, Prehistory of India, 1977 H. D. Sankalia, The prehistory and protohistory of India and Pakistan, N. Lahovary, Dravidian origins and the West, 1963 G. S. Ghurye, Caste and Race in India, Bombay, 1979 For years, F. C. Southworth has written on related topics: 
a) The reconstruction of Prehistoric South Asian language contact, 
in E. H. Bendix(ed.), The uses of linguistics, p. 207-234, NY 1990 
b) Dravidian and Indo-European: The neglected hypothesis, 
Int. J. Dravidian linguistics, 11, 1, p.1-21, 1982 
c) Lexical evidence for early contacts between Indo-Aryan and Dravidian, 
in Aryan & Non-Aryan in India, UMich. 1979 
d) F. C. Southworth, Ancient economic plants of South Asia: 
Linguistic archaeology and early agriculture. in Language and Culture: Studies in honor of E.C. Polome, p. 649-648, 1988 
e) Linguistic masks for power: some relationships between semantic and social change. 
Anthropological linguistics, 16, p. 177-191 
f) Linguistic stratigraphy of North India, IJDL, 3, 2, 1974

C) Substratum theory: 
***************** 
von Munkwitz-Smith, Jefrrey C. Substratum influence in Indo-Aryan grammar, PhD thesis, 1995, U. Minnesota

O. Szemerenyi, Structuralism and substratum:Indo-Europeans and Aryans in the Ancient Near East, Lingua 13, 1-29, 1964

Jaroslav Vacek, The non-IE linguistic substratum in the IE languages of India, with reference to the Ashokan inscriptions. 1969

C. A. Winters, The Dravidian and Manding substratum in Tokharian, 
Central Asiatic Jl., 1988, v.32, 1-2, p. 131-

D) Retroflexion in Sanskrit: 
******************************** 
M. B. Emeneau in Collected papers says: "The fact, however, that the later in Indo-Aryan linguistic history we go, the greater is the incidence of retroflex constants and the further fact that most of the Dravidian languages and the proto-Dravidian itself have this type of consonants in abundance, can only lead to the conclusion that the later Indo-Aryan developments are due to a borrowing of indigenous speech habits through bilingualism, and to the well-grounded suspicion that even in the early development of retroflexes from certain IE consonant clusters results from the same historic case."

A recent article: 
Eric P. Hamp, On the IE origin of retroflexes in Sanskrit, JAOS, 116, 4, 719- 
**** 
Palaniappa <Palaniappa@AOL.COM>, 6 May, on Indo-Aryan im/e-migration (scholarly debate)

In a message dated 98-05-04 23:26:06 EDT, bhk@HD1.VSNL.NET.IN writes:

<< Apparently the present generation of Indologists are not familiar 
with the arguments of Jules Bloch why OIA has ghoTa(ka) 'horse' > Hi. ghoDaa, etc., which has no IE-etymology (unlike Skt. as'va-). . . . >>

Indologists also should consult the following view of T. Burrow. 
. . . The reference is "Dravidian Studies-I: Notes on "Convertibility 
of Surds and Sonants" in Collected Papers on Dravidian Linguistics, by Prof T. Burrow, 1968, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, S. India. This is a reprint of a BSOS IX [1937-39] article. 
**** 
Georg von Simson <g.v.simson@EAST.UIO.NO>, 7 May, on Horses

Paul K. Manansala asks me: 
> 
>Could you explain this high position of the horse in other >Indo-European cultures. Preferably not Scythian ones as there has 
>always been some argument over whether the Scythians were truly IE. >What part did the horse play in Greek or Persian culture?

See the article "Horses" by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, in The 
Encyclopedia of Religion (Ed. Mircea Eliade). Vol. 6 (New York, 1987), p. 463-468. I cannot quote the whole article; let me just quote the following (p. 463): "Ancient Indo-European Horse Sacrifices: With the Greeks and the Vedic Indians, and later with the Romans, the horse truly came into its own as a religious symbol, one that pervades both myth and ritual. Rituals involving horses, more particularly rituals that involve the killing of a white stallion, are attested throughout the Indo-European world." 
In the following she mentions ancient Norse, Greek, Roman, Persian and Celtic ritual and mythological traditions which confirm her statement. See also the Bibliography added to her article for further references. 
**** 
"N. Ganesan" <GANESANS@CL.UH.EDU>, 9 May on Horses

To an outsider, horse looks important in ancient Persia.

A. Cotterell, The Penguin Encyclopaedia of Classical Civilizations, 1993 p.153 has a cylinder seal with cuneiform letters. In this seal, Darius I of the Achamenid empire around 520 BC is shown hunting lions. Two palm trees are there. The King of Kings is shooting an arrow from chariot. There are horses, charioteer, etc.,

See also, Jaan Puhvel, Comparative mythology, Johns Hopkins univ. press, 1989. 
Some chapter names: The concepts of Indo-European and Indo-Iranian, Vedic India, Ancient Iran, Ancient Greece, Rome, Celts, HORSE and ruler, ...

Jivanji Jamshedji Modi (1854-1933) 
The bas-relief of Behram Gour at Naksh-i-Rustam and the horse in ancient Iran. Bombay: Educational society's steam press, 1895

Bahram was dead at 438.

Regards, 
N. Ganesan 
**** 
JHOUBEN 10 May: 
Here, "the horse is missing" refers only to the oldest paintings. The 
absence of the horse becomes more striking if placed against the background of its conspicuous presence in later paintings. The dating of the different paintings is crucial, and for this I have to lean heavily on the preliminary publication which I cited, namely Bhimbetka: Prehistoric Man and his Art in Central India by Virendra Nath Misra et al., Deccan College: Pune, 1977.

[J.M. Houben's postings on the Indology Mailing List: June 15 and June 3, 1998]

June 15, 1998:

Having initiated this thread a few weeks ago when I found the Indo-Aryan im-/e-migration discussion somewhat stagnating, I would now like to conclude, for reasons of time, my own contributions to it (others may continue, of course), with a question:

Are we witnessing the transformation of part of South Asia's 
proto-history into history?

The name proto-history was invented to take into account the peculiar situation of South Asia, with its (Vedic) texts apparently without any corresponding archeological traces, and archeological cultures without (written) testimonies (cf. Sankalia in his book Prehistory and Protohistory of India and Pakistan, Pune 1974). A book like Inside the Texts - Beyond the Texts (see earlier in this thread) shows that the classical Indological paradigm has now progressed to much more satisfactory models integrating textual and archeological data than, say, 50 or 60 years ago. I am especially thinking of the contributions by Falk, Parpola, Rau, and Witzel.

I thank

Sn. Subrahmanya 
Lakshmi Srinivas 
S Krishna 
S Kalyanaraman 
George Thompson 
Lars M. Fosse

and others for their reactions, and especially also Michael Witzel for becoming a spokesman of the progressing classical paradigm (for its philological basis not just European, cf. pataNjali: yac chabda Aha tad asmAkam pramANam . . . ). A state-of-the-art overview of this succesful paradigm is found in Witzel's introduction to the above-mentioned book (sorry to mention it so often, just now I am reading it; other relevant publications have been mentioned in this and related threads).

I appreciate the challenges emerging from attempts to establish 
alternative paradigms and hope they continue (and become of better quality).

I would not recommend banning a discussion of presuppositions (someone's proposal in this thread), but it is to be admitted that presuppositions cannot be discussed at each and every step. A better awareness of the history of Indology and how certain models became dominant within the classical paradigm (mainly without colonially or post-colonially biased state-support, and nowadays even: in spite of the general neglect of Indological studies in 
countries outside India) would be welcome. It is a pity that Oldenberg's insightful Vedaforschung (1905) which discusses the struggle for the right method in the beginning decades of Indology has not yet been translated into English (or has it?).

June 3, 1998:

So we come back to 'method'.

And I turn to Michael Witzel's reaction to my suggestion on "how to 
proceed the discussion and to make it more fruitful"

(1 Jun 1998, Michael Witzel on Indo-Aryan im-/e-migration discussion 
and beyond)

I wrote: 
>> The two periods of urbanization are now >> archeologically well established, ... >> Aryans must have been around in the north of the Indian subcontinent.

Michael Witzel wrote: 
> Your statement about internal chronology (RV ---> YV and no rice --->> rice) are indeed staple food for Vedicists.

Yes, but now we proceed to apply the "indexing" as suggested in my post: "Each statement . . . should probably be indexed according to the evidence and estimates on which it is based."

Such indexing 
- will reduce the risk of accidental mixing up of personal guesses in 
which one strongly beliefs with statements which can really be backed up with solid evidence; - attracts attention of colleagues to weaker points where improvements are still to be made; 
- allows for more fruitful cooperation between archeologists, 
linguists, and specialists in other disciplines - will be more fair to a general public which may tend to take any statement by a scholar as a result of scientific research, and hence to accept either all or none of them; - can stimulate a shift from personal judgements to the arguments in support of them, hence something of the individualism regretted by L.M. Fosse can perhaps be avoided (although lonely hours with the texts will remain necessary).

Let us make a start: The two periods of urbanization are archeologically well established. What is the methodological status of this statement? How strong are the data and arguments in support of it? Ideally, we should distinguish several parameters: 
(1) numerical strength of pieces of evidence (f.i. many sites show 
increasing urbanization in certain period); 
(2) individual qualitative strength of pieces of evidence (e.g. how 
clear are the remains of houses, city plans, etc); 
(3) mutual indepence of pieces of evidence (the more independent the better). 
(4) strength of the additional arguments needed to arrive at final 
conclusion (can we be sure that finding an increasing number of house-remains points to increasing urbanization? perhaps the people changed from tent cities to cities with houses, etc.) 
For the sake of convenience we take the average of these parameters on a scale of, say, 0-100. (100 only for well-documented recent events, such as, sorry for the example, the nuclear explosions in India and Pakistan; but actually, were there really five in Pakistan?)

The Gangetic urbanization from 6th century BCE onward can than be rated at, say, 80: it is quite certain that there was such a thing. 
The Sarasvati-Indus urbanization 3000-2000 BCE can be rated with as much certainty at 80.

Now to the date of the Rgveda.

For a Rgveda written at 500 BCE we get double negative evidence: the certainty that writing was not employed at that time to transmit sacred scriptures is sufficiently strong and diverse (cf. Falk's study - perhaps allowing for pre-Asokan writing on pottery etc., Allchin), and the certainty that it was not employed to transmit Brahminical texts is even stronger in the light of taboos on writing; the evidence that the Rgveda was at that moment already in existence (socially well-established) for centuries is also quite strong, and it is obtained from separate sources. No writing of Vedic texts: 75; Rgveda well-established at 500 BCE: 80.

The *melting point* of the Rgveda. The Rgveda as specific collection has already dissolved at the time of the early brAhmanNas. But many hymns are presupposed. How strong is the argument that it must be pre-PGW, hence before 1200 BCE, not after? I largely follow Witzel. Congruence PGW and Brahmanic culture and its spread, presence/absence of rice/iron . . . evidence is subtle, not massive, but there is some mutual independence . . . let us rate it at 70.

As for Rau's "belief" (Witzel ca. 30 May) in a later beginning of the 
Rgvedic period: as far as I can see this did not interfere with his 
methodologically sound work on coordinating Vedic texts and archeological findings. In his Zur vedischen Altertumskunde, 1983, he remarks that competent scholars generally place the beginning of the Vedic time between 2000 and 700 BCE. And that he sees small indications which "jede fuer sich genommen nahezu nichts bedeutet" that the beginning was earlier than 1000 BCE. His suggestion to look for a relatively more recent beginning is not unreasonable, e.g. in the light of the fact that the tendency of a tradition to exaggerate its age is universal (cf. C.Bell, Ritual theory, ritual practice, 1992, chapter 6.) As for bronze/iron as indicator: In poetry and ritual older ideas and practices may continue when they have become outdated in daily life. Only very few hymns speak of metals, and they do so quite incidentally. Numerous 'modern' hymns not referring to metals could have slipped into an existing collection. Since Rau did not offer a definite hypothesis, I cannot assign a value to the methodological strength of it.

We ended with a probable *melting point* of the Rgveda in a pre-PGW period, hence before 1200 BCE.

But now it becomes more difficult to make definite statements.

We cannot check the stability of the Rgvedic hymns before the brAhmaNas. There is more *room* for entropy, and the hymns themselves value originality. But when did this entail a living creativity resulting in actual entropy? How stable and for how long can a nucleus (rather: one nucleus for each 'family') of established hymns have continued without refined supporting system of brAhmaNas and later on the pada-pATha, etc.? Perhaps there were social factors which maintained the stability of a great number of the Rgvedic hymns? It is also well known that myths and ritual structures can remain stable for a considerable period of time, some elements going back straight to the Stone Age. But then, going back in time in India, we encounter the remarkable urbanization period of Sarasv-Indus. Some Vedic fire-techniques like carrying around a pot with fire (useful in a Stone Age when making fire is difficult and uncertain) are preserved in Vedic ritual, but they were outdated already in Sarasv-Indus period where fire was well controled and domesticated. Churning fire is Rgvedic (RV 1.141.1, with apologies to the Madhvas who see in the hymn a prophecy of Madhva's birth). The rice-mess in the ritual establishment of fire (agnyAdheya), however, must be post Rgvedic (at least as far as the specific substance rice is concerned).

Now to the date of 1900 BCE as the post quem of the Rgveda: the Rgveda points to certain political relations; once the collections are divided into family books, we have independent references to a battle against an alliance of ten kings, etc. (details in Witzel, Vedic canon and its political milieu). Evidence is there, once we place the Rgveda in a period before 1200 BCE, but the evidence is relatively one-sided. We have to assume the Sarasv.Indus-civ. to be incompatible with the indications in the Rgveda, etc. Texts seem to allow several scenarios. General methodological strength of support: 30-40? Next, as pointed out: composing Rgvedic hymns presupposes not only the actuallity of certain events like a battle with ten kings, but also a pre-established culture, ritual, myths and poetical techniques: How much continuitiy was there in the latter?

And what was the methodological strength of Max Mueller's guestimate that the Rgveda was pre-1000 BCE? 
No archeological parallels were sought or known to him. In a previous posting I wrote that the date of the Buddha was his most firm starting point. In his Physical Religion, 1891, he has a firmer starting point: the contemproary of Alexander the Great, Candragupta. From there he goes to Asoka and estimates the rise of Buddhism at ca. 500 B.C. Argues that Vedic texts must be earlier. Next step is weaker, more guesswork: 200 years for sUtra-period, 200 for Brahmana, and arrives at 1000 B.C. as date when collection of hymns has taken place (but now we know: oldest brAhmanas do not know our saMhitAs). For the whole argument we can speak of a "shrewd guess" only with hindsight. Average methodological strength: 30.

Alternative datings: Rgveda at 4500 BCE (Jacobi, calculated on basis of astronomic hints in Rgveda). Most problematic in his argument is his acceptance of Rgveda as single unit: the marriage-of-sUryA myth may have been an older myth expressed in a Rgvedic hymn. Other weaknesses pointed out by Oldenberg. Yet Jacobi's argument was not entirely worthless for some Rgvedic mythic elements, and if there were no other arguments against an old date much more of the Rgveda could be old. Average strength, for entire RV: 10; for some mythical Vedic elements: 30.

Tilak's Arctic Home? Tilak adopted a method -- a defensible method in his time-- and followed it, even when it led him to unexpected results. Very good. But there are similar weaknesses as in the case of astronomical datings: Average strength, for entire RV: 10; for some mythical Vedic elements: 30.

Rgveda at 8000 BCE: 
I am insufficiently familiar with the relevant arguments to be able to judge them. One assumption is that Sarasv./Indus and RV-civilisation were not incompatible, either because RV-poets did speak of 1000-pillared mansions, or because they later on largely neglected co-existing urban cultures so might have done it earlier as well. A more positive argument in support of it would have been astronomical (Kak), in style similar to Jacobi's argument (please correct me if I am wrong).Hence:Average methodological strength of arguments in support of 8000 BCE,for entire RV: 10;for some mythical Vedic elements: 30.

Ebook of Kalyanaraman

Rigvedic Soma as a metallurgical allegory: soma, electrum is deified