From: vishalsagarwal
Message: 13255
Date: 2002-04-14
--- In cybalist@..., george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
> --- vishalsagarwal <vishalagarwal@...> wrote:
> *****GK: Are you suggesting that there are no "Vedic
> hymns [which] commemorate or invoke divine support
> for the destruction of their enemies and the storming
> of their citadels." ?? In other words Mallory is
> fibbing? And the next sentence he wrote viz., "This is
> to be accomplished with the assistance of their horses
> and chariots, a technique of warfare apparently
> unknown to the Indus civilization..." is meaningless
> and also with no backing in the Vedic texts?*****
VA: Mallory's statement was outdated even when he wrote his book.
Indologists no longer construe the word 'pura' in RV as a 'citadel'
or 'fort' these days. See -
RAU, Wilhelm. 1976. The Meaning of Pur in Vedic Literature.
Abhandlungen der Marburger Gelehrten Gesellschaft. Munich (Germany)
RAU is accepted by Witzel, Elizarenkova and a host of other
Indologists.
As for chariots, they are used for all sorts of things, and are
not 'two wheeled, light war vehicles pulled by two horses and mounted
by 1-2 men" as shown in Ben-Hur. For a FEW examples (with a stress on
real life like passages, ignoring most mythical passages) from the
RV, see -
1.30.16 Made of gold
1.34.9, 1.47.2 Chariot of Ashvinau had 3 passengers
1.53.9 The number of warriors on the chariot is said to be 60,099
1.7.2, 1.84.3 Two horses are hitched to the chariot
1.102.3 Indra's chariot in the battlefield
1.123.5 Helps in victory in battles
2.12.18 Warriors on their chariots implore Indra to come to their help
2.18.4 Ten horses yoked to a chariot
3.6.9 Chariot carrying 67 people
4.2.4 Chariot meant for carrying 7-8 people
5.56.6 Chariot pulled by 1 horse
8.3.23 A chariot yoked with 10 horses is given in charity
10.33.5 Chariot pulled by 3 horses
10.131.3 War chariots or chariots meant for long journeys are pulled
by several bullocks
BTW, it is interesting to know that the Near East imported wood from
IVC, and one of the uses of the wood was 'chariot construction',
according to Jane MacIntosh (since I am not so well read in Near
Eastern archaeology, could someone tell me where she got this
information?).
The chariot in the RV is also made of clearly INDIAN woods, and show
no signs of import from anywhere outside India.
************************
>
> > (VA)We know nothing about warfare in the IVC area
> > because we have not
> > found any murals or carvings depicting warfare
> > although many major
> > towns excavated show a 'citadel'. > > A pottery sherd from Early
Harappan levels has been
> > unearthed from
> > Kunal and it shows a chariot with a canopy,
> > according to the
> > excavator. No other evidence for chariots exists
> > archaeologically in
> > India till about 280 BCE.
>
> *****GK: But given the Vedic texts does this
> matter?****
VA: It does, precisely because of the 'Heads I win, tails I lose'
type of argument of Mallory.
Mallory rules out chariot warfare in IVC because there is no
archaeological evidence.
But he credits RV Aryans with chariot warfare even though there is no
archaeological evidence again. Is that consistent?
If a lack of archaeological evidence in IVC makes us rule out chariot
warfare, we should consign the RV descriptions also to the realm of
fantasy, if we are consistent.
That is what anthropologist Edmund Leech actually does.
In other words, Mallory's statement is inconsistent internally, and
also with the varying interpretations and evidence available with us.
*******************
>
> >(VA) In the RV, the chariot BTW seems to play mostly
> a
> > ceremonial role,
> > and is primarily meant for the Gods and for Rajas.
> > Some interpret
> > even the Hymn VI.75 as reflecting a SYMBOLIC warfare
> > (there is a
> > learned article on this and on 'gavishti' by S. A.
> > Dange, a noted
> > Vedicist in India).
>
> *****GK: Does this, in your view, rule out the
> likelihood of the chariot's use in actual warfare? The
> prime reference to Gods and Kings does not seem to me
> unusual. Saxo, for instance is filled with the
> exploits of Gods and Kings. And other texts, much
> younger than the Vedas of course, also seem to be very
> "aristocratic" in orientation. Like the Primary
> Chronicle of Kyiv for instance. Or the Scythian
> Foundation Legend.*****
VA: No, it does not rule out the role of chariot warfare in RV,
because it is clearly stated therein. Rather, it rules out the
fantastic dates of pre 3500 BCE that some people assign to it, or
atleast diminishes that possibility to a very small fraction.
The important thing to be noted is that the words for 'spoke' is
completely absent in RV for its early and early-middle parts, and
occurs only thereafter (whether in conjunction with chariots or
without them). And the earliest chariots attested in the Near East
are made of solid wheels.
*************************
> >[MALLORY] ...although [the horse] has
> > > occasionally been recovered from Harappan sites...
> > no
> > > one would credit the earlier Harappan culture as
> > > exemplifying the horse-centred culture of the
> > Vedic
> > > Aryans.../// ...
> >
> > VA: RV appears horse centric to those who want to
> > see it thus. Horse
> > and its various synonymns/derivates occur 215 times
> > in the RV,
>
> *****GK: Are these "war" contexts?****
VA: Most of the contexts in which the horse is mentioned ARE NOT
concerned with battles and wars. The contexts are mainly mythical.
This is because the Rigveda as such has few hymns which deal with
mundane matters. For instance, in the Book III, only 2 hymns (III.33
and 53) throw signficant light on the Vishvamitras. In Book VII,
there are perhaps 4 hymns which throw somelight on Vasishthas. Most
of these 'secular' hymns are found in Mandala X, and to extent in I.
As for the cattle, they occur in every conceivable context.
*********************
>
> >(VA) whereas cow and its related words occur 700
> times.
>
> ****GK: Are these "trade" contexts or something else?
VA: Cows occcur in every possible context. BTW, like the
word 'Ashva', the word 'go' hs more than a dozen meanings in the RV.
Refer -
SURYAKANTA. A Practical Vedic Dictionary. Orient Longman: Delhi
***********************
>
> >(VA) Note that the RV
> > is associated with 10 families of Rishis, ALL of
> > whom were 'Royal
> > Sages' in the sense that they were associated with
> > ruling elite as
> > their priests. So it is a HIGHLY elitist document,
> > where the
> > importance of the horse will doubtlessly get
> > magnified.
>
> *****GK: There is nothing strange about "aristocratic"
> orientations. But what about Mallory's point that the
> aristocracy would be incoming Aryan rather than
> Harappan?****
VA: There is no proof for that. The RV itself does not cover all
the 'Vedic Aryan' aristocracy. The aristocracies of 4/5 fraternal
tribes (Turvashas, Yadavas, Any, Dyuhyu) are predominatly kept out in
the text, and the parallel line of Trasadasyus is extolled but only
when they assist the Purus. (In later Indian tradition, these two
house crystallize as Survyamsha and Chandravamsha). The enemies are
the Dasyus, who are identified in the WEST of the Puru area. And the
area of Vedic Orthopraxy is the land between Sarasvati and
Drishadvati, which only later gets extended to Ganga-Yamuna Doab and
other parts of N India.
There is no hint of people coming from the west either in literature,
or in archaeology.
Mallory's suggestion is therefore merely an unsupported hypothesis.
*******************
>
> >(VA) Out of the 1028 hymns, only 2 are devoted to the
> > Ashvamedha ritual,
> > and even these are very late.
>
> *****GK: But is the horse and war chariot stuff only
> mentioned in those two hymns?****
VA: No, see some examples above. My reference to Ashvamedha was an
allusion to scholars like Parpola for whom the Ashvamedha argument is
very important in dissociating Vedic peoples from Harappans.
According to him, the Ashvamedha was the greatest Vedic sacrice, at
the pinnacle and centre of Vedic ritualism. This is not borne by
facts. In fact, the horse is not encountered much in much Vedic
ritual except in Rajasuya, Ashvamedha and a few others which are
performed rarely. And in Agnyadhana, its role is momentary.
Many Vedic texts actually allow substitutes for horses in sacrifices
in case they are not available, just as the 'pUtika' is prescribed
for Soma. I can cite passages if you wish.
This is a clear indication of their rarity in Vedic times.
**************
> >
> >(VA) If the RV were to have inherited the Horse
> sacrifice
> > from its IE
> > background, these rituals would form the core or the
> > text and would
> > be found in the oldest parts. On the contrary, they
> > are found to
> > belong to the later layers of RV AND EVEN the
> > Yajurvedic tradition.
> > For a detailed study of the Vedic Ashvamedha, see
> >
> > BHAWE Shrikrishna. 1939. Die Yajus' des Asvamedha.
> > Verlag W.
> > Kohlhammer: Stuttgart
>
> *****GK: Perhaps more discussion is warranted about
> the meaning and importance of "horse sacrifices" in
> the IE tradition as a whole.******
VA: Well, horse sacrifices are found in all cultures where horses
were present. There is nothing specifically `Indo-European' about the
horse sacrifice. Several non Indo-European tribes of Siberia perform
sacrifices or rituals involving horses. For e.g., the Tungus, Turco-
Tatars, East Cheremiss. Among the Altai Turks, the tribes which
follow this custom include Cumadins, the Telenget and the Yakuts.
Among the Mongols and Tibetans, the Buryats and the BÖn perform the
horse sacrifice [FUCHS 1996:40-50]. In addition, numerous Eurasian
communities sacrificed the horse during funerary rites for instance
the Scythians, the Russians (prior to their conversion to
Christianity) and so on.
The Vedic Ashvamedha was a rather tame affair, in contrast to the
more frequent, bloody horse sacrifices of some Indo-European tribes
and communities. For instance, at a place called Leira, which was
conducted once every year, 99 horses were sacrificed [FUCHS 1996:54].
Likewise, the Celts sacrificed horses along with other animals
annually on the summer solstice [ibid, p.56]. So also, the sacrifice
of horses was an annual event in Classical Rome [ibid, p. 57-58] and
was also common amongst the Scythians. In great contrast, there is no
known parallel to the Ashwamedha in the Avestan tradition, even
though some form of horse sacrifice was prevalent amongst the ancient
Iranians, as reported by Herodotus [ibid, p. 59].
There does not seem to be a parallel of the Horse sacrifice in any
form amongst the speakers of Munda family of languages. Instead of
the horse, the Gonds and the Baigas slaughter other animals like the
pig. In contrast, the earliest Tamil literature the Sangam texts,
are replete with references to the performance of the Ashwamedha by
the Tamil rulers.
Reference -
FUCHS Stephen. 1996. The Vedic Horse Sacrifice in its Culture-
Historical Relations. Inter-India Publications. New Delhi
*****************
> >
> >
> >[MALLORY] the very character of Indian society
> > > reflected in the earliest Vedic literature renders
> > it
> > > highly unlikely that the Indus civilization was
> > the
> > > product of Indo-Aryans... It is illiterate,
> > non-urban,
> > > non-maritime, basically uninterested in exchange
> > other
> > > than that involving cattle, and lacking in any
> > forms
> > > of political complexity beyond that of a king
> > whose
> > > primary function seems to be concerned with
> > warfare
> > > and ritual."******
> >(VA) In any case, the RV is not a manual of politics,
>
> *****GK: I don't believe this touches on the point
> made by Mallory who tries to deduce a political setup
> from intimations within the text, which is an entirely
> legitimate procedure.*****
VA: Well, you would not construct ancient Jewish political system
from the Book of Psalms. So the argument is relevant.
*****************
> (VA)and
> > for a better
> > source of information, we are forced to consult the
> > YV and AV
> > Samhitas, which clearly pre-suppose a complex
> > political set up, and
> > have coronation rituals et al. This would be odd if
> > these texts are
> > dated conventionally between 1000-650 BCE as they
> > are by linguists,
> > because this period does not give any definite proof
> > of monarchies
> > archaeology. Historically, it is assumed that state
> > formation was at
> > its nascent stage during the the later part of this
> > period.
>
> *****GK: There are of course, "monarchies" and
> "monarchies". The "rule of one" can be as simple as
> leadership of a warband, and as complex as the
> ritualized set up of highly complex court systems.
> With much "in between". I take it that Mallory
> contends that the Vedic monarchy was a relatively
> simple affair.*****
VA: But is this inconsistent with any type of evidence from the IVC
area?? That is the point I am making here, especially when Mallory
uses this notion to contrast Vedic aryans from IVC.
********************
> >
> > 2. MARITIME: This is contradicted by many references
> > to the oceans
> > and ships etc.
>
> *****GK: If this is so in what Mallory calls "the
> earliest Vedas" then this particular point of his
> would be defective. Is that in fact the case?*****
VA: Yes.
************************
**************
> > 3. NON-URBAN: Indian Subcontinent has NEVER been
> > predominantly Urban,
> > and it is a fantasy that IVC was predominatly urban.
>
> *****GK: But is Mallory's point not that the Vedic
> society is not oriented AT ALL towards "urban" living?
> And therefore that, whatever the over all picture of
> the Indus civilization (more rural than urban as you
> say) the simple fact that there existed major urban
> and quasi-urban agglomerations in it would be
> significant as an indicator that the Vedas were not a
> product of this society?*****
VA: As I stated, many scholars do see the evidence for an urban
culture in Vedic literature. In fact, it is most absent in LATER
Vedic texts like the Kalpasutras. These Kalpasutras are often dated
contemporaneously with cities like Atranjikhera, Hastinapur etc. If
the absence of cities on Kalpasutras indicates a rural setting, what
do with do with the cities excavated by archaeologists then??
Could you tell me which contexts of RV warrant an absolute mention of
cities?
*****************
> VA:The world has gone around the sun
> 13 times since Mallory wrote his book.
>
> *****GK: And 73 times since Bhawe wrote his. But I
> think the questions put above are still
> pertinent.*****
VA: There is a great difference between the two books. Mallory claims
to present his work on the basis of evidence from all the fields -
anthropology, archaeology, literary, genetic, linguistic,
philological etc.
Bhawe presents only TEXTUAL evidence from YV Samhitas and somewhat
from RV Samhita, ignoring other areas. After he published his book,
no major work of RV or YV has come to light, and no other major work
looking at textual sources of Ashvamedha has been published so far,
Hence Bhawe's work is still relevant.
Other Kshatriya rituals have been studied by Jan Heesterman, and in a
review of Bhawe's work in JAOS, Jan has clearly accepted the core
conclusions of Bhawe.
In contrast, Mallorys' statements on IVC-Aryans are being questioned
here.
Regards
Vishal