ORIGIN OF VEDAS

By K S Krishnan

July 22, 2017

2
Contents

0.1 preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1 The Origin of the Concept of Indo-European Language Family 9

1.1 The Indo-European Language Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.1.1 Proto Indo-European Language and its Immediate Proto Daughter Languages . . . . . . . 11

2 Theories Regarding Origin of IndoEuropean Languages 13

2.1 Linguistic Theories and Evidences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1.1 Tools of Historical Linguistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2 Origin of Proto Indo-European Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.2.1 Kurgan Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2.2 Anatolian Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.2.3 The Palaeolithic Continuity Theory (PCT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.2.4 Out of India theory(OIT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

3 Origin of Vedic Language 45

3.1 Archaeological Evidences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.1.1 Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex or BMAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.1.2 Evidence from Harappa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.1.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.2 Elite Dominance and Trickle in Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.2.1 The Mitanni Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.2.2 George Erdosys Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3.3 Evidences from the Vedas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.3.1 The Dasarajna Hymns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3.3.2 Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.3.3 Comparitive Chronology of the Mandalas and its implication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.3.4 References to Rivers Sarasvati, Indus and Ganges in Rigvedic Verses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3.4 Rg-Veda and the Iranian Avesta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3.4.1 History of Avesta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3.4.2 Contents of Avesta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
3.4.3 The Deva-Asura Rivalry in Rigveda, Puranas and Avesta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.4.4 The Unusual Case of Bhargava clan in Rigveda, Puranas and Avesta . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.4.5 Asuras, Anus and Bhigus and Their Possible Counterparts in Avesta. . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.4.6 Shrikant Talageris Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
3.4.7 Iranian Migrations into West Asia, Steppes and Central Asia in Pre-Historic Times . . . . . 116
3.4.8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

3
4 CONTENTS

3.5 Evolution of Indic LanguagesSome Unresolved Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

3.5.1 Retroflexion in Indo Aryan Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
3.5.2 Substitution of r for l in Indo Iranian Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
3.6 The Horse and Indo-Aryans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
3.7 Anthropology and Aryan Invasion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.8 Vedic Ritual Mathematics and Indo-European Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
3.9 Genetic Evidences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
3.10 The Sarasvati River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
3.11 Astronomical Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
3.11.1 Bal Gangadhar Tilaks Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.11.2 Other Astronomic Evidences From Vedic Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
3.11.3 Evidence of Kali Yuga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
3.11.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
3.12 Meaning and Contents of Rig-Veda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3.12.1 Structure and Organisation of Rgveda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3.12.2 Meaning of Rig-Veda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
3.12.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

4 Conclusion 175

0.1 preface
I had started writing this as brief notes, mainly for my own reference, as I tend to forget what I read. The materials
and data for it were collected from various sources; various internet pages as well as written texts during the past
few years. In course of time, the notes became unmanageable, as they were too many. It was then that I began to
write it in the present form. It was not meant for anybody else when I started it. This may have resulted in some
inconsistencies and repetitions that escaped my editing. As the sources are varied, it is possible that some of the
information may be outdated, contested or even of doubtful authority. Thus, in case anybody happens to read
it, it should be treated only as a source of preliminary reading on the subject. This is not a seminal or scholarly
work, but something for the laymen.
I am also not able to acknowledge the sources of some of the information and data I have included here, as
I did not make a note of it at the time I read it. I hope these are not significant, as these should be mostly
bits and pieces I picked up in casual readings. In any case I have no claim of deep scholarship in the subject, or
rather subjects, I have dealt with in this book and will have no hesitation in admitting it, if it turns out that
some of these bits and pieces had appeared in some other document earlier. Besides, my intention in undertaking
this work is only to present facts and data and their different interpretations, already in the public domain, in a
consolidated manner and not to attempt development of new interpretations or a new model on my own.
Even though I have obtained the information contained in this book from various sources, this is not a cut
and paste job. The language is mostly my own, except where I have quoted the text, and I have arrived at the
final conclusion on my own.
This book is primarily about the Origin of Vedas; or more particularly The Rgveda; the people who composed
it; the language in which it was composed; and the chronology of their arrival in North-west India in prehistoric
times. Since Vedic language; the language in which Vedas have been composed, is clearly an Indo-European
Language, I have tried to go into various theories regarding the origin and expansion of Indo-European Languages
also. Finally, I have also discussed the structure and contents of Rgveda in the last two chapters, as it could be of
help in appreciating some of the issues I have discussed in this book in the proper context.
0.1. PREFACE 5

The origin and expansion of Indo-European Languages in the pre-historic past is a deeply mysterious and
interesting subject. Indo European languages are spoken by almost half the humanity now and the geographical
spread of these languages virtually covers the earth. This is so unlike all other known language families, as all
these, more or less, have remained within their limited geographical areas. The circumstances and dynamics of
the spread and enormous expansion of Indo-European Languages in Eurasia in pre-historic times is not quite clear
at present. We do have many theories, but all of them have too many weak points and leave too many questions
unanswered. An enormous number of scholarly works on the subject have appeared in the past 150 years, each
of which is in disagreement with others in respect of various aspects of the problem. Almost every aspect of it is
controversial.
All these theories are essentially based on linguistics. But linguistics cannot determine chronology or dates of
phases of language evolution it is enquiring into; the two aspects we are mainly concerned with here. It can at best,
arrive at a comparative order. Attempts have been made to solve this by linking archaeological discoveries with
historical linguistics. But then archaeology cannot determine the language spoken by the people who produced
the artefacts recovered by it, unless a piece of writing from that period that we can read is also recovered from
the same stratigraphic context. There is nothing that really can connect archaeological finds, other than actual
writing, to languages except subjective inferences, as bones and pots found in archaeological digs do not talk.
Here we are enquiring into patterns of human migrations almost a millennium before writing was first invented
anywhere.
From the turn of the century we began getting results from Archaeogenetics based on Y-DNA mutations, which
can throw light on ancient migrations. Further improvements of these methods has resulted in development of
tools to extract similar information from autosomes also and now to extract it from ancient DNA data, its analysis
and interpretation, which is revolutionising our understanding of prehistory, as ancient population migrations can
be reconstructed far more clearly than before. Though the methods of archaeogenetics seems to be promising, it
has not been able to resolve the issue emphatically, as the pattern of the DNA mutations are found to be extremely
complex, giving room for different, often mutually contradictory interpretations. Also data sets of ancient DNA
available for study form different locations at present is so limited that it may not be enough to arrive at an
emphatic generalised conclusion. Besides, aDNA also has the same limitation as archaeology; it cannot tell us the
language of ancient people whose DNA was extracted and analysed.
Part of the difficulty in unravelling the mystery arises from the fact that most of the language forms in use in
the relevant period have become extinct now. The earliest attestation of an IndoEuropean language is from the
end of third millennium BCE. By then not only the original Porto IndoEuropean dialect, but also its direct proto
daughter dialects had undergone so much transformations and evolution in their syntax, semantics and phonetics,
that these original dialects had probably become unrecognisable from their historical known forms or had become
incomprehensible by speakers of the first attested forms of the language family. We now depend on forms of these
dialects, reconstructed using tools of historical linguistics. These reconstructed forms are used to build the tree
of language families and the order of its different nodes, apart from the syntax, semantics and phonetics of the
extinct dialect forms. Thus the reliability of these reconstructed forms are of crucial importance. But it is not
clear how reliable these are. Models of various related theories are largely based on reconstructed proto-languages.
But the existence of these proto-languages, in the form they are reconstructed, is at best conjectural, as there is
no direct or even indirect empirical evidence for their actual existence. Asserting that the reconstructed model
language is the only one possible will be misplaced confidence, given the uncertainties inherent in the available
tools. As one author said, these conjectures will be inadmissible in any court of law.
We could be certain about these reconstructed forms only if we have clear empirical evidence like a written
text from that period, as the reconstruction of unknown proto-languages is inherently subjective. In the absence of
archaeological finds of writing, enquiries and interpretations regarding the forms, and more important for us, the
pattern and chronology of branching of the language family, have to often relay on subjective logic and arguments.
Models based on such speculative arguments can only be a hypothesis; even good hypothesis, but not widely
accepted theories; leave alone historical facts. The differing perceptions and profusion of models point to the
6 CONTENTS

distinct possibility that there are still gaps in our understanding of the actual process of Indo-European language
groups origin and expansion as well as the history of Indic Languages in pre-historic times. It will probably require
far more research in different domains like linguistics, archaeology, genetics and other related fields to unravel the
mystery and arrive at an acceptable model which can account for all known data, without the need to ignore
adverse data.
The mainstream view now is that Vedas were composed by a group of (or groups of) Indo-European dialect
speaking nomadic pastoralists who trickled into Indus Valley from Central Asia and were living in present day
Punjab and nearby areas in around 1500 BCE. Our current knowledge about these Vedic Aryans, Vedas and the
Language Vedic are mired in controversies with arguments and counter arguments based on linguistics, archaeology,
anthropology, geography, geology, hydrology, astronomy, demography, genetics and evidence from Vedas itself.
None of these arguments, and models constructed based on them can be considered conclusive as most of them
seem to be hypotheses based on evidences that may have alternate explanations or based on data and techniques
that may have room for refinement. As I am not an expert who can authoritatively comment on these arguments,
I only intend to list them here, taking the liberty to make my laymans comments, where I feel one is in order.
Vedas are part of a large collection of texts usually known as Vedic Literature, and Vedas; particularly Rigveda,
is the primary or source text of this collection. The term, Vedic literature is not very well defined as different
authors treat different classes of texts as part of it. Assuming the term to mean only the four parts of Vedas and the
six branches of Vedangas, it constitutes the largest and possibly the oldest body of literature inherited by mankind
from pre-historic times. Many ancient Hindu texts (Muktikopanishad 1.12-13 and Vishnu Purana 3.6.1-7) mentions
that there were 1180 (21+109+1000+50=1180) Veda Sakhas or versions or recensions; Rgveda (21 versions), Yajus
(109), Samam (1000) and Adharvaveda (50). Each of these versions is in four parts; the Veda proper or Veda
Samhita; Brahmana Texts (Texts about conduct of rituals); Aranyakams (continuation of Brahmana Texts, but
often philosophical) and Upanisads (end of Vedas that primarily deals with Brahman; the underlying, all pervading,
ultimate reality that transcends everything). Besides, there were said to be six Vedanga texts (limbs of Vedas)
for each of the versions; namely Kalpam (rituals), Niruktham (etymology), Siksha (phonetics), Chandas (meter),
Vyakaran (grammar) and Jyothisham (astronomy/astrology). Each version of Kalpam1 again consisted of four
texts; namely Sroutam (conduct of rituals), Grihyam (household religious practices), Dharmam (social, political,
ethical laws) and Sulbam (meaning is measuring threads. Calculations and procedure for constructing sacrificial
altars etc or treatises of mathematics in Vedic Literature); making 13 texts (4+5+4) in all for each version of
Veda. By this account total number of texts of Vedic literature would be 1180*13=15340. The number of texts
available to us today, in more or less complete form, is less than 500. Many others are available in incomplete or
corrupted form. It should be noted that many texts available today purportedly belonging to some of the above
classifications could be later compositions. Further there are indications of existence of many others in the past
as there are references to them in extant texts.
The language of these texts is now usually known as Vedic, a sub branch of Porto Indo-European Language.
Vedic is believed to be the form of the language from which Sanskrit evolved later. It also might be another
branch of Porto Indo-Aryan language as the syntax and semantics are often very different. Vedic itself had
undergone considerable changes during the composition of these texts and is usually differentiated as Early Vedic,
Middle Vedic and Late Vedic. Michael Witzel, Professor of Sanskrit, Department of South Asian Studies, Harvard
University has another scheme of dividing Vedic into five stages. My attempt here is a review of the evidences of
origin of the verses, the language, as well as that of the people who spoke the original form of it and how they
came to be in South Asia in pre-historic times.
I have quoted English translations of a number of Rgvedic verses in this book. For all these I have used the
1896 translation of Rgveda by by Ralph T. H. Griffith; not because I found it to be particularly good, but mostly
1
About 50 of the Kalpa Sutra texts are available at present. Out of these only two, attributed to Baudhaayana and Aapastamba
are available in a complete set; that is Srouta Sutra, Grhya Sutra, Dharma Sutra and Sulba Sutra attributed to Baudhaayana and
Aapastamba are available at present. So far as I could ascertain, none of the other available texts, attributed to others like Manava,
Asvalaayana, Jaimini, Saankhaayana and others are in a complete set.
0.1. PREFACE 7

because it was readily available. Besides, I found that most other available translations are quite similar. I will
quote Griffiths own words on how he went about the task.

My translation, which follows the text of Max Mullers splendid six-volume edition, is partly based on
the work of the great scholiast Sayana who was Prime Minister at the court of the King of Vijaynagar
- in what is now the Madras District of Bellary - in the fourteenth century of our era. Sayanas
Commentary has been consulted and carefully considered for the general sense of every verse and for
the meaning of every word, and his interpretation has been followed whenever it seemed rational, and
consistent with the context, and with other passages in which the same word or words occur.

However, in spite of his great scholarship and commendable effort in undertaking such a difficult task, the
translated verses often are disjointed, inconsistent and incoherent. Griffith admits the limitations of his translation
in his one footnote thus, The whole hymn, as Wilson observes, is very elliptical and obscure and much of it is
at present unintelligible. This is in fact also true of other translations available to us today. In fact, the non-
availability of a good recent English translation of Rigveda is a serious handicap for those who wish to understand
on their own, what Vedas are all about. Apart from the archaic nature of the language, this may be due to
the multiple meanings many of the words and expressions used in these hymns can have. Also it seems that
the meanings of many words and word roots have undergone changes over time or that the sense in which these
are used in Rgveda may not be its current Sanskrit equivalent. Choosing the correct meaning the composers
intended for them is often impossible as we have no way of knowing the context of the verses and hymns. Besides,
these hymns may have used colourfully symbolic expressions extensively and seem to contain many metaphors,
allegories and allusions. These could be alluding to events that happened during the composers time or past
events of which they had certain knowledge or just inherited myths. Without having access to the underlying
contexts and circumstances, we have little option other than following Sayanas interpretations, which often ends
up with very elliptical and obscure results, that leave us mostly in the dark. Thus, the translations I have quoted
in this book should be treated as tentative or possible and not as absolute.
I have also borrowed data on Rigveda extensively from Srikant Talageris writings. These are quite rich in data
on Rigveda, unequaled by any other source I have come across so far. I have rechecked some of these with other
sources and have found his data to be reasonably dependable. I found a few doubtful ones, but these were mainly
because of the vagueness of the source text. But I am skeptic of many interpretations and conclusions he draws
from these data.
I would like to make a note of the frequent tendency among those who participate in the discussion on IE
homeland and related issues to arrive at conclusions based on little or very little empirical data and unconvincing
interpretation of these often flawed data, disregarding other equally valid scenarios. Regrettably, the subject
has acquired ideological underpinnings, resulting in scholarly discussions often degenerating into personal attacks.
This is now a serious impediment to honest intellectual enquiry into the issues discussed below.
It might seem that I have gone off course and discussed many unrelated issues at different points in this book,
thereby losing focus on my core theme. But I included these as I felt these are useful as background material,
and will be helpful in looking at the issues in the correct perspective. Besides, my intention was to attempt a
comprehensive treatment of the subject in this book. This is so, as I found that most currently available books
on the subject cover only a limited range of issues involved. I hope readers will find that I have achieved my
objective, at least to some measure.
Before concluding, I must also admit that some of the arguments and points made by me might seem too
speculative; but I included those as I felt that they are rational, plausible and warranted; or in some other cases,
as I thought the points may be interesting even as just a possibility. These may be treated as expression of
opinion and not as firm conclusions. In my own defence, I should mention that such methods are common among
most authors on the subject that I have come across; some of them very subtle and formulated in a manner to
make them sound very logical, but others often subjective inferences of doubtful validity or speculations based on
8 CONTENTS

flawed data and their doubtful interpretations. The danger with such methods is that such scholarly findings are
quoted as established, proven facts by later authors and still later are treated as facts of history. My own probable
transgressions are benign in comparison. In any case, these are not crucial to my main theses, which is that the
data available at present is insufficient to arrive at a firm conclusion regarding the origin and expansion of Indo
European languages, and the Indo Aryan branch of it and thus it will be premature to attempt one. I also believe
that all the present models, without exception, are all in need for further enquiries and confirmation. Particularly,
I have serious misgivings about the currently popular South Russian Home Land model or more particularly its
chronology and I believe that many of its basic assumptions and conclusions are inconsistent with the available
data.
K S Krishnan
Chapter 1

The Origin of the Concept of

Indo-European Language Family

1.1 The Indo-European Language Family

The discovery of the sea route from Europe to India towards the end of 15th century brought many European
visitors to India in the subsequent years. Some of them like Thomas Stephens; an English Jesuit missionary
and Filippo Sassetti; an Italian merchant noted and wrote about the similarities between Indian and European
languages and that between Sanskrit and Latin. Writing in 1585, Filippo Sassetti noted some word similarities
between Sanskrit and Italian, like deva/dio for God, sarpa/serpe for snake, sapta/sette for seven, ashta/otto
for eight. This observation is believed to have resulted in the beginning of the idea of an Indo-European language
family. Later, an Englishman named James Parsons found that words for numerals in Bengali, Hindi, Persian
and 15 European languages are very similar and also that these are entirely different from those in Chinese,
Hebrew and Turkish, again pointing to the possibility of a common origin of these 18 languages. But this work
was largely neglected by the academic world at that time. It was probably Sir William Jones, who rediscovered the
striking similarities between some of the oldest languages known in his time (Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Old Persian,
Gothic and Celtic) and brought it to the notice of academic circles, about two decades after the initial discovery
by Parsons. The first use of the term Indo-European (IE) is attributed to Thomas Young in 1813. It became
apparent from Indo-European (IE) language studies that hundreds of dead and living languages spoken in the vast
area from Europe, Iran, South Asia and parts of Central Asia and west Asia had a common origin. Franz Bopps
Comparative Grammar which appeared in the middle of 19th century is considered by most as the starting point
of linguistics as well as Indo-European language studies as an academic discipline. In this work he tries to analyse
and describe the original grammatical structure of the languages, trace their phonetic laws, and investigate the
origin of their grammatical forms. Since then numerous paths breaking studies has lifted the status of linguistics
to one of a social science as its predictive power has been demonstrated on a number of instances.
The scholarly consensus that the Vedic language, Vedas and its composers were not natives of India, but were
outsiders who came to India as immigrants or invaders was a consequence of the emergence of Indo-European
Language studies as an academic discipline in the nineteenth century. The evolution of this model may be briefly
stated as follows.
When the West encountered Sanskrit and became aware of its unusual richness in the 18th century, the
discovery brought about a fundamental change in its outlook. Sanskrit was instrumental in the development of
the IndoEuropean world-view and its associated fields like philology, linguistics and comparative studies. It
prompted the re-imagining of Europes history, the origin of its peoples and languages independent of the Bible.
The term used to denote the European languages evolved from Japhetic signifying Christian / European-ness of
white people, to Aryan referring to the distinct race and language spoken by Caucasian people thought to have

9
10 CHAPTER 1. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE FAMILY

migrated to Europe in pre-historic times, to the present one of Indo-European. Until the IE world-view gave them
an alternative non-religious vision, the history of Europe was thought of as the history of Christianity and their
origin as given in the Bible.
Thus by eighteenth century, European scholars came to conclude that their languages belonged to a large family
with Sanskrit as the mother language. On February 2, 1786, Sir William Jones, a British judge in India, and a
noted Orientalist of the time and a co-founder of Royal Asiatic society in 1784, delivered a lecture in Calcutta
regarding the similarities he found between Sanskrit and classical European languages.
The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the
Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both
of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and in the forms of grammar, that could not
possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all
three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer
exists: there is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and
the Celtic, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit; and
the old Persian might be added to the same family, if this were the place for discussing any question
concerning the antiquities of Persia, he said
.
His Discourse and other writings ignited an academic interest in the evolutionary history of languages and
Indo-European Languages in particular. Many well known scholars of the time such as Voltaire, Immanuel Kant
and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel were firmly of the opinion that Sanskrit was the mother of all IE Languages.
But for various reasons this conclusion was modified and a consensus emerged that some time in the prehistoric
past there was a Porto Indo-European (PIE) language, a people who spoke the language and an area where it
was originally in use or an Urheimat (home land) of Indo-European (IE) Languages, from where the IE people
spread to distant lands. The term Proto implies that the language is not only dead with no written record or
is unattested, but also that it has left no direct trace whatsoever. By the second half of nineteenth century most
European linguistic scholars were of the view that the Urheimat of IE must have been somewhere in East Europe,
north of Black sea and Caspian Sea.
By this time linguists also began to refer to the original IE speakers as Aryans. Origin of this term is uncertain.
Many Indo European language branches had its derivatives (ExampleIreland could be a derivative form) and
thus it probably was present in the Proto Indo European as well. It often appears in the ancient texts of Hinduism
and Zoroastrianism, the Rig-Veda and the Avesta respectively. It was a term used in these texts for the elites of
the society, mistaken by early Indologists for a separate race of Porto-IE language speakers. In Iran, variants of
the original can still be found in the name of Iran itself. But the term do not seem to refer to a particular race,
either in Iran or India. It appears that in Vedic literature only members of Puru tribe or more particularly the
Bharatas, were addressed as Arya and not the various other Aryan tribes related to Purus. According to
Max Muller, etymologically the word Arya was derived from ar-, plough, to cultivate. Therefore, Arya means
cultivator farmer, landlord (civilized, sedentary?). In the 1830s, the term Aryan was adopted for speakers
of Indo-European languages in general, in the unsubstantiated belief that this was an ethnic self-identifier used
by the Porto-Indo-Europeans, i.e., the prehistoric speakers of Porto-Indo-European dialect. Max Muller is often
identified as the first writer to speak of an Aryan race though later he himself emphatically stated that the term
has nothing to do with race. However the idea stuck and continued to be treated as the race of early IE speakers.
This development in subsequent years led to the development of the concept of a superior, heroic, warlike, tall,
white skinned, blue eyed, handsome Aryan race who conquered most of Eurasia and imposed their culture and
language in these lands in a very short time through superior physical and technological abilities. Some authors
went further and claimed that advance of human civilisation, from second millennium BCE, was mostly the result
of inherent superiority of Aryan race. By the early 20th century this idea became closely linked to Nordicism
and later Nazism, which posited Northern European racial purity and superiority over all other peoples. This also
1.1. THE INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE FAMILY 11

led to a racialist reinterpretation of Indian society, texts and history by British colonialists in late19th century as
a people who were always subjugated and ruled by superior races, in a way that justified their colonial rule. Also
it could be said that the arrival of the Europeans was nothing more than a reunion of long separated relations. It
also afforded an opportunity to the elite of India to identify themselves as racially related to the rulers. Following
the end of World War II and the discovery of the barbaric genocide that the self-styled Pure, Superior Aryans,
destined to rule the world had caused, the word Aryan ceased to have a positive meaning in general Western
understanding. Thus the concept of Aryans as a race is mostly the product of European politics of ninetieth
and early twentieth centuries and has little factual basis. Scholarly consensus now is that the anthropological or
genetic basis of the concept of race itself is doubtful. Thus, at present, the expression IE (Indo European) is used
instead of Aryan as few now believes that there ever was a distinct racial or ethnic group that could be identified
as Aryan. Similarly, the term Indic Languages is preferred to that of Indo-Aryan Languages for Vedic, Sanskrit
and their daughter languages in South Asia.

1.1.1 Proto Indo-European Language and its Immediate Proto Daughter Languages
The expression Proto implies that there now exist no textual or physical evidence of the existence of Proto
Indo-European Language (PIE) or its immediate daughter languages. These are assumed to have existed on the
basis of conclusions reached by use of tools of Historical linguistics and is reconstructed on the basis of cognate
words in the present daughter languages or extinct, but attested daughter languages. At least ten proto daughter
languages of PIE are now recognized. These are

Proto language Areas where these are spoken

Celtic Languages most commonly spoken on the north-western edge of Europe, notably in
Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Cornwall, and the Isle of Man. Most of these
languages are facing extinction except possibly the Welsh Language. At the begin-
ning of common Era, it was probably the most widely spoken IE language family
in Europe. During the 1st millennium BC, they were spoken widely across Europe,
in the Iberian Peninsula, from the Atlantic and North Sea coastlines, up the Rhine
valley and down the Danube valley to the Black Sea, the Upper Balkan Peninsula,
and in parts of Anatolia.
Germanic Languages spoken in England, throughout Scandinavia and central Europe to
Crimea
Italic Languages spoken throughout the Roman Empire and, later in modern-day Italy ,
Portugal, Spain, France, and Romania
Balto-Slavic Baltic languages spoken in Latvia and Lithuania, and Slavic throughout eastern
Europe, Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. Some scholars think that Baltic languages
share a common ancestral language with the Slavic languages. This hypothetical
language is called Balto-Slavic. But these are also often treated as two different
families.
Balkan Languages spoken mostly in the Balkans and far western Turkey
Hellenic spoken in Greece and the Aegean Islands and, later, in other areas conquered by
Alexander (but mostly around the Mediterranean)
Anatolian A family of languages spoken in Anatolia or modern Turkey in ancient times.
Armenian Spoken in Armenia and nearby areas including eastern Turkey
Indo-Iranian Languages spoken from India through Pakistan and Afghanistan to Iran and Kurdish
areas of Iraq and Turkey
Tocharian A group of languages spoken in Western China till about the first millennium BCE.
12 CHAPTER 1. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE FAMILY

Some of these are what are known as language isolates1 which have no apparent relationship to any other
known language or branches of a larger family with only one surviving daughter language. For instance, Albanian,
Armenian and Greek are commonly called Indo-European isolates. While these are part of the Indo-European
family, they do not belong to any established major branches like the Italian, Celtic, Anatolian, Indo-Iranian,
Slavic or Germanic branches, but instead form independent branches of their own. These could be branches of a
larger family which once existed, with only one currently surviving daughter language.
Similarly, there were many IE languages in use in the Balkan Peninsula and Anatolia in ancient times, like
Illyrian, Thracian, Phrygian, Proto Albanian, Mycenaean and Anatolian. The nature of relation between these
and the identity of their current evolved variants if any, are uncertain and disputed.
Of these, all known branches of Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Tocharian are extinct. Linguists believe that
Anatolian or more particularly Hittite was the first to break off from PIE. Some linguists also talk about a distinct
dialect of PIE less Hittite. The next to break away was Tocharian, which moved east to the Tarim Basin in
Western China. The accepted chronology of the breaking off of the remaining proto languages was more or less in
the order of Celtic, Germanic, Italic, Balto-Slavic, Hellenic, Armenian and the last Indo-Iranian, which also finally
split into Indo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan. As should be expected, there are differing opinions about this model.
The oldest attestation of an Indo-European language is of Hittite, a branch of Porto-Anatolian, in the Kultepe
Cuneiform texts. These clay tablets were recovered from Kultepe in north eastern Turkey or ancient Anatolia.
The ancient city of Kanes or Kanish was near modern village of Kultepe and was inhabited continuously from the
Chalcolithic period to Roman times flourishing as an important Hattic/Hittite/Hurrian city. These tablets created
some time around 20th century BCE are written in Old Assyrian, which is not an Indo-European language. Hittite
loanwords and names in these texts constitute the oldest record of any Indo-European language. Oldest known
written record in an IE language is again in Hittite in the 16th century BCE Anitta text in a cuneiform script,
although Hittite itself has become extinct since. Anitta was a king of Kussara, a city somewhere in Anatolia that
is yet to be identified. He was the earliest known ruler to compose and record a text in the Hittite or an IE
language. This text seems to be an inscription that record some of Anittas heroics.
Thus there is a gap of about two millennia or less between the time of emergence of Proto-Indo-European
language as per the currently popular model, and its first attestation. By this time we find that Indo-European
languages came to have vast geographical spread from Atlantic coast of Europe to South Asia. There is little
actual evidence for the mechanics or dynamics of this astounding spread.

1
Isolates are those languages which have no demonstrable genetic relationship to any other known language. Commonly cited
examples include Sumerian, Basque, Korean, Ainu and Burushaski, though in each case there are authors who claim to have demon-
strated a relationship with other languages. Another example is Elamite Language. Elamite was an extinct language spoken in the
ancient Elam region in present-day South West Iran from 2800 to 550 BCE. It has no demonstrable relatives and is usually considered
a language isolate, though some authors believe that Proto-Dravidian descented from Elamite or is in some way related to it. The
Kassite and Hurrian were also probably Language Isolates. Harappan also could well be one such isolate. The absence of established
relatives make interpretation of an extinct language very difficult.
Chapter 2

Theories Regarding Origin of

IndoEuropean Languages

2.1 Linguistic Theories and Evidences

Historical linguistics has produced a mountain of literature in the last 200 years and is full of hypotheses, supporting
arguments, speculations, wild theories and disagreements. Some of the more important linguistic theories which
have influenced the debate on IE origin and expansion, and by extension that of the Vedic Language, are discussed
below.
All living languages evolve over time, adding and losing vocabulary, morphological behaviour and syntactic
structures and changing in the ways they are pronounced by their speakers. For example, these evolutions account
for the differences between American and British English, and for the fact that neither Americans nor the English
can understand old English texts, including the writings of Shakespeare, without first being familiar with the basics
of the older forms of the language. Similarly PIEs descendant dialects underwent natural sound change, absorbed
other languages vocabulary and assumed unique characteristics. Over time, in the absence of close interaction,
they became mutually incomprehensible and over many centuries they evolved into hundreds of modern Indo-
European languages. PIE itself could not have been an original language. It must have evolved from some earlier
forms over many centuries and millennia.1 As it is an unattested language one can only say that a dialect must
have been in use at some time in the past from which all IE languages evolved. Scholarly work of the past 200
years is beginning to throw light on this process.
The tree of hundreds of living and dead Indo European (IE) languages has been reconstructed indicating the
language families which had branched off from Proto Indo European (PIE) dialect and its various pre historic
daughter languages and the chronology of their branching off. This is done by identifying and analysing common
word forms, grammatical and phonetic features of genetic origin and those that are known as Shared innovations
(acquired by borrowings as against genetic) among various languages, suggesting a common ancestor that split off
from a common mother language. Thus Proto-Indo-Iranian was determined to be a later branch of PIE from which
Proto Iranian and Proto Indo Aryan evolved. Avestan, Old Persian, Middle Persian and still later various present
day languages of Iran, Afghanistan and areas neighbouring these are daughter languages of Porto Iranian. Vedic,
Sanskrit, Pali and various Prakrit dialects spoken in the Gangetic Plains in the first millennium BC, like Ardha
1
Nostratic hypothesis is a model of the original language family of northern Eurasia. It was proposed in 1903 by the Danish linguist
Holger Pedersen as parent language of Indo-European, Uralic, Altaic, Afro-Asiatic, and possibly other language families under one
broad category. The name Nostratic is derived from the Latinnostrates meaning fellow countrymen. Modern research on the
Nostratic hypothesis began with the work of the Russian scholar, Vladislav M. Illich-Svitych, who made a detailed study in the mid-
1960s to establish the relatedness of the four above-named groups, together with Kartvelian and Dravidian. Colin Renfrew proposed the
NostraticUrheimat(original homeland) in the Fertile Crescent in the Mesolithic Period, before 10000 BCE. Bomhard (2008) suggests
differentiation of Proto-Nostratic into various proto daughter dialects by 8,000 BCE. But the hypothesis continues to be controversial.

13
14 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

Magadhi and Sauraseni, were daughter languages of IA. Apabhramsa dialects (Middle Indo-Aryan languages) in
use in the first millennium CE evolved from these, and most North Indian languages of the day are daughter
languages of Middle Indo-Aryan languages. Concurrently Paninnian or Classical Sanskrit continued to be a live
language as a preferred medium of scholarly and literary composition among Sanskrit scholars from the time of
Panini till recently. It was also continued to be used for oral communication till Muslim rule was established firmly
in many parts of India and even after that among Sanskrit literate people from different parts of the country.
Linguists have reconstructed the basics of the PIE and various cultural, life style aspects of its pre-historic
speakers. For example the presence of root words in the reconstructed PIE for ice and for flora and fauna found in
cold regions is assumed to limit the area of the Urheimat to such regions. For similar reasons they were believed
to be nomadic pastoralists, who were fond of singing and who buried their dead in individual pits. It is believed
to have been an early Bronze Age culture centered on animal husbandry and domesticated horse.
The Centum-Satem isogloss was usually thought of an important hypothesis in respect of the process of
evolution of the Indo-European language family, at least in the beginning. An isogloss is the geographical boundary
of certain linguistic features, such as the pronunciation of a vowel, the meaning of a word, or use of some syntactic
feature. It was devised by von Bradke in the late 19th century and relates to the different evolution of the dorsal
consonants2 of Proto-Indo-European (PIE). In some branches, the palatals fell together with the velars (articulated
at the back of the mouth). These branches are known as Centum branches, named after the Latin pronunciation
for hundred. In some other branches the labiovelars fell together with the velars (articulated in the front of the
mouth). These branches are known as Satem branches, named after the Avestan pronunciation for hundred or
Sanskrit Satam. The centum group includes Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic and Tocharian. Tocharian, a now
dead language spoken till the first millennium AD in parts of western China, appears to be a special case where
all three PIE dorsal series have merged into a single sound. This has led some writers to suggest that Tocharian
does not fit the CentumSatem model. The satem languages include Baltic, Slavic, Armenian and Indo-Iranian.
Palatalization is believed to be a one-way process transforming velars into palatals but never the reverse; so that
the velar or centum forms had to be the original and the palatal or satem forms the evolved variants. Vedic,
which is a satem language, had to be a later branch of IE if this model is correct and it must have come to India
from outside since it is believed that the origin of PIE was outside India. Another linguistic argument was that
the vowel differentiation in Latin and Greek was original, and that in Sanskrit was a subsequent development.
Yet another somewhat controversial philological theory is the linguistic centre of gravity principle which
states that a language familys most likely point of origin must be in the area of its greatest diversity. Only one
branch of the ten major sub branches of Proto Indo-European is found in India, whereas the remaining eight (also
excluding Tocharian) branches of Indo-European are all found in Central-Eastern Europe and areas proximate to
these. Because it requires a greater number of long migrations from the centre to the area of each sub family,
an Indian Urheimat of IE or origin of the language family, is far less likely than one closer to the centre of Indo-
European linguistic diversity, which is East Europe. But there are a number of scholars who are sceptical of this
theory and its universal applicability.
One of the main reasons for 19th-century philologists to exclude India as a candidate for Urheimat status, apart
from Centum-Satem isogloss hypothesis, was the findings of a fledgling new method called linguistic palaeontology
devised by nineteenth century linguists. The idea was that from the reconstructed vocabulary of PIE, one could
deduce which flora, fauna and artefacts were familiar to the speakers of the proto-language, hence also their
geographical area of habitation. Thus, speakers of a language that has words for snow, sleigh, reindeer,
and seal must live in a very different place from those of a language with words for palm, coconut, rice,
and elephant. Based on the consensus reconstructions of PIE, its speakers must have lived in a temperate
2
Dorsal consonants are articulated with the middle part of the tongue or the dorsum. They include the palatal, velar, alveolo-palatal
and uvular consonants. These, particularly the velar consonant, is the most common consonant in human languages, though there are
some exceptions. In articulatory phonetics, the place of articulation of a consonant is the point of contact where an obstruction of wind
flow occurs in the vocal tract. It can be an active articulator, like some part of the tongue or a passive location, like some part of the
roof of the mouth. Along with the manner of articulation, this gives the consonant its distinctive sound.
2.1. LINGUISTIC THEORIES AND EVIDENCES 15

environment, where snow, birch trees, beech trees, and wolves were common features, but salt-water bodies were
not. Reconstructions of words for rye, barley, sickle and plough tell us that PIE speakers had agriculture,
while words for sheep, goat, pig, and cattle mean that they raised animals. The reconstructed PIE also has
the roots like ekwos for horse and kwekwlo for wheel. The presence in the common vocabulary of words
denoting northern animals like the bear, wolf, elk, otter and beaver seemed to indicate a northern Urheimat;
likewise, the absence of terms for the lion or elephant seemed to exclude tropical countries like India. But this
kind of conclusions seem to be rather speculative.
Reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European language clearly has inherent limitations and yet it was used as a
means of pinpointing the geographical location of the original homeland. Thus, on the basis of the few reconstructed
names of animals, birds and plants, and words indicating climate, common to different Indo-European branches,
the linguists concluded that the Proto-Indo-Europeans lived in a cold environment, and were acquainted with a
few plants/trees like barley, birch, pine and oak, and animals like horses, cattle, goats, sheep, deer, bears, wolves,
dogs, foxes and otters.
While many Indo-European languages might have had these words, the Proto Indo-Aryan language did not
have many of these, but had words for flora and fauna found in South Asia. The words retained in either group
of languages could be the original forms. The only conclusion that can be derived is that the speakers of these
dialects retained only words for plants and animals present in their place of settlement, unless you start from the
pre-determined assumption that South Russia has to be the original Home Land. To conclude that any one set of
these points to the original home of Indo-Europeans is bending the available evidence to suit a favored hypothesis.
In any case, this method of determining The Home Land is not taken seriously in academic circles at present.
As linguist Stefan Zimmer puts it: The long dispute about the reliability of this linguistic paleontology is not
yet finished, but approaching its inevitable end - with a negative result, of course.
Based on these linguistic theories most scholars came to accept the hypotheses that Vedic language had entered
India from the North-West. The date first suggested by Max Muller was 1200 BCE, possibly based on the then
accepted chronology of Biblical events. Some people believe that Max Mullers proposal could probably be based
on his firm belief in the Biblical date of the creation of the world on October 23, 4004 BC. This is not to belittle
the unmatched scholarship of Muller. He had little else to base his estimate at that time and had himself often
expressed doubts about the chronology. The presently accepted date of the arrival of the language in South Asia
is slightly earlier (1500-1700 BCE). As Indo-Aryan was a later branch of IE and Urheimat of PIE was assumed to
be somewhere in Eastern Europe, the obvious conclusion was that the language entered India form that area in
the time frame indicated above.
There are a number of other conjectures, hypothesizes and theories which point to the origin of Vedic language
outside India, though some of these have lost mainstream academic support. Even with regard to the Satem-
Centum and vowel differentiation, there are differing views among scholars. For example the proposed Satem
Centum split was undermined by the discoveries of Hittite and Tocharian, which were centum languages located
within the hypothetical satem geographical range. Tocharian presented particularly serious difficulties as it is
isolated in the Far East, separated from centum language areas in Europe by thousands of miles of rugged terrain
and hostile people. The finding that, Tocharian, the most eastward Indo-European language, was a centum
language, has put the concept of centum-satem division untenable and the division is thus no longer considered a
real isogloss, though the term remain useful and thus is used widely. Most authors now believe that each branch
became centum or satem independently.
This division based on a single isogloss was further weakened by continued research into additional Indo-
European isoglosses, many of which seemed of equal or greater importance in the development of daughter lan-
guages. Philip Baldi explains:

...an early dialect split of the type indicated by the centum-satem contrast should be expected to be
reflected in other high-order dialect distinctions as well, a pattern which is not evident from an analysis
of shared features among eastern and western languages.
16 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

The division of the Indo-European languages into Satem/Centum groups is held by many scholars now to be
outdated as it is based on just one phonological feature. Thus it is doubtful if it or the current interpretation
of the various linguistic features discussed above can be treated as the primary source of evidence in the spread
of Indo-European languages in its present form. Colin Renfrew notes that the satemcentum distinction is not
in itself accorded much significance today as it is considered too simplistic. Besides, many other isoglosses
identified since are inconsistent with the interpretation of centum-satem contrast.
An isogloss is an indicator of geographical proximity, rather than of genetic relationship, in respect of dialects
and languages sharing that isogloss. Thus when, in some cases, some of the dialects or languages sharing the
isogloss move geographically away from each other into non-contiguous areas, and continue to retain the linguistic
feature, that linguistic feature is a testimony to their geographical proximity at some time in the past. An
examination of the different extant or attested branches of the Indo- European language family shows different
linguistic features found as isoglosses linking different branches to each other. The branches sharing any particular
isogloss are not necessarily spoken in contiguous areas at present, and many are not on record as having been
spoken in contiguous areas even in historical times. Thus the only conclusion that can be drawn is that these
branches, in the form of some stage of the respective ancestral dialects of Porto-Indo-European, were spoken in
contiguous areas in the original Indo-European homeland or close to it, before they separated from each other or
at various points and stages during the process of their separation.
The immediate daughter dialects of Proto-Indo-European dialect, can be divided into three groups on the basis
of their break from the main body, the Early Dialects, the European dialects, and the Last Dialects.

1. The Early Dialects: Anatolian (Hittite), Tocharian.

2. The European dialects: Italic (south-west of Europe), Celtic(central west), Germanic (north west), Baltic
(north east), Slavic (east).

3. The Last Dialects: Albanian or proto Balkan, Greek, Armenian/Phrygian, Iranian, Indo-Aryan.

It is significant that, while there are isoglosses shared between Early and European Dialects and those between
European and late dialects, the Early Dialects and the Last Dialects, and, more particularly, the Early Dialects
and Indo-Iranian, do not share any isoglosses with each other.
One of these isoglosse, identified between Iranian, Armenian/Phrygian and Greek is difficult to explain in
terms of the currently popular Kurgan model, as this linguistic feature is not present in Indic languages. In
these languages the s sound has shifted to h. This must have occurred before the date of the oldest texts
like Avesta. This shift, which is universal in the three branches, is not found in Sanskrit and a majority of the
Indo-Aryan languages, although a similar shift is present in some modem Indo-Aryan dialects of the northwest and
west (Gujarati, etc.) and, significantly, in Sinhalese. This could have evolved only when the three dialects were in
close and contiguous areas; and yet separated from Indo-Aryan branch. The Kurgan model cannot accommodate
such a situation as the split between Indo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan is believed to have happened long after the
common dialect split from Armenian/Phrygian and Greek.
According to Victor H. Mair (MAIR 1998:847-853), for example, the Indo-Iranians were already separated
from the speakers of the Anatolian and Tocharian Dialects by 3700 BCE, from the speakers of the Italic, Celtic,
Germanic, Baltic, Slavic and Albanian Dialects by 3200 BCE, from the speakers of the Greek Dialect by 2500 BCE,
and from the speakers of the Armenian Dialect by 2000 BCE. Other authors have slightly different chronology
with minor differences; but the comparative order is the same. Thus, there could not have been a stage when
Iranian, Armenian/Phrygian and Greek were in contiguous areas and yet seperated from Indo-Aryan.
Many isoglosses identified so far are quite complex, baffling and difficult to explain within any of the proposed
models of Original homeland and chronology and sequence of IE expansion. One such particularly difficult
isoglosse is the one that includes Hittite and Phrygian in the centre south, Tocharian in the far east, Celtic in
2.1. LINGUISTIC THEORIES AND EVIDENCES 17

the far west and Italic in the south-west3 of the purported IE homeland. This isogloss could have formed only
in a secondary homeland, outside and away the the original homeland, which must have functioned as an area of
settlement and common development for the migrating branches. The original home area would then be home
to the intermediate proto languages, the ancestors of Germanic, Slavonic, Greek, Armenian, Albanian or Balkan,
Iranian and Indo Aryan. This should introduce some uncertainties for The steppe home land model, as it will
now have to look for the location of this secondary home land as well as the chronology of its branching. And it
will have to deal with at least another two proto languages.
To get over this problem, some authors suggest that this isogloss is probably an example of the archaism
of the fringe phenomenon. The isoglosses shared in common by these branches were not innovations developed
by these branches in common, but archaic features which have been retained by otherwise separately migrating
branches. When a language is spread over a large territory, speakers at the fringe of that territory are likely to be
detached from what goes on at the core. Linguistic innovations that take place at the core may never find their
way out to peripheral areas; hence dialects spoken on the fringe tend to preserve archaic features that have long
since disappeared from the mainstream.
The archaism of the fringe implies that the left over dialects, which were the ancestors of Germanic, Semitic,
Greek, Armenian, Balkan, Iranian and Indo Aryan remained in the core area after the others had moved to the
fringe. There are many problems with this model. For example, Germanic has also some isoglosses in common
with Hittite and Tocharian. It is not clear how such an isogloss is possible, if Germanic was not a part of the former
isogloss. Also the dialects that remained in the core area would include both centum and satem languages, after
other major centum dialects had moved to the fringe areas. Thus, South Russian homeland model appears to
be incompatible with the evidence of the isoglosses. Similarly Hittite, Tocharian and Italic are the dialects which
are thought to be the first, second and third respectively, to migrate from the original purported homeland in the
Steppes and they share a few isoglosses almost exclusively with each other.
A fundamental attribute of isoglosses is that every single isogloss can be mapped out showing all the dialects
which share that isogloss lying in a contiguous area, now or at some time in the past, without any intrusions of any
dialect which does not share that particular isogloss. These need not be in contiguous area at present, but they
must have been so at some time in the past for a substantial period of time of at least a couple of centuries or more.
It would have been impossible under the steppe home land model for the speakers of Tocharian, Hittite, Italic
and Celtic to have coexisted in close contiguity and yet apart from all other IE dialects at any time, somewhere in
the steppes, so as to have developed these features. If these four dilects had moved together in any direction away
from the others, at least two of these groups would need to retrace their steps and move in the opposite direction
later, through almost certainly hostile territory, as the first attested geographical area of these languages are west
of the steppes in case of Celtic, south-west in case of Italic, south in case of Hittites and, most problematically,
far east in case of Tocharian. A long migration through areas of total strangers , for thousands of miles, during a
period lasting many decades or centuries would have been devilishly difficult; if not impossible, in ancient times.
No one would have allowed complete strangers speaking unknown languages and with unfamiliar lifestyles moving
among them. Besides the strangers also would try to satisfy their basic material needs from the often constrained
3
There are reasons to believe that the ancient Phrygian language was part of the isogloss, based on the very limited attestations of
the language. But Armenian, the only living member of the Thrace-Phrygian branch, does not share the r-isogloss, nor did the ancient
Thracian language. The seeming presence of this isogloss in Phrygian could be due to the influence of Hittite, with which it shared its
historical habitat. Phrygian later replaced Hittite as the dominant language of Central Anatolia.
The Phrygians were an ancient Indo-European people, first attested in southern Balkans. They later moved to the north west of
Anatolia. The Thracians were a group of Indo-European tribes inhabiting a large area in south eastern Europe.They spoke theThracian
language, a scarcely attested branch of the Indo-European language family. The first reference to them is found in the Iliad, where
they are described as allies of the Trojans. Thracians inhabited parts of the ancient Balkans and Anatolia. Illyria was a region in the
western part of the Balkan Peninsula inhabited by the Illyrians, roughly the areas of todays Croatia, Bosnia and Albania. Thrace was
to the east of Illyria. Albanian might have evolved from an ancientPaleo-Balkan language, possibly either Illyrian or Thracian. The
concept of Thraco-Illyrian as a separate Proto language is not favored now. All three languages are scarcely attested and thus it is
difficult to make any firm conclusions about them. They are also probably Language Isolates.
18 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

local sources; a sure recipe for conflict. They would have been annihilated or absorbed by the people in the areas
through which they might have tried to pass. Such a movement of large groups of strangers would be unthinkable
even in todays liberal and globalised societies. On the basis of the currently popular model, it is impossible that
these dialects could have been in contiguous areas, but separated from all other IE dialects, at any time in the
past.
There is no easy explanation for the Old Russian/Avestan isoglosses discovered by Patri (2001) or for the
presence of words from many IE language families in Finnish language, including those from Indo Aryan or for the
presence of Old German word roots in Old Chinese. Such branch-crossing isoglosses or just inexplicable data
are often difficult to explain under the popular tree model of linguistic evolutions. This has led many authors to
propose what is termed as the wave model. But it is difficult to see how even wave model can explain the s to
h isogloss shared by Old Greek, Old Persian and Armenian languages, but not present in Indic Languages. It
is possible that there has been contact between the Indo-European languages throughout their history and that
some isoglosses could be the effects of contact (convergence wave model) rather than inheritance (divergence
tree model). But these contacts will have to be explained historically, chronologically and geographically. A few
of these might be explainable as chance independent developments, though these could test ones credibility. But
many of them involving multiple languages and linguistic features will be hard to explain as the result of wave
model contacts at the fringe, leave alone as chance independent developments. Isoglosses involving multiple
languages and linguistic features would be impossible without common origin or long close geographic contacts.
Thus, it appears that linguistic isoglosses have added to the uncertainties and imponderables of origin and
expansion of Indo European Languages, rather than help resolve the issues. In fact most popular models of the
process would become untenable, if the distribution of the IE isoglosses so far identified are accepted. The lone
possible exception could be the Out Of India model, though not in its entirety. These inexplicable isoglosses
may be pointers to unknown or unimagined past history of the language group and probably deeper chronologies
of the pre-history of IE languages. It also points to the severe limitations of our knowledge of prehistory.

2.1.1 Tools of Historical Linguistics

In the course of the 19th century Indo-European studies evolved as a science in its own right. As part of this,
various techniques and methods were developed which help the linguists to arrive at conclusions about previous
stages of a language. Some of such techniques are
1 COMPARATIVE METHOD or CM. This refers to the practice of comparing forms in two or more languages
with a view of discovering regularities of correspondence. It is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned
with comparing languages to establish their historical relatedness. comparative linguistics aims to construct
language families, to reconstruct proto-languages and specify the changes that have resulted in the documented
languages. A number of methods for carrying out language classification have been developed, ranging from simple
inspection to computerised hypothesis testing. Such methods have gone through a long process of development.
The fundamental technique of comparative linguistics is to compare phonological systems, morphological sys-
tems, syntax and the lexicon of two or more languages using techniques such as the comparative method. From
them, regular sound correspondences between the languages are established, and a sequence of regular sound
changes can then be postulated, which allows the proto-language to be reconstructed. A simple instance from
English and German concerns the consonants /t/ and /s/. Where English has /t/ German has /s/: water :
Wasser, better : besser, foot : Fuss. It is obvious here that English /t/ corresponds to German /s/ in non-initial
position. Other Germanic languages like Swedish also has retained t in vatten, betra and fot for water, better
and foot. This would imply that it is German which has changed the original /t/ to its present /s/.
A major concern of the comparative method is validating a postulated original form, which is not attested. By
looking at a several genetically related languages linguists can attempt to reconstruct the ancestor language from
which the modern related languages are derived. Since linguists do not have, in most cases, actual access to written
records of the proto-language, they work backwards from modern languages or older languages for which records
2.1. LINGUISTIC THEORIES AND EVIDENCES 19

are avilable, to reconstruct the proto-language. This is done by identifying cognate forms in these languages.
But the real test is that the reconstruction should match reality.
In linguistics, cognates are words that have a common etymological origin or having the same linguistic
derivation as another (e.g. English father, German Vater, Latin pater). The word cognate derives from the Latin
cognatus or blood relative. In linguistic research, it is generally excluds doublets and loan words, although
broader definitions are sometimes used.
After several millennia of gradual evolusion, cognates often acquire very different phonetic shapes. For example,
English hundred, French cent, and Polish sto are all descendants of Porto-Indo-European parent. Thus cognates
often become unidentifiable as such. They also do not need to have the same meaning, which may have changed as
the languages developed separately. Cognates also do not need to have similar forms. The semantic change can be
quite dramatic. For example, English guest and Latin host (enemy) are cognates, even though their meanings
are diametrically different. Similarly, the Hebrew word for impudence, and its Classical Arabic cognate have
opposite meaning. On the other hand, phonetic similarity of semantically equivalent words can also be a matter
of chance resemblance, as in English day and Latin die. False cognates are words that are commonly thought
to be related or thought to have a common origin, but which linguistic examination reveals to be unrelated.
linguists have developed many tools to verify if words in different languages are cognats, some of them using
highly complex algorithms. These are mostly based on sound law and uses knowledge of systematic sound corre-
spondences or phonological changes that they have undergone. Cognates may often be easily recognised, but in
many cases authorities often differ in their interpretations of the evidence. Basically, the proceedure is as follows.
Words that exhibit some phonological similarity are analyzed in order to find systematic correspondences of sounds
and in turn these are used to distinguish between genuine cognates and borrowings or chance resemblances. It is
standard to look for cognates among basic vocabulary items, e.g. body parts, close kinship terms, low numbers,
basic geographical terms, since these are more likely to be words which are preserved from the proto-language,
rather than borrowed at a later time. The standared for such lists is The Swadesh list.4 . It is a list of basic
concepts for the purposes of historical-comparative linguistics. Translations of the Swadesh list into a set of words
of selected languages allow researchers to quantify the interrelatedness of those languages.
Comparative method uses cognates in different languages with a common origin to arrive at conclusions. But
correct identification of cognates is often problematic. The fundamental assumption in recognising cognates is
that sound laws have no exceptions. When it was initially proposed, critics proposed an alternate position,
summarized by the maxim each word has its own history. Several types of change do in fact alter words in
non-regular ways. Unless identified, they may hide or distort laws and cause false perceptions of relationship.
Sporadic changes, such as irregular inflections, compounding, and abbreviation, do not follow any laws. For
example, the Spanish words palabra (word), peligro (danger) and milagro (miracle) should have been parabla,
periglo, miraglo by regular sound changes from the Latin parabola, periculum and miraculum, but the r and l
changed places by sporadic metathesis. All languages borrow words from other languages in various contexts.
They are likely to have followed the laws of the languages from which they were borrowed rather than the laws
of the borrowing language. These uncertainties make the Comparative method as well as the identification of
cognates in different languages a hard task and error prone. Some scholars observe that even a systematic sound
change is at first applied in an unsystematic fashion, with the percentage of its occurrence in a persons speech
dependent on various social factors. The sound change gradually spreads, a process known as lexical diffusion.
Thus they do not always apply to all lexical items at the same time. Such exceptions leave the neogrammarians
axiom that sound laws have no exceptions often doubtful.
2 INTERNAL RECONSTRUCTION This is the second major technique in reconstructing previous stages of
languages. The basic principle is that one uses evidence from within a single language to gain knowledge of an
earlier stage. Such evidence is usually available as unproductive or unused forms, which are taken as remnants of
4
The Swadesh list is named after the U.S. linguist Morris Swadesh, who created the first such lists. After many alterations and
corrections, he published his final 100-word list in 1971.
20 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

those which were formerly active.

These techniques are based on a number of assumptions and principles. Perhaps the most important of these
is The Uniformitarian Principle or UP, sometimes also referred to as the Principle of Uniformity. It very simply
claims that the processes which we observe in the present can help us to gain knowledge about processes in the
past. The reasoning behind this is that we must assume that whatever happens today, must also have been possible
in the past; whatever is impossible today, must have been impossible in the past. If we observe today that water
boils at around 100 degrees Celsius, we can logically assume that it also did so at any given point in the past.
This principle, which originated in the natural sciences, has also been applied in the humanities and in linguistics,
when looking at historical developments. In linguistics, however, the Uniformitarian Principle may have to be
taken with a pinch of salt, since there is no clear and simple correlate to the laws of nature. The Uniformity we
observe in nature is on account of The laws of nature. But it is uncertain if there are any equivalent laws of
human phonetics. From what we can observe, phonetic changes appear to be random.
General knowledge of linguistic processes often helps to formulate useful laws of linguistics. One such is the
assumption that palatalisation is a process that always result in a forward movement, from the velum to the
palate. The shifting of an articulation from a velar position to a palatal one is a very common phenomenon. 5
Examples of velar consonants in English are k and g and for palatals is t. Again, an instance of a knowledge
about some aspect of the nature, that is of a general nature, leading to validation of an individual case would be
with morphology. If a language has fewer inflections than another, then it is probably right to assume that the
latter is older or at least more conservative, as inherited inflections tend to be lost by phonetic attrition.
Applying general knowledge in particular cases assumes that linguists have an accurate conception of what
constitutes a typical and what an unusual change, but it is difficult to quantify typical and unusual. This is hardly
ever self evident and thus there is often disagreement among scholars on this point. Besides it is a sort of inductive
reasoning, where a few specific instances are used to formulate a general rule. Such logic can be valid in many
cases, but is apt to be widely off the mark in others. Thus the validity of this type of conclusions may be probable
and not definite.
Another fundamental assumption is that rate of retention of items is relatively constant for all languages
throughout time: about 80% of the basic vocabulary of 200 items (86% of the 100 item list) is retained over 1000
years and 20% (14% for 100 item list) lost/shifted during this time. But the validity of such an assumption should
be considered suspect. During times of hugely destructive invasions and wars, large migrations, climate changes
etc., the pace of evolution of dialects also can change. In ancient/medieval times instances of such disturbances
were probably common. The assumption of uniformity in a proto-language, implicit in the comparative method,
is also problematic. Even in small language communities there are always dialect differences, whether based on
area, gender, class, or other factors.
Reconstruction of proto languages and and the language trees with its nodes, using such assumptions and
principles can be a distinct possibility, but cannot be considered unassailable. However many linguists appear to
have unshakable faith in such models. Quoted below is what David W. Anthony and Don Ringe have to say in
their article titled The Indo-European Homeland from Linguistic and Archaeological Perspectives that appeared
in Annu. Rev. Linguist. 2015.linguistics.annualreviews.org.

It is true that we can recover only part of any prehistoric language: a larger or smaller portion of its
lexicon and a larger or smaller fragment of its grammar, depending on how much inherited material is
preserved by the actually attested daughter languages. Some details may remain unrecoverable, and
our reconstructions are sometimes temporally out of focus, including slightly older and slightly less
old details in the same reconstruction. However, each protolanguage that we reconstruct must be an
approximation of some real language spoken by a real community, for two different reasons. One basis
of our confidence is the nature of the comparative method by which we reconstruct protolanguages: It
5
Velars are produced by raising the back part of the tongue to the soft palate or the velum, whereas palatals are produced by raising
the front part of the tongue to the palate.
2.1. LINGUISTIC THEORIES AND EVIDENCES 21

exploits the observed regularity of sound change by means of simple mathematics, yielding categorical
results that can be replicated by other researchers and checked both for internal consistency and against
information from other sources.
The other reason for our confidence is the Uniformitarian Principle (UP), familiar from other historical
sciences such as paleontology. As usually applied in linguistics, the UP holds that unless external
conditions can be shown to have changed in some way that can be proved to have an impact on human
language, we must assume that the structures of past languages, the way they were acquired by children,
the changes they underwent, the distribution of linguistic variation in their speech communities, and
so on fell within the same ranges as those of languages that can still be observed and studied. Thus,
the UP is usually invoked to flesh out the impoverished language data that survive from the past and
our necessarily limited reconstructions of protolanguages. But it can also be used to make a different
argument: If straightforward mathematical reconstruction yields a grammar fragment that falls within
the observed range for modern native languages, we can reasonably infer that it corresponds to some
real language of the past spoken by some real speech community, because experience shows that
living languages do not exist apart from native speech communities. Because the grammar fragment,
phonological system, and lexemes that are reconstructible for PIE reveal a coherent, unremarkable
human language, the UP suggests that the PIE-speaking community might, given the correct integrative
methods, be correlated with the reality recovered by archaeology

In spite of the confident assertion of such reputed scholars, one will have to note the many uncertainties inherent
in practices and processes of historical linguistics. Conclusions reached by such methods can only be probable and
not certain.
All attempts to identify an actual pre historic people with an unattested language depend on sound recon-
struction of that language for reliable identification of cultural aspects and environmental factors which may be
associated with a particular time and culture (such as the use of metals, agriculture vs. pastoralism, geographically
distinctive plants and animals, etc). A powerful tool that linguists make use of for the purpose is the so called
Linguistic Archaeology or Linguistic Palaeontology which attempts to put a firm date to the linguistic record using
archaeological data. One such tool is known as lexical periodisation or lexical self-dating. According to this
method, names of datable notions (i.e. tools, techniques, social institutions and the like) can be assumed to have
been created at the moment of the given innovation. In other words, the lexicalisation of datable referents can be
assumed to have the same date as that of the referent. As a consequence, lexical self-dating, applied with the
due care, is a useful tool to produce a lexical periodisation system. For example agriculture related words could
only have entered the lexicon at roughly the period when agriculture was first invented. Similarly words related to
horse riding and chariots might be assumed to have been created when these innovations came into use or words
related to metals like copper and bronze might be from the beginning of Bronze Age or Chalcolithic (copper) Age.
But such lexical periodisation can be error prone. Linguistic reconstruction makes it possible to identify
particular words which are taken to have formed part of the vocabulary of the Porto-Indo-European language.
But these are reconstructed on the basis of sound laws, which are not properly supported in many instances by
parallel meaning laws. Thus one cannot be certain exactly what these terms may have referred to at the PIE
stage. It is possible words might have been adapted for new uses when they came into use. For example the
Porto IE sound for to shine or glow was later used to denote gold. The technique of inferring culture from such
reconstructions is therefore open to criticism, and the same word is open to different interpretations. This is what
Paul Heggarty of Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig has to say about such methods

Cultural reconstruction is no hard science. It is open to a great deal of subjective interpretation and
interminable arguments, and not probative at all. For while linguists can reconstruct sounds reliably,
by near exceptionless sound laws, we have no equivalent meaning laws to be able to reconstruct
*exact* meanings, especially not where referents themselves are necessarily changing, in processes of
22 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

domestication or technological development. The supposed wheel words actually go back to more
general words for turn, rotate and walk, formed into words that look literally like turn-turn (thing),
for example.

Another uncertain element is that some of these similar words in different languages may be loan words, although
linguists use widely accepted procedures to differentiate genetically inherited words and loan words.
Linguistic reconstruction is fraught with significant uncertainties and offer room for subjective speculation.
Often other scenarios could also account for the data. The reconstruction of unknown proto-languages is inher-
ently subjective. Thus all current models of Indo-European origin or expansion are open to possible substantial
modification in future.

2.2 Origin of Proto Indo-European Language

There are many theories regarding the location of the Urheimat or homeland6 of PIE and the model of its expansion.
Some of the hypotheses regarding the origin of PIE are

Model Period of origin Area where originated

Armenian hypothesis 4th millennium BC Armenia
Sogdiana hypothesis 4th or 5th millennium BC East of the Caspian Sea, in the area of ancient
Bactria-Sogdiana. Johanna Nichols (1997) holds
that the dispersal of the Indo-European lan-
guages commenced from a region somewhere in
the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana. She
revived the forgotten 18 century model with
some new linguistic arguments.
Kurgan hypothesis 5th millennium BC The Pontic-Caspian steppe.
Out of India model 6th millennium BC India.
Anatolian hypothesis 7th millennium BCE Anatolia.
Palaeolithic Continuity Theory Before 10th millennium BC Somewhere in Euresia.

Other such suggestions like North-Western Europe and the Arctic Circle have little following now. All these
models are still based on theories that cannot claim finality as there is no direct evidence of the nature of Proto-
Indo-European language or society. All interpretations of whatever aspects this society or the language might
have had are therefore only inferences. Interpretations based on archaeology makes the assumption that one
particular homeland hypotheses is in fact correct as there is nothing that really connects the archaeological finds
to the language except inferences based on various artefacts unearthed by archaeology. Linguistics by itself cannot
determine the actual chronology of the evolution of a language, but at most only a comparative order. It can date
6
It is essential that some of the words that will recur in this book are defined very clearly. A homeland is usually defined as a
continuous area where a dialect or language or language group was first known or believed to have been spoken and a migration out
of it is any movement causing that area to become non-continuous. A movement that simply changes the shape of the home land is
an expansion or expansive intrusion and not migration. The linguistic population of the homeland need not be a single language,
but a set of closely related languages, the first-order daughters of the original proto language. While the steppe home land model
postulates a series of migrations out of the original home land, the Anatolian Hypothesis assumes a series of expansions or expansive
intrusion, first into Southern Europe and later into other parts of Europe. Both these types of movements would require some very
strong impelling force as few would venture into the unknown, hostile and often dangerous lands, unless there are very strong motivating
factors. This impelling force was believed to be wander lust in case of Kurgan model, search for good agricultural land and water
sources and possibly demographic pressure, in case of Anatolian Hypothesis , deep time depth, in case of Paleolithic Continuity Theory
and Demographic surplus and resulting conflicts, in case of Out of India model. But simple wander lust , as in the case of Kurgan
model, would be a very unsatisfactory explanation for them. Migrations to lands thousands of kilometres away would be far less likely.
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 23

the events only with the help of some other branch of knowledge. Thus IE linguistics will remain a dependent
variable, unless some kind of writing of an IE language from third millennium BC is unearthed.
Among the above models Kurgan hypothesis has emerged as the front runner at present. Anatolian Hypothesis
by Colin Renfrew, Palaeolithic Continuity Theory by Mario Alinei and Out of India model are the other serious
contenders, but have only limited academic support. Essentials of these models is stated briefly as follws.

2.2.1 Kurgan Hypothesis

A Kurgan is a circular burial mound constructed over a pit grave, which is a common feature all over the Pontic
Steppes. The term is now widely used for such structures of Eastern European and Central Asian archaeology
and is a Turkic loan word in Russian. The distribution of such tumuli in Eastern Europe corresponds closely
to the area of the Pit Grave and The Yamna cultures dating to the 36th-23rd centuries BC which are identified
with the late Porto-Indo-Europeans (PIE). Geographically the area in Pontic Steppe north of the Black Sea and
the Caspian Sea coincide with the land of the ancient Scythians. Characteristic of the Kurgan culture include
inhumations in pit graves with a kurgan structure over the pits and the dead body placed in a supine position
with bent knees. The bodies were covered in red ochre. Multiple graves have been found in successive layers in
these kurgans as later insertions. Significantly, animal grave offerings were made (cattle, sheep, goats and horse),
a feature associated with Porto-Indo-Europeans. These Kurgans are mounds of earth and stones raised over a
grave, with features like the presence of an entryway into the chamber, into the tomb, into the fence, or into the
kurgan, funeral chambers, the presence of an altar in the chamber and a wooden roof over or under the kurgan,
at the top of the kurgan, or around the kurgan. Depending on a combination of elements, each historical and
cultural nomadic zone had its architectural peculiarities.
Some of these Kurgans are complex and large structures like Ipatovo kurgan located near Ipatovo, some 120
km north-east of Stavropol, Russia. This is particularly special not only because of its sheer size with a height of
7 meters, but also because of the complexity of the architectural evidence which covers at least thirteen phases
of construction and use, from the 4th millennium BC to the 18th century AD. The first grave may have been a
burial of the Maykop culture, which was destroyed by later graves. The earliest extant grave contained two young
people, buried in a sitting position, dating to the late 4th millennium. On top was a Sarmatian grave of the 3rd
century BC. A woman had been buried here in extended position on the back, together with an exceptionally rich
treasure of grave-goods like gold ornaments. In the final phase, more than 100 simple graves were dug into the
slope of the barrow, probably 18th century burials of the Turkic Islamic nomads who later moved into the area.
The early phases include a wagon burial, with the skeleton deposited in an extended position; the complete wagon
had been deposited next to the body, and wooden parts such as the wheels were substantially preserved. The
latter gave a radio carbon date of 2615-2337 BC. In addition, the grave had a large number of bronze artefacts,
including a hook, a knife and a medallion.
In 1956 Lithuanian-born American archaeologist Marina Gimbals first proposed her Kurgan hypothesis
combining archaeology with linguistics to locate the origins of the Porto-Indo-European (PIE) speaking people in
the Pontic Steppe towards the end of Neolithic or during the Chalcolithic period or copper age or early Bronze
Age. Her technique of thus combining archaeology with linguistics was considered by many as quite revolutionary
at the time. The concept of Cultural horizon proposed by by Marina Gimbals, included several cultures in what
she termed as Kurgan Culture that coexisted in the steppes during the period, including the Samara culture
and the Yamna culture. The Yamna culture (36th to 23rd centuries BCE), also called Pit Grave Culture,
may have been the nucleus of the proto-Indo-European language. By the 1970s consensus had emerged among
Indo-Europeanists in favour of this model and it had a significant impact on Indo-European research.
According to this theory early Bronze Age Ponting-Caspian steppe people spread westward as well as eastward
on horseback and chariots carrying Porto Indo-European language with them. The presence of Indo-European
languages everywhere from England to India was assumed to have been a product of the invention of horse-chariot
technology shortly before 2000 BC and their original speakers were assumed as particularly powerful and ruthless
24 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

warlords. The original Indo-Europeans were imagined as a horde of aristocratic Bronze Age warriors who came
hurtling out of the steppes, overwhelming the simple peasant cultures of Europe and even toppling the civilization
of the Indus Valley which was far ahead of the nomads in many other technologies. The history of Indo-European
was seen as the key to a remote romantic era, a time of great migrations and heroic conquests. It was taken for
granted that the prehistoric past could best be understood in terms of warfare and colonization. This point of
view had a sort of romantic appeal and came to have wide acceptance. This model thus is more or less a modern
variation on the traditional invasion theory.
The model proposes that the proto-Indo-Europeans gradually split into several dialect groups, which eventually
evolved into the proto Indo-European daughter languages. One of the groups moved eastward and established the
the Sintashta culture (2100-1800 BCE), from which developed the Andronovo and Yaz cultures (1800-1400 BCE).
This culture interacted with the Bactria-Margiana Culture (2300-1700 BCE). Earlier it was thought that Bactria-
Margiana Culture was created by the incoming proto Indo-Aryans. But few hold that view now and the consensus
is that Bactria-Margiana Culture was not Indo-European. Out of this interaction developed the Indo-Iranians,
which split in around 1800 BCE into the Indo-Aryans and the Iranians. One group of Indo-Aryans migrated
to the Levant and became the Mitannians. A second wave moved towards northern India and became Vedic
Aryans. The Andronovo, Bactria-Margiana and Yaz cultures have been associated with Indo-Iranian migrations,
with separation of Indo-Aryans proper from Porto-Indo-Iranians dated to roughly 2000-1800 BC. The Gandhara
Grave, Cemetery H, Copper Hoard and Painted Grey Ware cultures are thought to be archaeological attestations
of Indo-Aryan movements; their arrival in the Indian subcontinent being dated to the Late Harappan period.
This theory is based on a combination of linguistic theories and archaeological data. The evidence for this
model comes from linguistic palaeontology: in particular, certain words to do with the technology of wheeled
vehicles are present across all the branches of the Indo-European family, though not everyone agrees with this.
So Proto Indo-European itself could not have fragmented into those daughter languages before the invention of
chariots and wagons. Further we have archaeological evidence of wheeled vehicles by 4000 BCE in the steppes.
Most estimates based on this model date PIE between 4500 and 2500 BC, with the most probable date falling
around 3700 BC. Many scholars are of the opinion that early PIE could not pre-date 4500 BC, because the
reconstructed vocabulary strongly suggests a culture of the terminal phase of the Neolithic bordering the early
Bronze Age. The main strengths of the model are the archaeological evidence of an early Bronze Age culture with
remains of chariots and horses from third millennium BC in the steppes combined with linguistic evidence for root
words in the reconstructed Proto IE language for technologies mastered by the steppe people like domestication of
horses and chariots. When the Kurgan burial sites, with the horse and chariot remains found there, were securely
dated to a period close enough to the assumed time of Porto IE language, it was natural to connect these two.
I see the wheeled-vehicle evidence as a trump card over any evolutionary tree, says David W Anthony, well
known archaeologist in his scholarly work The Horse, the Wheel, and Language, though he disapproves the use
of the term Kurgan Hypothesis as he believes that there never was a single homogeneous culture that could be
identified as Kurgan Culture. What the Pontic Steppes had were many essentially heterogeneous social groups
with differing racial backgrounds and cultural traits.
But the model has been challenged on account of a number of weaknesses. These include.

In the last three decades, archaeological research has made quite a few revolutionary advances, among which
the most well-known is the much higher chronologies of European prehistory, obtained by radiocarbon and
other innovative dating techniques. These studies have indisputably established that there is absolutely
no trace of any large scale invasion and that a language substitution of the imagined scale would be quite
unlikely. There is probably some indication of a migration event from the steppes towards Easten Europe
and the Balkans some time in the third millennium BCE. But this evidence is not apparent in other parts of
Europe. The evidence collected by archaeology in the last thirty years points to the uninterrupted continuity
of most Copper and Bronze Age cultures of Southern, Western and Northern Europe from Neolithic. This
is also true of the areas south of Oxus River; Iran and South Asia.
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 25

Reconstructed Proto IE language also has many words related to agriculture in its core vocabulary. Thus it
could also be argued that Proto-Indo-Europeans were agriculturalists whereas the Kurgan people were not.
Many terms found in the reconstructed proto Indo-European language are not compatible with the cultural
level of the Kurgans. Kathrin Krell (1998) holds that the Indo-Europeans were primarily agriculturalists
whereas the Kurgan people were just at a pastoral stage and hence might not have had sedentary agricul-
tural terms in their language. Krell has compiled lists of items of flora and fauna; economy and technology
that archaeology has unearthed from the Kurgan sites and compared these with lists of the corresponding
words in the reconstructed proto IE vocabulary. Krell found major discrepancies between the two.

IE language spread was mainly in areas where agriculture flourished. Thus either Proto Indo-European
Language and people spread with agriculture before 6000 BCE, or it later spread into regions already
agricultural. The later scenario will need to explain the reason for the selective spread of IE people, into
regions already agricultural, 2000 to 3000 years after the event. Why would nomadic pastoralists migrate in
many separate waves almost exclusively into agricultural land?

Kurgan hypothesis places the proto-Indo-European language in the 4th millennium BCE, the process of
transformation from Porto-IE to separate Proto language groups in the 3rd and evolution of the separate
language groups into the major attested languages in the II and first millennium BCE in the Bronze and Iron
Age. Many scholars are uncomfortable with the unprecedented pace of these transformations. Evolution of
most other language groups such as Australian, American Indian, African, Chinese and Uralic happened from
prehistory over many millennia. The earliest known Indo-European languages like Mycenaean Greek, Hittite
and Sanskrit were already far more divergent in the second millennium BC than the languages derived from
Latin such as French and Italian are today. Divergence between Latin as spoken in the Roman Empire on
one hand and modern French and Italian happened over two millennia during a period of far more cultural
exchanges, migrations and invasions unlike the times of divergence of IE languages. This suggests that the
common ancestor of IE Languages must have been spoken not around 3000 BC, as assumed, but well back
in time. Evolution of languages must have been far slower in pre-historic times compared to historic times
because of the constraints of means and technology and rarer cultural contacts with outsiders.
Bronze Age is sometimes divided into early Bronze Age, middle Bronze Age and late Bronze Age. The
technology during early Bronze Age was probably crude and so chariot and spoked wheel making techniques
might have been perfected only in the second half of third millennium BCE, when most estimates of middle
Bronze Age place its development in the area. Spoked and hence light, yet sturdy, wheels for chariots and
wagons might not have been possible without middle Bronze Age technology and without sturdy chariots
and wagons the unprecedented IE expansion would not have been possible. Thus separate Proto language
groups might have evolved only after this time as linguistics tells us that words related to these technologies
evolved at the stage of PIE. We have first attestation of an IE language (Hittite) by around 20 century BC.
Thus we are faced with the improbable conclusion that PIE evolved into separate Porto language groups
and further into attested languages like Hittite within a couple of centuries.

If the Pontic Steppes is the Urheimat of IE, one would expect some early branch of IE Languages still to be
in use in the area. No such language now survives in the area of ancient Yamna culture, the heartland of
Kurgan Culture. The area is dominated by some very old language families unrelated to IE like Kartvelian,
Northwest Caucasian, North-east Caucasian and Turkic. These languages, except Turkic, appear to have
been spoken in the area for a very long time. Russian and Ukraine spoken in the areas to the North-West
belong to Balto-Slavic branch of IE which appears to have originated in Central Europe and spread into the
area in historic times. No linguist has ever claimed that these two IE languages trace back to the original
PIE. Armenian spoken in a small pocket south of the Caspian and Black Sea is the only other IE language
in the area. Besides Balto-Slavic and Armenian are satem languages and not the original Centum variant.
26 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

If the IE dialects were violently displaced from the area, possibly by Turkic intrusions in the later periods,
why and how did the Caucasian languages survive in the area?
Similarly Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a1, which many believe to be that of the Proto IE speakers, has only minor
presence in the area. Its greatest concentration is in South Asia and Central Europe.
According to this hypothesis, the bearers of these cultures were nomadic pastoralists, who, by the 3rd
millennium BC expanded throughout the Ponting-Caspian steppe and into Eastern Europe. But further
Indo-Europeanization of Central and Western Europe and Central Asia during the Bronze Age is far more
uncertain. There is no indication of spread of Kurgan culture east of the Caspian. There are no kurgan
burials at all south of the Amu Darya.
The importance of horse and chariot to the Kurgan Hypotheses is that these help explain the spread of IE
Languages throughout the vast Eurasia in a comparatively short time. We also have the analogy of nomadic
horse riding warriors from the steppes time and again conquering the surrounding civilizations later. These
warriors used their horses to significantly increase their military effectiveness. It may seem straightforward
to simply assume something similar happened in the third millennium BC. But the steppe nomads only
became such fearsome warriors from around 1000 BC when they adopted more effective riding gear and
developed new breeds of horses. In fact, it is only from this time onwards that we find extensive evidence
of horseback warriors. Though archaeological evidence of domestication of horses in third millennium BCE
is available, it is unlikely that cavalry or chariot warfare could have been feasible before well into second
millennium BCE, as an effective cavalry requires far more technological invocations than what is apparent in
the archaeological records of third millennium steppes. The full domestication of the horse might have been
a long drawn out process that not only involved the development of horse harness and handling techniques
but also the physical and behavioural transformation of a generally untameable wild animal through many
generations of selective breeding. Similarly there are claims of evidence of early riding gear but this evidence
seems far from conclusive. Even if the Proto IE people had mastered the technique of horse riding, their
horsemanship might not have been very effective, useful or common. Certainly horses were sometimes used
for riding and transportation before but its effectiveness, particularly as a cavalry force is doubtful. The
extensive and very effective use of chariots for warfare in Persia, The Fertile Crescent, Anatolia as well as
the steppes till about 500 BCE may be an indication that cavalry were not in use till about that time. This
is because the comparatively clumsy chariots might have had little chance against a fast, flexible cavalry. It
is significant that chariots ceased to be used as a war machine at about the time horse riding steppe tribes
began to ravage Eurasia.
Also chariots could not have been used for invasions beyond the steppes as the terrain was not very suitable;
nor is war chariots associated with nomads. Large cavalry needs open terrain for their mobility and grasslands
for the horses. It seems very unlikely that horses or chariots were used in any significant scale for warfare
in third millennium BCE, particularly beyond the steppes. At best small groups of riders might have used
horses for fighting minor battles. It might have been more useful as a means of transportation.
Different branches of Proto Indo-European language, and many other ancient evolved forms of these, did have
words for various parts of wheeled vehicles, although the specific meanings were often different or uncertain.
But it will be an unwarranted speculative leap to conclude, on the basis of this, that the original Indo
Europeans had wheeled vehicles. The reconstructed words in PIE might have meant related concepts like
circle or turning. And the chronology of the Kurgan Hypothesis depends largely on Proto Indo Europeans
having horse drawn wheeled vehicles.
Around 2500 BCE, Central Europe witnessed an enormous upheaval caused by an invasion from the east,
clearly apparent in the archaeological record, along with a possible population or language displacement,
now traceable in the ancient genetic records. If these people had gone in other directions as well, as the
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 27

Kurgan model suggests, this is what an invasion by the steppe nomads of mid third millennium BCE should
look like. And that precisely is what is totally missing in the archaeological record in Southern and Western
Europe, Iran and South Asia.

Something happened in the steppes in the 3rd millennium BC according to this model that caused the IE
languages to start spreading over most of Europe and much of Asia, eventually to spawn the languages spoken
by almost half of mankind. Whatever it was, it must have been quite unusual, spectacular and historically
important. There is no parallel for such an expansion in recorded history except may be the spread of English
language. But IE spread was at least 4000 years before English, over land with very difficult terrain and
hostile people. Besides we know fairly well why or how English spread as it did. It is this insight that we lack
in case of Kurgan Hypothesis. Archaeological records and their interpretation to this date give no indication
of any such spectacular circumstances. It is unlikely that it could have been demographic pressure, as the
steppes were always thinly populated. The hypothesised incredible wanderlust of the pre-historic Indo-
European tribes who spread thousands of kilometres westward, eastward, northward, southward, and even
remote corners of the vast Eurasian landmass, in a remarkably short time, is quite unprecedented or even
unlikely. Incidentally neither Rgveda or Iranian Avesta describe the composers as people with a particular
liking for wandering in unknown lands. On the contrary, these texts often express contempt for people with
nomadic life style.
There are many other language families in the world. List of the top ten language families of the world in
terms of numbers of speakers as a proportion of world population, listed below with their geographic areas.

Language family % of world population Areas where in use

Indo-European languages 48% Europe, South west to South Asia, North Asia,
North America, South America, Oceania, South
Africa
Sino-Tibetan languages 20% East Asia
NigerCongo languages 6% Sub-Saharan Africa
Afro-Asiatic languages 6% North Africa to Horn of Africa, West Asia
Austronesian languages 6% Oceania, Madagascar, maritime South-east Asia
Dravidian languages 4% South Asia
Altaic languages 2.5% Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic families.
Whether these belong to a single group is dis-
puted. Central Asia, Northern Asia, Anatolia,
Siberia
Japonic languages 2% Japan. Sometimes included in an expanded Al-
taic family.
Austro-Asiatic languages 2% mainland South-east Asia
TaiKadai languages 1.2% South-east Asia

7
Austro- means south in Greek, hence the name Austro-Asiatic. Most of the languages that belong to this family are spoken in
South-east Asia, in countries located between China and Indonesia. A few are spoken to the west in the Nicobar Islands and in India.
The Austro-Asiatic family includes 168 languages. It is usually divided into two main branches: Mon-Khmer with 147 languages, and
Munda with 21 languages. Khmer of Cambodia and Vietnamese together constitute almost 90% of speakers of Mon-Khmer. Speakers
of Munda branches are scattered in the three Indian states of Orrisa, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh as well as some other places in India
and Nepal. Khasi language of North East India also belong to this group. Similarly, Tibeto-Burmese languages are part of Sino-Tibetan
and languages like Bodo, Naga, Kuki and others spoken in North East India, are part of Tibeto-Burmese group.
28 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

The Uralic languages constitute a language family of some three dozen languages spoken by approximately 25
million people. Most native speakers of these languages are Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian and a few others.
The named three are official languages of the respective nation-states. More than 50% of the speakers are
Hungarians. Evidence suggests that their ancestors had migrated from areas around Ural Mountains at some
time in the pre-historic past; hence the name Uralic languages. Some scholars believe that this movement
might have been along with that of Indo European language speakers at about the same time.
Since the birth of comparative linguistics in the 19th century, the riddle of the apparently isolated Caucasian
language families has attracted the attention of many scholars. Three of these families have no current
members outside the Caucasus, and are considered indigenous to the area. Intriguingly, this is the core
area of Kurgan culture. The term Caucasian languages are generally restricted to these families, which are
spoken by about 11.2 million people. These languages are Kartvelian, Northwest Caucasian and North-east
Caucasian language families.
The long presence of these isolated Caucasian language in the core Kurgan area also points to an unlikely
contradiction. These languages, which were present during the purported time of expansion of IE dialects
from the same location, did not spread with the IE dialects; but the IE dialects, which are not present in
the area now spread all over Eurasia from the area.
As can be seen from the above, all other language families except IE have more or less stayed in their
own natural areas. IE expansion happened over very difficult and different terrain and climatic conditions.
The factors that motivated these people to undertake such an expansion in spite of the risks and hardships
is not clear. Similarly the other language families apparently evolved into the present forms over many
thousands of years unlike Porto IE, which according to the model, expanded all over Eurasia and evolved
into unconnected daughter languages within a period of about a thousand years or less. Any successful model
of IE expansion should have a satisfactory explanation for the means as well as the cause of the process. The
Kurgan hypothesis does not have such an explanation at present.
Tsung-tung Chang, a scholar of Chinese origin, has shown on the basis of a study of the relationship between
the vocabulary of Old Chinese and the etymological roots of Proto-Indo-European vocabulary, that there
was a strong Indo-European influence on the formative vocabulary of Old Chinese. He provides a long list of
words common to Indo European and Old Chinese, which would constitute roughly two-thirds of the basic
vocabulary in Old Chinese. According to Tsung: Among Indo-European dialects, Germanic languages seem
to have been mostly akin to Old Chinese. Germanic preserved the largest number of cognate words found
in Chinese. Germanic and Chinese belong to the group of so called centum languages. It is unlikely that
these cognates were picked up by Old Chinese in Europe and the most likely place this could have happened
is Central Asia. But it would be difficult to explain under the Steppe Home Land model.
A further difficulty with this theory, or its related arrival of IE language in South Asia, is that by this time
North West India was a densely populated region with widespread agriculture, so the number of IE migrants
would need to be extraordinarily large to explain the fact that today about half the ancestry in India derives
from genetic types known as the Ancestral North Indian. For more details on this, please see page 134.
As new evidences emerge the model is facing new challenges on many fronts. Doubts are being raised about
its chronology. For example Mycenaean Greeks who had been previously considered a prime example of
invading Indo-European chariot-warriors are now suspected as a purely local development, as it appears
that they were already living in Greece by 3000 BC, more than a millennium before their estimated time of
arrival in Greece and even before the putative invention of the horse-chariot in Pontic Steppes. Excavations
at Mycenae and other sites has resulted in revision of the early history of Mycenaean civilization to 3200 to
2000 BCE (Early Helladic Period).8
8
The Early Helladic Period started in about 3200 BC. A number of nomadic tribes, probably Indo-European, appeared in central and
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 29

The prevailing chronology seem to be in conflict with emerging evidences regarding earliest history of many
of the Indo European Language groups like Celtic, Greek, Armenian apart from Indo Aryan. It is now
becoming increasingly evident that the speakers of Celtic Language were already in the Atlantic Coast of
Western Europe in Neolithic times just as Indo-Aryans in South Asia during that period.
The long-standing traditional view is that the Celtic language speakers arrived in Ireland sometime in the
first millennium BCE. But this is mostly based on ancient Greek and Roman accounts, which again is based
on the description of the people in these areas by Greek and Roman chroniclers. It may be that, to the
Greeks and Romans, all their neighbors, with whom they had little social contacts, were barbarians, who
more or less looked alike and spoke similar sounding dialects. The people the Ancient Greeks called Keltoi
or barbarians may have belonged to many different ethnicities and spoke different languages. The word
Celt comes from this Greek word and is pronounced as Kelt.
Another source of evidence is the linguistic theories regarding the spread of Indo-European languages in
Europe, or rather the need to include the Celtic languages in this framework.
Whether the Iron Age inhabitants of Ireland could be regarded as Celts who migrated from Central Europe,
has become a subject of controversy, as DNA studies do not point to such a possibility so far. Besides, there
is little archaeological evidence for such a migration event.
Ancient DNA studies seem to indicate that ancestors of the Irish people reached the area in 8000 BCE or
even earlier from Northern Spain. The Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b has the highest incidence in these two areas
in Europe; exceeding 90% in Ireland. Samples of ancient DNA recovered from Ireland are found to be R1b
and have been dated to about 5200 BCE.
Recent research into Irish DNA at the beginning of the twenty-first century suggests that the early inhabi-
tants of Ireland were not directly descended from the barbarians of central Europe, as it was believed so far.
Genome sequencing performed on remains of early settlers in Ireland by researchers at Trinity University in
Dublin and Queens University has revealed at least two waves of migration to the island in past millennia.
Analysis of the remains of a 5,200 year-old Irish farmer suggested that the population of Ireland at that
time was closely genetically related to the modern-day populations of southern Europe, especially Spain and
Sardinia.
90% of DNA in Ireland traces to ancestors who arrived in the Mesolithic period. The high incidence of
Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b in Ireland and its presence there in 5200 BCE, precludes the possibility that there
could have been a deep admixture of Irish population with Celtic speaking invaders in the first millennium
BCE or earlier, as it is popularly believed.
Interestingly, this is supported by Irish Origin Myths. One of the oldest texts composed in Ireland is
theLeabhar Gabhla; the Book of Invasions. It tells a semi-mythical story of the waves of people who settled
in Ireland in earliest times. It says the first settlers to arrive in Ireland were a small dark people called the
Fir Bolg, followed by a magical super-race called the Tuatha de Danaan (the people of the goddess Dana).
Most interestingly, the book says that the group which then came to Ireland and fully established itself as
rulers of the island were the Milesians; the sons of Mil, a soldier from Spain.
The Neolithic farmers from northern Greece and the Marmara Sea region of western Turkey seem to have
reached the Iberian Peninsula by about 10000 YBP. Subsequently, It is probable that they used the sea route
Southern Greece from this time and took up agriculture and animal husbandry as their main occupations. They could have been living
in the area from an earlier period. The Helladic or Mycenaean civilization, is divided into the Early Helladic (c.3200-2000 BC), Middle
Helladic (c.2000-1500 BC), and Late Helladic (c.1500-1100 BC) periods. If the steppe home land model is correct, the IE speaking
nomads would have reached Greece by around the time of beggining of Middle Helladic period. But archaeology do not show any
significant disruption or change in the cultural and life style practices in the area. The civilisation is named Mycenaean, as Mycenae
was the most important city-state among many that dotted Greece in this period. These chronological periods are approximately
parallel to the Minoan civilization which was centred around the island of Crete.
30 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

to reach Ireland. Ireland remained isolated in ancient times from major centers of Europe as it is an isolated
island. It is in theNorth Atlantic, separated from Great Britain to its east by the North Channel, the Irish
Sea, and St Georges Channel. Needless to add, Great Britain itself is separated from mainland Europe by
the English Channel, which should have been quite difficult to cross in pre-historic times.
The presence of two major branches of Indo-European languages in the western and eastern extremities of
Eurasia in the Neolithic times, would involve significant collateral damage to the prevailing dogma.
The South Russian model can at best explain some; but not all Indo European languages of Northern and
Eastern Europe. For the great majority of the familys branches; across the early farming heartlands of the
Mediterranean, like Greek, Latin, Albanian, various extinct branches of Indo-European in the Balkans and
western and central Anatolia; and the Iranian and Indic branches; the model throws up more questions than
answers.

Kurgan hypothesis stands on two separate pillars. First the archaeological finds from the steppes have clearly
established a Bronze Age culture of nomadic pastoralists who had domesticated horses and knew the use of
wheels. This part of the evidence stands on firm ground. The second is based on various linguistic theories
concluding that PIE people were early Bronze Age nomadic pastoralists who had domesticated horses and
knew the use of wheels. This conclusion is based on a large amount of scholarly work and is not easy to
challenge at present. But this part cannot be said to be as strong as the archaeological evidence. But the
weakest aspect of the model is that there is little that connects these two pillars. It requires a leap of faith
to link the archaeological finds in the Kurgans and the PIE.

Many academics are now uncomfortable with the model in view of its many weaknesses. Even so Kurgan
Model has more support among academics than other models and is considered as the leading model that answers
the question of Indo-European origins.

2.2.2 Anatolian Hypothesis

Anatolian hypothesis claims that the Proto-IE language spread from Anatolia or Asia Minor as the Greeks
called the area (present day Turkey) into Europe, with the expansion of farming about 9000 years Before Present,
possibly shortly after the origin of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent. The author of this model of Indo-European
expansion is Colin Renfrew. Renfrew argues that the language family was able to spread due to the population
expansion of agriculturalists. He believes that the only moment in European prehistory when a large scale change
such as the presumed indo-Europeanization of Europe could have occured, was the beginning of farming in the
8th millennium B.C. As archaeology does detect in southern Europe a migratory contribution from that direction
during this period, Renfrew has concluded that these early migrants were the Porto-Indo-Europeans, responsible
for the introduction of IE languages as well as farming in southern and central Europe, and that the subsequent IE
dispersal started from these two areas, along with the dispersal of farming techniques. An intrusive contribution is
especially evident in the two earliest Neolithic cultures of southern Europe, both dated to the 7th millennium BCE,
namely the Balkan complex and in Western and Central Mediterranean. According to Renfrew, these cultures
would represent the first introduction of IE into Europe. The philosophy behind this theory is that the Porto-
Indo-Europeans, far from being warriors who invaded and conquered Europe by sheer military force, were, instead,
the inventors of farming, who conquered Europe by cultural and technological superiority. The main strength of
the farming hypothesis lies in its linking of the spread of Indo-European languages with an archaeologically known
event (the spread of farming in Europe) that may have resulted in significant population shifts.
A Mathematical/statistical tool developed recently, and since successively refined, is now being used to arrive
at the chronological order of branching of different nodes of a language tree and the approximate time of such
branching, by analysing lexical and philological data. It make use of concepts and methods of phylogenetic
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 31

analysis. A 2003 analysis of 87 languages with 2,449 lexical items found an age range for the initial Indo-
European divergence of 7,800-9,800 years, which was found to be consistent with the Anatolian hypothesis.
Successive studies, using ever more improved methods taking into account conceptual and methodical problems
that were noticed in earlier studies, consistently agree with the Anatolian hypothesis of spread of IE languages
from Anatolia with the spread of agriculture, in around 8500 YBP. One of the latest such study is by Robin J.
Ryder and Geoff K. Nicholls published in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Volume 60, Issue 1, pages
71-92, January 2011. After systematically examining potential impact of various factors that might impact their
results, Ryder and Nicholls conclude that the only factor which could make a major difference to their results
would be a major change in the rate of word diversification in a coordinated manner, across all IE branches
in existence, between 3000 and 5000 years ago. Such coordinated change across the vast land mass from
India to Western Europe seems very unlikely. Their conclusion is as follows.
Our main result is a unimodal posterior distribution for the age of Porto-Indo-European centred at
8400 years before Present with 95% highest posterior density interval equal to 7100-9800 years before
Present. all our results agree with the Anatolian hypothesis that the spread of the Indo-European
family started around 8000 BP. None of our analyses agree with the Kurgan theory that the spread
started between 6000 and 6500 BP.
They also specifically analyse and reject various objections raised against their methods by other authors; partic-
ularly linguists and historians. Some of these are
1. One weakness pointed out for computational models is that it take into account only one possible mechanism
of language spread; known as demic diffusion, a slow and random population movement in all directions,
impeded only by water. Such models cannot handle quick migrations, and hence necessarily postulate a
much slower spread of Indo-European languages and, as a result, a much earlier date for PIE.
2. Besides, lexical data alone cannot tell the whole story and sometimes can be highly misleading. For example,
models that rely on lexical data often show Romani, the language of the Gypsies, as far more diverged from
Indo-Aryan languages than it actually is, indicating a time of divergence of 2,500-3,500 years. In reality,
Romani gained a distinctive lexicon, not because it diverged from its other Indo-Aryan languages a long
time ago, but rather because it was in contact with, and picked numerous words from, other languages on
its way from northern India to Europe; words from Persian, Armenian and Greek. A look at its structural
properties, such as its gender and case systems, indicates that Romani must have split off from the other
Indo-Aryan languages only about 1,000 years ago. This more recent date of the Roma exodus from northern
India is now confirmed by genetic studies.
A computerized study published in 2012 in Science, using methods drawn from the modelling of the spatial
diffusion of infectious diseases, also offer support the Anatolian hypothesis.
These recent finding, by use of some very recently developed advanced techniques in differ-
ent domains, along with recent archaeological finds and their interpretations, have begun to give
Anatolian hypothesis the status of a front runner among various models of IE origin and expansion.
An argument against the Anatolian hypothesis is that PIE contains words for technologies that make their
first appearance in the archaeological record in the Late Neolithic, in some cases bordering on the early Bronze
Age, and that some of these words belong to the oldest layers of PIE. There is strong support at the moment for
the close relation of early Bronze Age and PIE, though it appears to equate absence of evidence to evidence of
absence; a frequently used method, but of doubtful logical validity.

A new Model of Anatolian Hypothesis Based on Genetics

Spectacular advances in the tools to extract ancient DNA data, its analysis and interpretation is revolutionising
our understanding of prehistory. One of the early result from it is the confirmation that there was a massive
32 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

genetic transfer from the Kurgan areas to the Eastern and North-Eastern Europe in around 4500 years BP.
Though the data set was rather limited, the fact of the genetic transfer seems to be on quite firm ground. But
further interpretation of its significance may be problematic. To clarify the issues, parts from an article titled
Ancient DNA and the Indo-European Question by Paul Heggarty of Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary
Anthropology, Leipzig; is quoted below.

Ancient DNA and the Indo-European Question Posted on 2015/06/11 by Paul Heggarty, Ancient DNA
and the Indo-European Question
An ancient DNA revolution is now sweeping through genetics. Suddenly, ancient population migrations
can be recovered far more clearly than before. For linguists, this holds out the prospect of closure, at
last, on the Indo-European question. And that is quite some prospect, for agreement on the origins of
Indo-European has eluded us ever since linguistic science began, when Sir William Jones first posed
this very question in 1786.
Todays issue of Nature (11th June 2015) publishes two major papers based on Bronze Age ancient
DNA from the Eurasian Steppe one of the two leading candidates for the original homeland of the
Indo-European family.
Haak, W. et al. [David Reichs group, Harvard] 2015. (online since 2015-03-01) Massive migration
from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature 522 (7555): p.207211.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature14317
Allentoft, M.E. et al. [Eske Willerslevs group, Copenhagen] 2015. Population genomics of Bronze Age
Eurasia. Nature 522 (7555): p.167172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature14507
Spectacular advances in ancient DNA data, as published in papers such as these, are enriching and
revolutionising our understanding of prehistory at a bewildering pace. They are advancing us in great
strides towards an eventual resolution of the Indo-European question.
Both papers interpret their results as leaning towards the Steppe hypothesis, albeit rather tentatively
and superficially in places. On closer inspection, indeed, all is by no means so clear cut. The new data
actually turn out to be equally compatible, if not more so, with the Steppe as the immediate origin
of just a few branches of Indo-European (notably BaltoSlavic and perhaps Tocharian). These Bronze
Age movements would thus be only secondary to an original Neolithic expansion of the Indo-European
family as a whole, with farming, out of the northern arc of the Fertile Crescent (i.e. the Anatolian
hypothesis). The ancient DNA data also reconfirm the spread of farming as the dominant shaper of
the genetic make-up of Indo-European-speaking southern, Mediterranean Europe, with relatively little
Steppe impact. The mistaken impression that the results support the Steppe hypothesis comes from
what seems to be a failure to grasp the scope and scale of the Indo-European question. And from the
an apparent assumption that if one can detect some population movements originating in the steppe,
then that means they must support the steppe hypothesis.
The new papers rather misleadingly talk of the hypothesis of steppe origins, and the Indo-European
languages, as if referring by default to the entire family, and to what explains that family as a whole.
But they go on to refer mostly to regions that host but a small proportion of the sub-branches of Indo-
European, which is all that their new data really bear on. This is also why their results actually fit also
with a secondary subexpansion (out of the Steppe) of just those few parts of Indo-European. This
Bronze Age movement would have been a second stage, long after the primary stage in the Neolithic
which had already seen the much wider expansion of most of the family, with farming, out of an original
homeland in the northern arc of the Fertile Crescent.
A YamnayaCorded Ware population movement is in fact entirely compatible with the farming hypoth-
esis, as a later, secondary movement within the overall spread and intensification of food-production.
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 33

The main first phase saw farming (both crops and livestock) spreading originally out of the northern
arc of the Fertile Crescent: westwards into Europe; and eastwards through the Middle East, to the
Indus and eventually the Ganges. Colin Renfrews (1987) original hypothesis for Indo-European had
both of these movements spreading the Indo-European family too, both eastwards and westwards.
But farming also spread out of Anatolia northwards onto the Steppe. Whether this spread to the
Steppe was predominantly through the Balkans and/or Caucasus remains debated.
Once on the steppe, farming eventually specialised there into pastoralism, in this highly suitable grass-
lands environment (although some crop-farming continued in more western regions). Several millennia
after the first spread of farming, this new and predominantly pastoralist package on the Steppe made
for an intensification of food production, most viable and competitive in environments where farming
was not yet especially productive, including temperate north-eastern Europe. It seems no surprise that
pastoralists spread successfully there in the early Bronze Age, then.
Traditionally, the Steppe hypothesis has proposed a time-frame for Indo-European expansion of c. six
millennia. For the Yamnaya  Corded Ware movement, however, Brandt et al. (2013) and Haak et al.
(2015) give a date of just 4500 BP. But is a time-span of just 4500 years or so sufficient to allow for
all the divergence between all European branches of Indo-European: Slavic vs. Baltic vs. Germanic
vs. Celtic vs. Italic vs. Greek vs. Albanian, and so on? That is, we are left with little more than two
millennia to take us, for example, from the early Latin of the last few centuries bc back to Porto-Italic,
then further back to Porto-Italo-Celtic (if one accepts that clade), and then back again to allow for a
sufficiently deep split from other branches such as Greek. Early Latin and Greek texts document what
were, already by 2500 years ago, sub-lineages far diverged from each other, into fully-fledged, mutually
unintelligible languages. And even amongst Greek dialects, their own divergence within their single
clade already takes us back to at least 3000 bp, on standard thinking. That leaves just 1500 years for
divergence vis-a-vis all other branches of Indo-European in Europe. As an informal but informative
yardstick, consider how similar modern Italian and Spanish remain, some 2200 years after Roman
expansion to Iberia. From that perspective, an expansion at barely double that time-depth, 4500 bp
(years before present), looks suspiciously shallow for the entire, far greater diversity of Indo-European
within Europe.

Both above studies indicate that todays Europeans descend from three groups who moved into Europe at
different stages of history. The first were hunter-gatherers who arrived some 45,000 years ago in Europe. Then
came farmers who arrived from the Near East about 8,000 years ago. Finally, a group of nomadic sheep herders
from the area around River Volga and Ural Mountains called the Yamnaya arrived about 4,500 years ago. Some
researchers suspect that there was also a forth element. The issue is, which of these groups brought the Indo-
European languages to Europe; the second group (Anatolian Hypothesis) or the third (Kurgan model) or even the
first (Paleolithic continuation hypothesis); or is an altogether different mechanism involved?
Dr. Heggarty believes that early European farmers, the second wave of immigrants, may have brought Indo-
European languages to Europe from the Near East. Then, thousands of years later, the Yamnaya brought the
language again to Central and East Europe. The genetic profile of present European population also points to
a pattern consistent with such a scenario. While in Central and East Europe, R1a is the dominant Y-DNA
haplogroup, it is R1b in west, north and south Europe.
What Paul Heggarty proposes is a new model of IE origin and expansion or more correctly, a model that
is basically Anatolian Hypothesis with some elements of Kurgan Hypothesis to account for certain ancient
migration patterns that ancient DNA data has confirmed. The migration of the Yamnaya or Yamna horse riding
pastoralists, possibly along with proto Uralic elements, which probably evolved into the Corded Ware culture in
Eastern Europe, was a secondary movement within the overall spread of Indo-European dialects. He believes that
the large scale genetic transfer from the Kurgan areas to East Europe was on account of just one branch of proto
34 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

Indo-European dialect; the Balto-Slavic branch of the Satem variety. Porto Indo-European language evolved in
the Anatolia some two thousand years before that and its daughter dialects spread west to southern and western
Europe as the Cetum variety, and south to parts of West Asia, Iran, South Asia as also to the steppe areas, were
it evolved as Yamna and Kurgan cultures. His conclusion is based on two counts. first, as the Yamna genetic
markers have not been found in significant numbers in other places where IE languages spread. The ancient
DNA data also reconfirm the spread of farming as the dominant shaper of the genetic make-up of Indo-European-
speaking southern, Mediterranean Europe, with relatively little Steppe impact. Secondly, the traditional model
would require the evolution and expansion of the Indo-European languages in a quite unlikely or suspiciously
shallow time frame. This model, if it could be confirmed, can be a possible winner, as it can explain almost all
the uncertainties and defects of the popular model.
Such aDNA studies need to be considered and analysed carefully, as there can be inherent pitfalls in them.
In the present case, skeletal material that had been excavated and analyzed from grave mounds dated to the 1st
half of the 3rd millennium BCE in the East European steppe area, where the Yamnaya culture flourished and
those from parts of Central Europe, show marked similarity in DNA structure as well as physical features. The
Yamnaya like burial features were also identified in graves of the Corded Ware culture in Central Europe and
parts of Germany in a number of these instances. Characteristic archaeological feathers of Yamnaya culture are a
specific type of grave construction and burial customs.
Thus it seems clear that there was a large gene flow from Ural region towards Central and parts of North Europe
at that time. It is assumed that these remains are that of the migrating Indo European Yamnaya tribes. But,
while aDNA can tell us far more about ancient migration patterns, it cannot tell us what language the migrants
spoke. Unless we have dependable tools to resolve this, any theory of linguistic expansion based on aDNA will
have an element of subjectivity and cannot be fully reliable.

2.2.3 The Palaeolithic Continuity Theory (PCT)

The Palaeolithic Continuity Theory (PCT) is a hypothesis suggesting that the Porto-Indo-European language
might have originated in the Upper Palaeolithic or around 25000 YBP or before, several millennia earlier than the
Bronze Age as in Kurgan model or at the most Neolithic estimates in Anatolian Hypothesis. Its main proponent
is Mario Alinei, who advanced the theory in his Origini delle Lingue dEuropa, published in two volumes in 1996
and 2000.
The Continuity Theory proposes that Indo-European speakers arrived in Europe tens of millennia ago, and that
by the end of the Ice Age, had already differentiated into Celtic/Italic/Germanic/etc. speakers occupying territories
within or close to their traditional homelands. The PCT posits that the advent of Indo-European languages should
be linked to the arrival of Homo sapiens in Europe and Asia from Africa in the Upper Palaeolithic. It also suggests
that the glaciers and pre-glacial basins that compartmentalized Europe during the Ice Age may actually have been
the mechanisms for the process of differentiation of Indo-European into its component families.
It is based on a synthesis of linguistic studies, the archaeogenetical studies of Brian Sykes indicating that some
80% of the genetic stock of Europeans goes back to the Palaeolithic, as well as on archaeological data indicating
European cultural continuity. The Continuity Theory also draws radically different conclusions about the rate of
linguistic change from those of the traditional theories of Colin Renfrew and Gimbals. Clearly, if a homogeneous
proto-Indo-European people appeared in Europe 6,000 years ago, then firstly, all subsequent language evolution
will necessarily be compressed into the 6,000 years between then and the present, and secondly, the projection
of this rapid rate of linguistic change back into the Palaeolithic will lead to the evident conclusion that no
useful inferences can be drawn about languages spoken at that time, since it will be impossible to distinguish
genuine cognates in extant languages from chance similarities. This indeed is a serious argument that other
models, particularly The Kurgan Hypothesis will have to account for. Compression of evolution of
the language family into such a short period has no parallel. Proponents point to a lack of archaeological
evidence for an Indo-European invasion in the Bronze Age; to the lack of substantial genetic change in Europe
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 35

since the Palaeolithic; and to analogy with a theory of a Palaeolithic origin of Uralic peoples and languages in
Eurasia.
The framework of PCT is laid out by Alinei in four main assumptions:

Continuity is the basic pattern of European prehistory and the basic working hypothesis on the origins of
IE languages.

Stability and antiquity are general features of languages.

The lexicon of natural languages must be periodized along the entire course of human evolution.

Archaeological frontiers coincide with linguistic frontiers.

The continuity theory draws on a Continuity Model (CM), positing the presence of IE and non-IE peoples and
languages in Europe from Upper Palaeolithic times and allowing for minor invasions and infiltrations of local scope,
mainly during the last three millennia. This model has only limited support at present as it obliges us to deal with
words traditionally reconstructed for Indo-European referring to notions that did not exist in the Palaeolithic as
loan words. If the IE lexicon of this class is satisfactorily explained to conform to PCD, it will seriously destabilize
the massive knowledge base created by linguists over the past two hundred years.

2.2.4 Out of India theory(OIT)

The Out of India theory (OIT), also known as the Indian Urheimat Theory, is the proposition that the Indo-
European language family originated in the Indian subcontinent and spread to the remainder of the Indo-European
region through a series of migrations. It was originally proposed in the late 18th century to explain similarities
between Sanskrit and European languages. The finding of similarities between languages from India to Europe led
to the beginning of Indo-European studies in the late 18th century. Most scholars at the time were certain that the
Porto-Indo-European language must be Sanskrit, or something very close to it. A few early Indo-Europeanists,
such as Voltaire, Immanuel Kant and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel had a firm belief in this and essentially
created the idea that India was the Urheimat of all Indo-European languages. In a 1775 letter, Voltaire expressed
his belief that I am convinced that everything has come down to us from the banks of the Ganges and the dynasty
of the Brahmins. Kant wrote Mankind together with all science must have originated on the roof of the world,
the Himalayas.
The development of historical linguistics in the ninetieth century resulted in doubts about Sanskrits status as
the mother of all languages. Particularly it was determined that reconstructed PIE lexicon related to climate, flora
and fauna etc seemed inconsistent with those available in India. Also Sanskrit as a satem language was found to
be a later branch of PIE. Again the Linguistic centre of gravity theory increased the distance between Sanskrit
and PIE.
The hypothesis however was revived recently by Koenraad Elst (1999), Shrikant Talageri (1993, 2000, 2008) and
others. It is based on the idea that Aryans are indigenous to the Indian subcontinent. These recent OIT scenarios
posit that the Indus Valley Civilization was Indo-Aryan. The Indian Urheimat proposal holds that during the 6th
millennium BC, the Porto-Indo-Europeans were living in the Punjab region of northern India. As the result of
demographic expansion, they migrated in a number of waves to different parts of Eurasia in the next two thousand
years. By the end of this migration, India was left with the Porto-Indo-Aryans. Those remained in North-West
India composed the Vedas during the fourth millennium BCE before the Early Harappan period (3300 to 2700
BCE). Adharv Veda, Brahmanas etc were composed during the mature Harappan phase (2700 to 1900 BCE). At
the end of the Mature Harappan period, the Sarasvati River began drying up and the remainder of Indo-Aryans
split into separate categories. Some travelled westwards and their descendents later established themselves as
rulers of the Hurrian Mitanni kingdom and possibly as Kassites by around 1600 BCE. Others travelled eastwards
36 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

and inhabited the Gangetic basin while others travelled southwards and interacted with the Dravidian people.
But this chronology has minor variations in case of different authors.
Elst argues that it is altogether more likely that the Urheimat was in satem territory. OIT holds that
India originally had the centum form, that the dialects which first emigrated (Hittite, Italo-Celtic, Germanic,
Tokharic) retained the centum form and took it to the geographical borderlands of the IE expanse (Europe,
Anatolia, China), while the dialects which emigrated later (Baltic, Thracian, Phrygian) were at a halfway stage
and the last-emigrated dialects (Slavic, Armenian, Iranian) plus the stay behind Indo-Aryan languages had evolved
into the satem form. This would satisfy the claim of the so-called Lateral Theory that the most conservative forms
are to be found at the outskirts rather than in the metropolis. Today Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi and Hindi/Urdu
speakers of India, Bangladesh and Pakistan together have almost a billion native speakers, making Indo-Aryan
family easily the largest of any of the Indo-European language family. Thus the majority stayed back as would be
normal in such a scenario.

Evidences for Large Migrations from Ancient India

Exodus of the Vedic Tribe; Druhyus
It is now generally accepted that there were a number of waves of emigrations out of South Asia from ancient
times. One reason for such movements was that South Asia always had demographic surplus.
One possible case of such a migration event, in the pre-historic past, was that of Druhyus. Many Puranas
like Vishnu Purana 4.10.17,18 says King Yayati gave the south-eastern part of his Kingdom to his son Turvasa,
South to Yadu, north to Anu, north-west, probably Gandhara to Druhyu, and the central and most important
portion to Puru, his youngest son.
References to the Vedic tribe Druhyus in the Rigveda are found in the Dasarajna battle hymns RV VII.18,
33 and 83, as also a few other Rgvedic hymns. These three hymns by Rshi Vasista, describes a battle fought by
Purus allied with some other Vedic Aryan tribes against the Bharata King Sudas. In VII.18.14, the reference is
to the two tribal conglomerates (Anu and Druhyu), in VII.18.12, the reference is to the kings or leaders of these
tribes in the battle (Kavasa and the Druhyu), and in VII.18.6, the reference is to the priests (Bhrgu and Druhyu)9
of the two tribal conglomerates, who are said to live far away or as distant people. Thus, the Druhyus are an
interesting case with the tribe, the king and the priest all named as Druhyu. One plausible reason for this might
be that, by this time Druhyus were beginning to fade away from the memories of Vedic Aryans who had little
knowledge about the culture, lifestyle and even names of these distant relatives.More information on Dasarajna
hymns can be found in page 85.
Rigveda names the descendents of the five princes mentioned in Puranas, as important tribes or kingdoms as
follows.
RV I.108.8:
If with the Yadus, Turvasas ye
sojourn, with Druhyus, Anus, Purus, Indra-Agni!
These verses, as well as others, usually talk of Yadus and Turvasas together, and Drhyus, Anus and Purus
together, but separately form the first two. It may be noted that Puranas says that Yadu and Turvasu were sons
of Yayati, by his wife Devayani, daughter of Sucracarya and Drhyu, Anu and Puru were his sons by his other wife,
Sarmista. The references in Rigveda seems to reflect this difference, in the manner their descendants are listed.
Gandhara in Afghanistan is said to be named after one of the Druhyu chieftains. Vishnu Purana later in the
same chapter says that the last Druhyu King became the leader of Mlecha tribes; people with unacceptable life
styles and religious practices or just unfamilier people. Intriguingly, it then says that Druhyus just disappeared
from the far away land where they were known to live earlier.
9
These verses clearly equates Anus with Bhrgus. More on this later
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 37

The Iranian Avesta makes it clear that Druhyu (Druj) was an appellation for a class of rival or enemy priests.
The priests of the Iranians were the Athravans or Bhrgus and Magi, and the terms Angra (Angiras?) and Druj
(Druhyu) are regularly used in the Avesta in reference to the demon enemies of Ahura Mazda, the supreme god
of Zoroastrians, and Zarathustra or Zoroaster. In Vendidad 19, it is stated that an Angra and a Druj tried to
tempt Zoroaster away from the path of Ahura Mazda.
An interesting related detail is that, while the word Druhyu and its cognates (Druh, Drugh, drogha, droha,
drohy) in the Rigveda and derived words in Indic languages, as well as the word Druj in the Avesta, refer to
demons or enemies; cognate forms in the European languages have the opposite meaning : while Drui is the name
for the priests of the Celts, the word means friend in some Baltic and Slavic languages.
Also, there is now a Druze community spread mostly in the Levant. The Druze faith is one of the minority
religious groups in the Levant, with about 1.5 million adherents who are found primarily in Syria, Lebanon, Turkey
and Israel. Lebanons Druze community is a small sect which developed out of Islam; but has little in common with
it, though under the Lebanese political division (Parliament of Lebanon Seat Allocation) the Druze is designated
as one of the five Lebanese Muslim communities. This is also the case with Druze in Syria and Turkey . But Druze
community do not follow theFive Pillars of Islam like fasting or pilgrimage to Mecca. Their faith incorporates
elements of Gnosticism, Ismailism, Judaism, Christianity, and even Buddhism and other philosophies and beliefs,
creating a distinct and secretive theology known to esoterically interpret religious scriptures and to highlight the
role of the mind and truthfulness. Their social customs differ markedly from those of their Muslims or Christians
neighbours. Although it is believed that the name Druze is derived from an eleventh century Muslim preacher,
many religious beliefs and customs of the sect are similar to those of communities in South Asia. For example,
they believe in reincarnation or the transmigration of the soul. At the end of the cycle of rebirth, which is achieved
through successive reincarnations, the soul is united with the Cosmic Mind. The belief in the cycle of rebirth and
ultimate union with Cosmic Mind is not part of belief system of any of the three Semitic Religions and is distinctly
South Asian.
Thus, Druhyus were part of vedic tribes at some time before Rigveda began to be composed, moved to the
north-west of Saptasindhu as part of a political settlement, again before Rigveda began to be composed, 10 moved
far away further north or west by the time of battle of ten kings of early Rigvedic period, later became enemies
of Zoroastrians also and still later became Mlechas and then gradually just disappeared or moved further away
and lost all contacts with their former kins. If these accounts in Rigveda, Avesta and Puranas have at least some
elements of truth in them, this was a migration of whole tribes out of South Asia in pre-historic times; not just in
one quick movement, but a slow process of many stages, that took many generations or even many centuries.
This account of the gradual alienation of part of a society and their eventual disappearance from some far
away land, might be an actual record of history; albeit in a form in which the ancient Indians chose to record
their history. It do not appear to be a hugely exaggerated and embellished story designed to retain the audience
attention as many stories in Purana-Itihasas appear to be. The story of a hated and despised clan who migrated
out of the country and just disappeared in distant, forgotten past has little glamour or ability to hold audience
attendance.
The above movement of Druhyu tribes can also neatly solve the problem of the linguistic isoglosse that unites
Hittite, Tocharian and some European Languages that Kurgan Hypothesis finds difficult to reconcile. If the
Druhyus had moved North-West and passed through the Bottleneck Khyber Pass, into Northern Afghanistan
and Central Asia, They would have lost all contacts with South Asia. Later some of them could have moved west
along the southern coast of Caspian Sea and reached Northern Mesopotamia as Hittites. Another branch moving
east would have reached Tarim Basin or modern Xinjiang, China, as Tocharians. Yet another group moving
north-west would have ultimately reached Western Europe. All these people could have carried with them the
linguistic markers picked up while living together in Central Asia or even north-western India.
10
According to Puranas, Puru was the tenth king in the Chandra vamsi line and Bharata was the twenty second. All references to
Bharata in Rigveda are as a distant ancestor, who was the progenitor of Bharata clan. Puru is not even named as a person, but only
as a clan in Rigveda. Or in other words, on the basis of Rgvedic evidence, Puru and Bharata were pre-Rgvedic figures.
38 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

Witzel denies the possibility of such a scenario as the present physical characteristics of Nordic people and
those in the North-west India are very different. But the Druhyus could have interbred with many races during
their long process of migration and acquired these characteristics in the process. It may be necessary to look
closely at the genetic pattern of these people to arrive at a conclusion. Besides such an objection would make
any IE homeland model untenable, as IE language speaking people come in all shapes, sizes and colours. At least
two of the now extinct groups; Hittites and Tocharians were believed to have had Mongolian features. That there
are so many very different ethnic groups, with very different physical characteristics, within the speakers of Indo-
European Languages now, may point to the need for far older chronology for origin and expansion of the language
group. Also, it is possible that the Indo-European language speakers could have changed races, as modern Turks
seem to have done. They were originally Mongols, but looks like Europeans now, even though their ancestors in
Western Mongolia were, and still are, Mongoloid.

Other Migrations from Ancient India

The Romani people, also known as Roma, Sinti or Sindhi or Kale are an Indo-Aryan ethnic group, who live
primarily in Europe, Turkey, US and Brazil. There are substantial number of Romas in most European countries
as ethnic minorities. They are unique among such ethnic minorities anywhere in the world, as they do not identify
themselves with a country; nor do they claim the right to national sovereignty in any of the lands where they
reside. Romas belief system do not favour celebrating the past as is done by most other cultures. They also have
no tradition of an ancient and distant homeland. Thus they are now a people without a past.
Linguistically the Romani language is a New Indo-Aryan or Middle Indo-Aryan language. It may be related
to the Sinhalese language. Their genetic relation with people of South Asia is clear from the fact that 47.3% of
Romani men carry Y DNA haplogroup H-M82, which is rare outside the South Asia.
Evidences suggest that they originated in Northwest regions of the Indian subcontinent, in the area comprising
of the present states of Rajastan, Gujarat, Punjab and Sind; and left sometime in the early second millennium
CE, first to West Asia, where they were probably living in the Byzantine Empire for several hundred years and
later to Europe after the Muslim conquest of Byzantine Empire. Turkey still has a substantial Roma population.
The reason for their migration from South Asia is not known. One suggested reason is that they were a lower
caste and migrated because of caste oppression. It could also be due to the frequent famines in South Asia or
frequent wars and political uncertainity in the area where they lived.
Another intriguing case is that of genetic evidence of spread of South Asian cattle to Middle East and Central
Europe. There are mainly two matrilineal populations of domesticated cows in Eurasia. One is of Indian ancestry
called Zebu or Bos Indicus, the other is probably of African or West Asian origin called Bos Taurus. The humped
cattle breed known as zebu (Bos Indicus) is very common in North-West India. Today hybrids of zebu with
local breeds are very common in Central Asia, parts of West Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, China and Africa.
Origin of bos indicus is clearly in South Asia and this is now confirmed by recent genetic studies. Quote from
one such study, an online article published in the Oxford journal, Molecular Biology and Evolution by Shanyuan
Chen et all dated Sep 21, 2009

Abstract
Animal domestication was a major step forward in human prehistory, contributing to the emergence
of more complex societies. At the time of the Neolithic transition, zebu cattle (Bos indicus) were
probably the most abundant and important domestic livestock species in Southern Asia. Although
archaeological evidence points toward the domestication of zebu cattle within the Indian subcontinent,
the exact geographic origins and phylogenetic history of zebu cattle remains uncertain. Here, we report
evidence from 844 zebu mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences surveyed from 19 Asiatic countries
comprising 8 regional groups, which identify 2 distinct mitochondrial haplogroups, termed I1 and I2.
The marked increase in nucleotide diversity (P 0.001) for both the I1 and I2 haplogroups within the
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 39

northern part of the Indian subcontinent is consistent with an origin for all domestic zebu in this area.
For haplogroup I1, genetic diversity was highest within the Indus Valley among the three hypothesized
domestication centres (Indus Valley, Ganges, and South India). These data support the Indus Valley
as the most likely centre of origin for the I1 haplogroup and a primary centre of zebu domestication.
However, for the I2 haplogroup, a complex pattern of diversity is detected, preventing the unambiguous
pinpointing of the exact place of origin for this zebu maternal lineage. Our findings are discussed with
respect to the archaeological record for zebu domestication within the Indian subcontinent.

Thus it seems that Bos Indicus could have originated in the core area of Indus Valley Civilization as also the
Vedic Civilization, but sometime in the early Neolithic or even earlier. Some studies have indicated that Zebu
genes are present in most of the taurine (Bos Taurus) cow lineages of Europe, West Asia, Africa and other parts of
the world. Even those European and West Asian cows which are taurine in all other respects, have zebuine milk
protein gene. Zebu cows have a prominent presence in China and Africa. Bos indicus might have been introduced
into Africa by sea route and not through Suez as it was thought initially, as it has been found in Madagascar,
which is accessible only by sea. The time or circumstances of this movement is still unclear. It is probable that it
was domesticated in India, before it started moving out and thus it is reasonable to assume that this might have
happened as part of a human migration. Wild cattle could not have spread to such far flung areas and crossed the
sea on their own. But our knowledge of this process is very sketchy at the moment.
Another aspect of spread of Bos indicus cattle breed might offer further support to out of India model.
Mitochondrial DNA data indicates the presence of Bos indicus in northern Mesopotamia, in the area of Mitanni,
in the 2nd millennium BC. Mitannians ruling class were believed to be related to Indo-Aryans as they appear to
have had many shared linguistic, cultural and religious traits with Indo-Aryans. The majority position now is that
the language of Mitannians was a proto Indo-Aryan form and thus their presence in northern Mesopotamia in the
middle of 2nd millennium BC constitutes an evidence of west to east movement of proto Indo-Aryan tribes. But
the spread of the cattle breed from North India to Mitannian kingdom seems to point to just the opposite.
The people who lived in northwest India had developed pastoral practices very early and they now have the
milk digesting capacity during the adult life; a capacity which is present in the infants, but is lost in most of the
people of the world in the adult life. The presence of the milk digesting capacity in the adult life is due to the
Lactase Persistence gene (LP Gene). Because of this gene, adults did not develop diarrhea after drinking milk.
The presence of this milk-digesting LP Gene probably provided a huge evolutionary survival advantage to those
who had easy access to it, like cattle dependent pastoralists.
There are quite a few types of LP Genes present in the world. But the particular LP Gene which is shared by
the people of North and South India, Arabia and Europe is the same. Thus, it is probable that its origin was in
South Asia, Arabia or Europe. Studies indicate that the gene reached Europe by about 2300 BCE and in Arabia
still later. A report that appeared in The Science dated Apr. 2, 2015 byAnn Gibbons makes the following points.
First, the scientists confirmed an earlier report that the hunter-gatherers in Europe could not digest the sugars
in milk 8000 years ago, according to a poster. They also noted an interesting twist: The first farmers also couldnt
digest milk. The farmers who came from the Near East about 7800 years ago and the Yamnaya pastoralists who
came from the steppes 4800 years ago lacked the version of theLCTgene that allows adults to digest sugars in
milk. It wasnt until about 4300 years ago that lactose tolerance swept through Europe.
It came to Arabia still later. It helped digest camels milk when camel pastoralism developed in Arabia about
1000 BC. The camels milk was the staple food in the Arabian Desert after 1000 BC,
It is present in South Asia in significant frequencies, and sometimes in quite high frequency even in some tribal
people in South India. Such admixture requires high time depth. This point to the possibility that the gene
originated in South Asia.
It has been found that at least 126 genes code for skin pigmentation in humans. South Asians have quite a
wide range and diversity in the biological spectrum of skin color. About 27 percent of the skin color variation in
South Asia is due to a skin pigmentation gene called SLC24A5. It is commonly found in both, north and south
40 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

India. This gene also codes for lighter skin and is present in almost 100 percent of Europeans. It was not clear
where it had originated. Both South Asian and European populations inherited this particular variant from a
common ancestor who lived sometime between 22,000 and 28,000 years ago. The hunter gatherers who peopled
Europe till about 8000 YBP lacked versions of two genes that lead to the pigmentation and, therefore, pale skin in
Europeans today. Then, the first farmers from the Near East arrived in Europe; they carried both genes for light
skin. As they interbred with the indigenous hunter-gatherers, one of their light-skin genes swept through Europe,
so that central and southern Europeans also began to have lighter skin. The other gene variant,SLC45A2, was at
low levels until about 5800 years ago when it swept up to high frequency.
A recent study suggests that this gene appeared for the first time in India and from there it migrated to other
parts of Eurasia. This DNA study of the existing populations of Europe and Asia found that the oldest light-skin-
color gene is found in the Gujarati Indians. Interestingly, the greatest diversity of B-region haplotypes associated
with C11 is found in GIH (89% B6).. GIH stands for Gujarati-Indian-Hindus. The data obtained from the GIH
(the Gujarati Indians included in this study) showed that the light skin color gene most probably originated in
Gujarat, Western India.

Other Evidences
Sarasvati is an exact cognate with Avestan Haraxavati (as Sanskrit s has become h in Avestan and Pahlavi).
Perhaps originally the word might have referred to Ardwisur Anahid, the Zoroastrian mythological world river,
quite similar to Vedic Sarasvati which is often described as a celestial river. In the younger Avesta, Haraxavati is
Arachosia, a region described to be rich in rivers. Thus the references to Haraxavati in the older part of Avesta
seem to be some vague recollection of a distant past. This name, Haraxvaiti, appears in the first chapter of the
Videvdad along with place names like Haetumant , Mauru or Margu probably Margiana, Baxoi and Haptahindu
(saptasindhu). Haraxvaiti means simply one who has harah-. But Harah or Harax is a stem entirely isolated
in Avestan. It has no derivative in the language or in various derivative dialects or the stem went out of use at
some time in the past, whereas the Vedic or Sanskrit equivalent Sar has innumerable derivative words in derived
languages as also present day Indian languages. Interestingly it has cognates in many IE languages. Words get
lost in migrating dialects, but rarely in the original language. All these appear to point to a society of migrants
remembering a very important river in their original home and a related word or morpheme in the initial stages,
but losing the morpheme in their language (as part of the natural evolution of their dialect) as well as the memory
of the river over time.
Similarly references to geography of the area where the hymns were composed also point to the expansion
of Vedic Aryans from places east of Sarasvati towards River Indus and beyond. Mandala 6, the earlist book of
Rgveda, knows only the Sarasvati and rivers to the east of it; Mandala 3, the next, first mentions the first two
easternmost rivers of Punjab, the Sutudri and the Vipas, in the context of a historical military crossing; Mandala
7, the next, mentions the next two from the east, the Parusni and the Asikni, in the context of a battle being
fought on the third river, Parusni. Mandala 4 finally takes the geographical horizon of the Rigveda to the Indus
and beyond. Mandala 5 is as ignorant, as the earlier Books, of the Western place names, mountain names, lake
names and animal names, so well known to the later Books, and is, for all practical purposes, acquainted only
with the three Western rivers known to the earlier Mandala 4. But familiarity with geography of north-west India
is clear in later books. This suggests that the Vedic Aryans were moving from east to west during the composition
of Rgveda. For more details on this, please see chapter 3.3.3.
The climate and topography of the Rigveda is apparently that of a monsoon land lying to the east of the
Punjab. River Yamuna is frequently mentioned, even in Mandala 3, an early book, and references to apparently
River Ganga occur twice. There are references to heavy rain, cloudy skies and lighting, features rarely found in
north-west India. A most significant indicator of the insularity of the Rigvedic Aryans within India, and strong
evidence of their original unfamiliarity with the north-western and western areas, is the fact that Vedic traditional
attitude towards these areas has always been one of suspicion, disdain or even mild hostility. They are referred
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 41

to as Mlechas country and people of the area regarded as a suspicious sort of people, whose religious practices,
far from being authoritative, are considered deviant and is censured. Such an attitude is quite unlikely if vedic
Aryans themselves had entered India from the North-West direction a few centuries earlier.
One objection to the OIT model is that other Indo-European branches do not show traces of Vedic. Witzel
argues that if the other Indo-European branches had their origins in India, they should have preserved traces of the
local words for specifically Indian plants and animals not found outside India. But, again, when even the Gypsies
have not preserved local names of Indian plants and animals not found outside India, although they originally
migrated from areas inside India where those plants and animals were common, and spoke Indo-Aryan dialects
of the late 1st millennium CE which are known to have had words for these plants and animals, why should the
Indo-European dialects, which developed their earliest isoglosses, thousands of years earlier, in areas outside the
north-western borders of India, have preserved traces of such names? There is nothing unusual in migrating people
failing to preserve local words for plants and animals in their dialects, after a few centuries, if these are not found
in their new place of residence.
Porto IndoEuropeans were believed to be nomadic pastoralists. But it is now doubtful if this was the case.
They can no longer be considered as exclusively pastoral. Moreover it is wrong to assume that pastoral and
agricultural life styles are mutually exclusive. Renfrew (1990) pointed out that pastoral life is a part of agricultural
society. He wrote:
The pastoral economy is usually symbiotic with the agricultural one as it has been shown that a major
component of the diet of these pastoralists was bread. The practice of agriculture is thus a precondition
of a pastoral economy.
thus recent linguistic evidence points to the distinct possibility that the proto Indo-Europeans were farmers from
the very beginning.
Dorian Fuller, in his recent paper Agricultural Origins and Frontiers in South Asia: A Working Synthesis
point out that the Indo- European languages evolved at a place which had developed agriculture. This conclusion
is drawn by presence of agriculture related cognate words in the languages of this family. This would exclude the
steppes as IE home land. Some of these ancient agricultural words of Indo-European family are possibly shared
by Munda (Austro-Asiatic) as well as Dravidian families, two other ancient language groups in South Asia. If this
finding is true, a South Asian home land of Indo-European languages, cannot be dismissed as impossible. Hans
Hock, pointed out (1999) that several dialects spoken in N-W India travelled north-westward at different times in
the Common Era, the most notable one being that of the Gypsies in the early centuries CE . Hock stated that
Indo Aryan indigenism and even the Out of India Theory could theoretically be possible, provided the distribution
of the IE isoglosses so far identified are accepted.
Names of Indian animals and plants, in Indo-Aryan languages, are alleged to be adopted from non Aryan
dialects (Dravidian or Austric), thereby showing that the original Indo-Aryan speakers were not acquainted with
the flora and fauna of India. But many of these names, usually said to be of external or doubtful origin, have no
clear etymologies in Dravidian and Munda languages, making the validity of the argument rather uncertain. The
names of plants and animals, which are native to North India, are mostly of Indo-European or Sanskrit origin even
in the Dravidian languages of South India and the Austric languages of eastern India. One example is Simha
for lion in Indic languages and Cinkam in Tamil. In fact, the words for lion in all South Indian Languages are
derived from Simha. The word clearly has Indo Aryan roots. Some similar other words include those for camels.
This would not have been the case if the Northwestern India, native to the camel and lion, had originally been
Dravidian or Austric, or any other non-Aryan language areas, before the alleged advent of the Indo-Aryans. These
languages would have Dravidian or Austric derived words for these.
It is only for names for plants and animals, not native to North India, that words of doubtful etymologies
occur. Modern Indo-Aryan languages may not have descended from Vedic language, but from other Indo-European
dialects that were in use in eastern parts of North India, whose grammatical and syntactical features may have been
different from that of the Vedic. These may have been closer to the other non-Indo-European families within India,
42 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES

like Dravidian and Austric. This could account for the presence of many words of non-Indo-Aryan etymologies in
Indic languages.
F.B.J. Kuiper (1991) had produced a list of 380 words from the Rigveda, constituting about four percent of
the Rigvedic vocabulary, which he believed were of non-Aryan, primarily Dravidian, origin. But opinion of other
linguists is divided and the Dravidian connection is contradicted in case of every one of these words, particularly as
Dravidian or Austric etymologies for these words have not been clearly established. This has led some linguists to
postulate extinct original families of non-Aryan, non-Dravidian and non-Austric languages in ancient India, which
have disappeared without a trace, but which constitute the main non-Aryan substrata in Indo-Aryan. Many
linguists now doubt the usefulness of imagining a language, which has left absolutely no trace of its existence, as
the source of these words, which can neither be proved nor disproved. Possible Sanskrit etymologies of many of
these words and names have been proposed, but they are rejected as they are inconsistent with the strict rules of
phonetic changes. Such conservatism could lead to serious difficulties, as there are many instances in linguistics
where these rules are found to be invalid or has to be moderated. Besides, the names of plants or animals need
not be analyzable from etymological roots or follow rules of phonetic changes, since most of them would be slang
or colloquial words derived from the working class vernaculars of the same language. In short, these supposed
borrowel of words and names in Indic languages are at best possibilities or even can be termed faith based.
Linguists also admit that most languages have words whose etymologies cannot be established using strict rules
of phonetic changes. As an example, all the modem Italic languages have words for horse derived from a Latin
word caballus. Some of these are Italian cavallo, French cheval, Spanish caballo, Rumanian cal; while the
actual Latin word for the horse was equus. If Latin had been an unrecorded language, and it had been required
to reconstruct it on the basis of words common to its present day descendants, the word equus would never be
reconstructed. Or if it or any cognate word is found in any descendent language of Latin, it would be rejected by
such conservatism as one without proper etymology and declared a borrowel from some unknown language.
Presence of non-Indo-European words and names in Indic languages is fully compatible with Out of India
model, as these could be the result of contacts with Dravidian and Munda societies, after the emigration of other
IE branches out of India. It should be remembered that genetic studies point to a very deep admixture between
the Ancestral North Indian and Ancestral South Indian genetic markers from 2000 BCE to the beginning of
Common Era, affecting almost every population groups in South Asia, after only minimum contacts between them
for the preceding millennia. As a result there is not a single pure Ancestral North Indian or pure Ancestral
South Indian population groups in South Asia now.
Bernard Sergent says, though it was in another context, that the Iranian name Hindu for Indus, hence also
for India, indicates that the Iranians had lived near the Indus before moving to the present location. If they
had not, then Sindhu would have been a foreign term which they would have left intact, just as they kept the
Elamite city name Susa intact rather than evolving it to Huha or something appropriate to the phonetics of the
language; but because Sindhu was part of their own vocabulary, it followed the evolution of Iranian phonetics
to become Hindu. This implies east to west movement of Indo-Iranians from the banks of Sindhu River in pre
historic times and also that their original dialect was closer to Indo-Aryan which evolved into the present form
later.
Yet another interesting related information comes from the stories about India recorded by Megastenes 11 . In
his work known as Indica he states

For the Indians stand alone in nations in never having migrated from their own country. From the
days of father Bacchus (presumably the first Indian king; Manu?) to Alexander the Great, their kings
are reckoned at 154, whose reigns extend over 6451 years and three month.
11
The stories are believed to cover the period 350290 BCE. Megastenes was a Greek ethnographer and explorer in the Hellenistic
period. He became an ambassador of Seleucus I, the Greek king who ruled Northwest India, possibly to Pataliputra during the reign
of Chandragupta Maurya
2.2. ORIGIN OF PROTO INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGE 43

It says that there was no invasion of the country for the past 6451 years from the time of the first king to the
time of Alexander and they had lists of an unbroken line of 154 kings who ruled the land. This shows that Indians
had no recollection of any large migration or invasion from outside and believed their society had not undergone
a major change for a very long time. Megastenes says that from what he learned there was no migration from
India for a very long time. Assuming the account is reliable, smaller scale migration that did not seriously affect
the demography might still have occurred.
Finnish language, specifically the Finno-Ugric branch of the Uralic languages, contains borrowings from all
stages of Indo-Iranian; that is from Pre- and Porto-Indo-Aryan (precursor of Old Indic and Sanskrit), from Pre- and
Porto-Iranian, from Pre and Porto- Balto-Slavic, from Swedish and from all stages of Pre- and Porto-Germanic.
Very strangely, all of these seem to be borrowings in one direction only. The Finnish languages seem, in each
case, to have been recipients only. These borrowings must have taken place close to the homeland of the Uralic
languages. But various different viewpoints have been put forward and hotly debated, about the location of the
Uralic homeland, and about the exact dating of various chronological levels of the borrowings. Although most
linguists would agree that there is a considerable amount of vocabulary shared by Uralic and various Indo-European
languages, there is not really any consensus as to why this is the case. One explanation is that Finnish may have
acted as a freezer, since borrowed words have often changed much less than its original in other languages.
Shrikant Talageri proposes that, if Finno-Ugric branch of the Uralic has so many Indo-Aryan and Iranian
words, logically there must have been equally large numbers of Uralic words borrowed by the Indo-Aryan and
Iranian speakers. The total absence of such borrowings is significant. Talageri proposes that the Indo-Aryan and
Iranian speakers, whose speech contained all these Uralic borrowings, were emigrants moving out and away from
the main body of Indo-Aryan and Iranian speakers in the south, never to come into contact with them again,
so these Uralic words never reached the Indo-Aryan and Iranian languages of South Asia and Iran, but Uralic
languages absorbed many words from Indo-Aryan and Iranian languages.
It may not be difficult to explain Finnish borrowings from Porto- Balto-Slavic, Swedish or Porto-Germanic
languages. But the borrowings from Indo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan is very difficult to explain in the prevailing
models. The best explanation seems to be the one of OIT model.
The Model can also explain the isogloss that connects Iranian, Greek and Armenian.These groups could have
left South Asia and stayed somewhere in Eastern Iran together and separated after the elements of the isogloss
were formed.
There are about 445 Indo-European languages and dialects and over two-thirds (313) of them belong to the
Indo-Iranian branch alone. Thus one could argue, using the Centre of Gravity principle differently, that the
Indo-Iranian branch or even a proto Indo-Aryan dialect must be the original form.
OIT hypothesis has only limited support from archaeology at present. Besides most linguistic Theories, as
they are formulated now, are inconsistent with it. Genetics at present is consistent with it. The information that
the Sarasvati River was a full flowing river before 3000 BCE, if true, can offer major support to it. Same is the
case with astronomical references in Vedas to the extent these can be accepted as evidence.
Anatolian hypothesis, PCT and OIT have many weak points and thus Kurgan Hypothesis has the largest
following at present.
44 CHAPTER 2. THEORIES REGARDING ORIGIN OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES
Chapter 3

Origin of Vedic Language

3.1 Archaeological Evidences

Findings by archaeology is regarded as hard evidence meaning that it is supported by empirical data and its
methods are fully compliant with required discipline of modern scientific research. In the last 150 years researchers
have developed many tools to ensure this, including those for dating the finds. Dating material drawn from the
archaeological record can be absolute or relative. Those made by a direct study of an artefact is absolute and
those deduced by association, with materials found in the context the item is drawn from or inferred by its point of
discovery in the sequence relative to datable contexts, is relative method. Absolute methods include Radiocarbon
dating - for dating organic materials, Dendrochronology - for dating trees and objects made from wood and
Thermoluminescence dating - for dating inorganic material including ceramics. Relative or indirect methods tend
to use associations built from the archaeological body of knowledge. In practice several different dating techniques
must be applied in most circumstances for the conclusions to have acceptability. Thus dating evidence, unearthed
and recorded during excavation, requires matching information from known absolute or some associated source.
Dating of metallic articles at present can be done only from impurities of organic material contained in it or using
indirect methods, and thus may not be fully reliable by itself. Though techniques for dating of artifacts recovered
by archaeology have thus improved tremendously in the past fifty years, interpretations of the significance of
these finds are often controversial. As the ancient pieces of bones and pots cannot speak, there is bound to be
speculation and subjectivity in these interpretations, and thus all declared findings should be treated only as
hypotheses subject to possible future revisions.
When it was first proposed that the IE language, Indo-Aryan, entered India in the second millennium BC,
the theory was that the Aryan speakers of the language entered North West India and subjugated the aboriginal
barbarians living in Indo-Gangetic plains at the time. Basics of the theory are that a white race who called
themselves Aryans invaded India from Caspian steppes and Central Asia in the second millennium BC and
subjugated the locals known to the IE people as Dasas and this was the basis of Indian caste system. The three
upper castes originated from different sections of the invaders and Dasas became the low caste Sudras. This system
of racial identity or segregation was preserved for a very long time with a rigid ban on inter-caste marriages. Those
dasas who refused to acknowledge the superiority of Aryas became the aboriginals or tribals and others withdrew to
the south of the sub-continent. It was claimed that Vedic and Hindu civilization, including the Sanskrit language,
was solely the contribution of these invading Aryans. Further it was concluded that history of India began with
the arrival of the Aryans.
At the time of its formulation, it was a hypothesis based on a number of linguistic theories. The chronology
proposed for it was at best a speculative interpretation of available data. In the beginning of 20th century, with
the archaeological discovery of Indus Valley Civilization, the above theory was somewhat modified as invasion
instead of migration or Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) to account for the decline of the Indus Valley Civilization

45
46 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

(IVC) in the first half of second millennium BC. The new version was that when the Aryan tribes entered India,
they encountered a highly advanced civilization. They conquered the fertile valley as their opponents, though
far more civilized and technologically advanced, were more mercantile than warlike. The invaders were able to
conquer Indus people as their horses and chariots proved to be a tremendous force multiplier. The proofs for
these invasions were discovered in Rig-Veda on the basis of uncritical, erroneous and tendentious interpretations of
a number of references in the texts to conclude that these describe the subjugation by a white skinned, tall race of
IE speaking invaders of dark natives of India. The frequent description in Rg Veda of what was assumed as events
of battles, war booties and invocation of various gods for help in winning wars, were taken as confirmation of the
theory. Another aspect of IVC ruins that was claimed to support AIT was the absence of horse remains at these
sites whereas various references to horses in Vedas suggested that the animal was very important to Vedic people.
The find seemed to support AIT at least in three respects. Firstly the apparent destruction of IVC settlements
at about the time of the assumed entry of Aryans into Indus valley seemed to support the invasion hypothesis.
Secondly once the archaeological evidence was interpreted in this way, the many references in Vedas to battles,
Dasyus, and Asuras were seen in a new light and were determined as supporting evidence for AIT. Lastly it helped
to fix the time frame of AIT on the basis of hard archaeological evidences. These led to the famous words of
Sir Mortimer Wheeler that Indra stands accused of destroying the Harappan civilization. This then became
the accepted wisdom for the next 100 years among scholars and common people alike and was stated as a fact in
academic curricula, popular writings and school text books all over the world.
Such a conclusion needed to be supported by archaeological evidence of the migration from north of Black Sea
and Caspian Sea right up to South Asia. This was provided by the archaeological finds such as Kurgan culture
of the steppes north of Black Sea-Caspian Sea, Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex or BMAC (Porto Indo-
Iranian) and Petrovka-Sintashta (Porto Indo-Aryan) among others. There are a number of other archaeological
finds in the Urals, Volga, Central Asia, Iran, Swat Valley (Ancient Gandhara) and Baluchistan which were taken
as remains of Indo-Aryan migration. By the middle of the last century this model came to have the further support
of the most widely accepted model of IE origin and expansion; The Kurgan Hypothesis.
But later closer examination of the available evidence at IVC showed the conclusion to be too hasty as no
tell-tale signs of large-scale destruction of Harappan cities have been found. Contrast this with the IE expansion
in the Balkans. Based on linguistic evidence, we were told that the Hellenes (Greeks) along with the Illyrians
and Thracians supplanted or absorbed a highly civilized non-IE native population, whose culture is known as the
Vinca culture. These natives, who had used what might have been a writing system reportedly going back to
5300 BC,1 might have disappeared along with the Old European culture some time before 2500 BC. According
to Marina Gimbals, the Vinca culture was part of Old Europe; a relatively homogeneous, peaceful culture that
occupied Europe during the Neolithic and its period of decline was followed by an invasion of warlike, horse-riding
Porto-Indo-European tribes from the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Here was an advanced civilization being overrun by
barbarian invaders who largely destroyed it (though the time frame does not seem to fit the theory), a model
that was thought to be applicable to Vedic-Harappan history: a literate urban and agricultural civilization being
overrun by semi-nomadic horsemen. But the crucial difference is that in the Balkans, this violent scenario was
attested by archaeological findings: The existence of archaeologically attested burnt layers at many settlements
may be evidence for military confrontations between the native farmers of South-east Europe and the cattle-
breeding horse riding nomads from South Russia. This testimony of many settlements having been burnt down
1
The Tartaria tablets and those found in the town of Kardzhali in South Bulgaria, dated to around 5,300 BC, bear incised symbols
and these probably represent the earliest known form of writing in the world. It seems quite certain that these symbols or patterns
represent distinct ideas, even if it had not developed into a full-fledged script to represent the underlying language fully. Subsequent
radiocarbon dating on these finds pushed the date of the tablets, and therefore of the whole Vinca culture, further back to 5,500 BC.
This was the time of the early Eridu phase of the Sumerian civilization in Mesopotamia. Some authors now believe that the Sumerians
learned of the technique of writing from the Vinca, probably following the collapse of the Vinca homeland 3,500 BC. Kardzhali script
also appear to have close similarity with Linear A script and the ancient script of the Cretan (Minoan) civilization. Interestingly, Vincas
built some of the earliest known urban centres with a system of streets and with houses on either side. These also had metallurgical
workshops and places to manufacture various artefacts, which were traded extensively.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 47

is absent at the Harappan sites. Besides the conclusion drawn from the archaeological data of violent destruction
of Vinca culture or old Europe by horse riding steppe people is also now disputed. The evidence collected by
archaeology in the last thirty years in fact point to the absence of any large scale invasion in Southern, Western
and Northern Europe before historical period. Vincas, Minoans, Mycenaean and Hellenes all flourished in areas
which are in geographic proximity to each other; they had similar genetic profile; there were cultural similarity; and
they seem to have used closely related script. It is thus distinctly possible they were also linguistically, ethnically
and culturally related. There is no credible evidence at present that is inconsistent with such a possibility, except
that it will be in conflict with the chronology of the popular steppe home land hypotheses.
As early as 1964, U.S. archaeologist George F. Dales, who excavated at several Harappan sites, questioned
the theory of a violent attack on Indus cities by invading Aryans: Where are the burned fortresses, the
arrow heads, weapons, pieces of armour, the smashed chariots and bodies of the invaders and defenders?...
Despite the extensive excavations at the largest Harappan sites, there is not a single bit of evidence that can
be brought forth as unconditional proof of an armed conquest and the destruction on the supposed scale of
the Aryan invasion.
Jim G. Shaffer, another U.S. archaeologist with first-hand experience of Harappan sites, wrote in 1984 an
article entitled Indo-Aryan Invasions: Myth or Reality?, in which he refuted the invasionist framework.
His conclusion as regards the archaeological record was: Current archaeological data do not support the
existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre or proto-historic
periods.. Jim Shaffer says that the demographic eastward shift of the Harappan population during the
decline of their cities, i.e. an intra-Indian movement from Indus and Saraswati to Ganga, is the only
archaeologically documented west-to-east movement of human populations in South Asia before the first
half of the first millennium BC, while the archaeological record shows no significant discontinuities for
the period when the Aryan invasion should have made its mark.
Shaffer in another article, discussed the Painted Grey Ware Pottery, which some archaeologists identified as
the work of Aryans, when they said rapid changes in pottery suggest a series of sudden waves of migrants
into the region. Shaffer pointed out this potterys absence along the supposed route the Aryans would have
taken, to reach the Ganga-Yamuna region, where this pottery was found. In addition he noted that the
Painted Grey Ware pottery was a continuation of earlier styles native to that area.
In a major book on the Indus civilization, another U.S. archaeologist, Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, one of the
excavators at Harappa, rejected the entire concept of AIT:
There is no archaeological or biological evidence for invasions or mass migrations into the Indus
Valley between the end of the Harappan Phase, about 1900 BC and the beginning of the Early
Historic period around 600 BC Although the overall socio-economic organization changed, conti-
nuities in technology, subsistence practices, settlement organization, and some regional symbols
show that the indigenous population was not displaced by invading hordes of Indo-Aryan speaking
people. For a long time the invasions or migrations of Indo-Aryan-speaking Vedic/Aryan tribes
was believed to explain the decline of the Indus civilization and the sudden rise of urbanization in
the Ganga-Yamuna valley. This was based on simplistic models of culture change and an uncritical
reading of Vedic texts...
Colin Renfrew, another archaeologist, criticized historical linguistics, saying that while it could be useful
in establishing relationships between languages, its precision in determining the homeland of the original
speakers of the Indo-European language family is questionable. Thus the identification of Southern Russia,
Anatolia, or any other place as the original homeland of the Aryans based only on historical linguistics is
largely speculative. He does not see any evidence in the Rig Veda that the Aryans were invaders in India or
that they were nomads.
48 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

He adds: Indeed the chariot is not a vehicle especially associated with nomads. He further
says that we should, in other words, seriously consider the possibility that the new religious and
cultural synthesis which is represented by the Rig Veda was essentially a product of the soil of
India and Pakistan, and that it was not imported, ready-made, on the backs of the steeds of the
Indo-Aryans.

Many well known archaeologists like Allchins, Kenoyer, Possehl, Shaffer and many others emphasize the unbroken
continuity of the native culture in North-Western India from 7000 BCE to the last centuries before Common Era.
The most cited evidence of Aryans in India is usually a culture based in areas around Punjab and areas east
of it towards the end of second millennium BC and first half of first millennium BC that used ceramics known as
Painted Grey Wares (PGW).
It was archaeologist B.B. Lal who, as a young archaeologist in the 1950s, made his name by digging up the
long-awaited proof of an Aryan invasion into South Asia. He had identified a pottery style, the Painted Grey
Ware dated to 1200800 BCE, as typifying the Aryans penetrating deeper into India. At that time it was
considered as a sensational discovery that seemed to confirm the Aryan Invasion Theory. However Lal changed
his stance since as he found that PGW could have been an adaptation of the earlier Harappan style. Also PGW
type pottery is not found anywhere outside Punjab. If Vedic Aryans had brought this new technology with them
similar pottery should be seen in the many sites on the likely route taken by them while moving towards India.
Its absence anywhere in the supposed route taken by Indo-Aryans from the steppes goes against any connection
between PWG and any migrants/invaders from the steppes. Based on this, one could actually argue that there
was no migration in either direction in the period from 1500 BC onwards. But this evidence remains compatible
with an Indo-European emigration from India in another time bracket, anytime between 6000 and 2000 BC.
He also could not find any sign of a foreign origin of either the Harappan civilization or the Vedic Aryans.
He felt that there are many indications of continuity of cultural and life style practices in the area. Lal claims
that the fire pits he excavated in the Harappan sites were remains of fire altars of the kind Vedic priests used for
rituals. This finding was rubbished by many authors in the West, asserting that these were just kitchen hearths.
Lal explains in detail why these cannot be kitchen hearths. As part of it, he highlights a finding of fire-altars
where a cooking hearth stood close by, demonstrating the difference.
The continuity of the Harappan civilization is clear from many artefacts dug up from Harappan sites. Several
Shiva-like figures are depicted in Harappan seals and other items, where the posture is well known in Yogic
practices. There is also a depiction of a Hindu fable: The Thirsty Crow. Statuettes show the Namaste salute
with folded hands. Married women are shown wearing red powder in the parting of their hair, like their modern
counterparts. A prominent Hindu religious symbol known as Swastika is frequently found on Harappan seals.
The weights and measures mentioned in Koutilyas Ardhasastra are the same as those used in Harappan centres.
All these could not have been accidental and clearly shows that there was no discontinuity.
There is very little similarity between the Kurgan and Vedic cultures. The Kurgan people buried their dead
in pits with the corpse placed in a fetal position and covered with red ochre. There is no evidence of such burials
among the PGW culture and neither do such practices jibe with Vedic cremation rituals. Burial customs apparent
in the RV Death hymn in Mandala 10.10 to 10.18 has little similarity with those of the Kurgan culture as the
folowing verses from RV 10.16 indicates.
RV 10.16.1,2 Devata Agni.

1. Burn him not up, nor quite consume him, Agni: let not his body or his skin be scattered.
O Jatavedas, when thou hast matured him, then send him on his way unto the Fathers.
2 When thou hast made him ready, Jatavedas, then do thou give him over to the Fathers.
When he attains unto the life that waits him, he shall become the Deities controller.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 49

Jatavedas is another name of vedic god Agni or fire. This seems to clearly idicate that the funeral method
of vedic people was cremation, and not inhumation or burial. There is no indication of the defining feature of
Kurgan burials, like animal grave offerings, anywhere in North-West India from that period.
It also has little similarity with funeral rites of Margiana as they were revealed at the Gonur necropolis. 2
Nothing similar to the Kurgan or Andronovo material culture have been recovered from Punjab.
Bernard Sergent believes that the strategic key to the Aryan invasion puzzle has been provided by the
discovery, by a French team in 1968, of the post-Harappan town of Pirak, near the Bolan pass and near Mehrgarh
in Baluchistan. Pirak was a settlement dating back to the 18th century BCE, just about the time the Harappan
civilisation was breaking up. In fact, other civilisations like Sumerian Third Dynasty of Ur and Bactria-Margiana
were also breaking up at this time. Culturally it was closely related to the societies to its north and west, especially
Bactria. Sergent sums up a long list of precise material items which Pirak had in common with those non-Indian
regions. He also says in Pirak the horse makes its appearance (for the first time) in India, both through bones
and in figurines.
If Pirak was close to Bactria in material culture , then it is simply a Bactrian-Iranian settlement in an Indian
border region, a southward extension of the Bactrian culture, possibly due to severe draught in the Oxus region.
Pirak can be significant only if it can be shown that the innovations are repeated in many North-Indian sites in
the subsequent centuries. But so far we have no such evidence. It appears that whoever established themselves in
and around the border town of Pirak never crossed the Indus River and moved further east.

3.1.1 Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex or BMAC

Evidence for Aryan migration through Central Asia, provided by BMAC finds, once thought to to be a given, is
also now doubtful. The Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (or BMAC, also known as the Oxus civilization)
is the modern archaeological designation for a Bronze Age civilisation of Central Asia, dated to 23001700 BCE,
located in present day northern Afghanistan, eastern Turkmenistan, southern Uzbekistan and western Tajikistan,
centred on the upper Amu Darya (Oxus River is the Greek name for it)). Its sites were discovered and named
by the Soviet archaeologist Viktor Sarianidi in 1976. Sarianidi declares it as the 5th oldest civilization on earth;
not just a culture but a lost civilization.3 Some major sites of Oxus Civilization are centred in the Murghab
Oasis, Turkmenistan. These have unique architecture and had an exceptionally rich material culture. With
their impressive material culture, including monumental architecture, bronze tools, ceramics, and jewellery of
semiprecious stones, the complex exhibits many of the hallmarks of civilization. The complex can be compared to
other contemporary proto-urban settlements in Iran or the Indus Valley. Its achievement in craft manufacture was
of the highest standred, and it was equal to anything produced in the Bronze Age Near East in terms of aesthetics.
The richness, both with regard to technological achievement and aesthetic quality is abundantly demonstrated in
the ten Royal burials in Gonur. Materials used include gold, silver, bronze, lapis lazuli or carnelian. Foreign
contacts, whether as gift exchange or attesting to commercial relations are evident in the recovery of an Indus seal
and an Akkadian seal with inscriptions. The signature of the Oxus Civilization rests in its impressive architecture.
More specifically, in the monumentality of the fortification systems that surround each settlement. The sites of
Gonur, Togolok, Adji Kui 1 and 9 serve as exemplary models of the extent to which the community was fortified.
One, two, even three perimeter walls, most 2-4 meters in width, enclose an area in excess of 20,000 square meters.
2
Gonur is one of the important archaeological site of Oxus civilisation. Here a large burial site has been found, which is known
as Gonur necropolis. The necropolis was situated to the west of the Gonur. It occupied an area of over ten hectares and included
6,000-7,000 dead.
3
It was originally named as a Complex (BMAC), but has since been accepted as a full fledged civilization, as many authors consider
it as an archaeological complex fully worthy of civilizational status, rather than a complex that is essentially part of another civilization.
Bactria was the Greek name for the area of Bactra (modern Balkh province), in what is now northern Afghanistan, and Margiana was
the Greek name for the Persian satrapy of Margu, the capital of which was Merv, in modern-day south-eastern Turkmenistan. Bactria
was historically central to the Iranian culture, where Zarathushtra probably lived (in the city of Balkh). Margiana was to the west, in
eastern Turkmenistan. Both these are to the east of Caspian Sea and north east of Iranian heart land.
50 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

The palace of North Gonur measures 150 metres by 140 metres, the temple at Togolok 140 metres by 100 metres,
the fort at Kelleli 3 125 metres by 125 metres, and the house of a local ruler at Adji Kui 25 metres by 25 metres.
They are circular or rectangular and have up to three encircling walls. Each of these formidable structures has been
extensively excavated. Within this area at Gonur, Sarianidi identifies temples, palaces, areas of craft production,
and ritual activities. Its fortification systems are more impressive than any other contemporary Bronze Age cities
of the Near East. At the moment one can only speculate on the reasons for such elaborate defences of the BMAC
cities or whom they were defending against. The enemy or enemies must have been very, very powerful and
technologically advanced, if there was need to build such defences against them. It is unlikely that these could
have been the barbarian nomads from the steppes. Beyond this fortified area, the community extended its walled
settlement to 20+ hectares. Contemporary communities, i.e. Adji Kui 1 and Adji Kui 9, are less than 3 kilometres
distant from each other and are both well fortified, suggesting that even nearest neighbours, likely subject to a
common authority, were fortified. Presence of a dense settlement regime within the Murghab delta during the
Bronze and Iron Ages is hinted at in some recent archaeological surveys. The inhabitants of the BMAC were
sedentary people who practised irrigation farming of wheat and barley. By 1700 B.C. virtually all of the fortified
settlements of the BMAC were abandoned. The reason is not clear, but could be owing to drying up of sources of
water.
However, even after more than thirty years of research and excavation, the chronology and stratigraphy of the
BMAC remains rather uncertain. The principle sites excavated; Gonur, Togolok and Sapeli, to mention just three,
did not attend to stratigraphic distinctions, nor are the limited number of radiocarbon dates associated with
specific stratigraphic levels or material inventory. The C-14 dates are often derived from unspecified contexts.
Many authors consider Sarainidis methods rather crude, even alleging that he used bulldozers, where modern
archaeologists would have used fine tooth-combs. Sarianidi regards Gonur as the capital of the complex in
Margiana throughout the Bronze Age. While they all have impressive fortification walls, gates, and buttresses, it
is not always clear why one structure is identified as a temple and another as a palace. Sarainidis evidence for the
presence of Soma-Haoma in some of these temples is speculative at best. In 1995, Sarianidi claimed to have found
ephedra twigs, a plant asserted to be the Vedic Soma plant, in a vessel uncovered at Gonur. In 1998 a second
discovery of ephedra was reported. Analysis of both finds of ephedra could not confirm its identification. The
Temple of Soma-Haoma and the identification of numerous other temples, rest mostly on his assertion rather than
empirical evidences. His narrative is often wildly imaginative in which allegation trumps rigorous demonstration.
BMAC seem to have had contacts with Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley and the Iranian Plateau. Toward the
last centuries of the third millennium some of BMAC artefacts appear on a number of sites on the Iranian Plateau
and in the Indus Valley and the Persian Gulf.
All the archaeological sites of third millennium BC in the area, except Shortugai,4 appear to be related in
material culture to the prototypical Bactrian settlement of Dashli; the principal Bactrian site. Whether these
were Porto Indo-Aryan settlements on their way to South-Asia as proposed by those supporting IE origin in the
steppes model or Porto Indo-Iranian, as declared by Sarianidi or of local origin as many authors suspect, is an
4
Shortugai in Bactria, about 250 KM east of Mazar-i-Sharif and 350 KM north of Kabul, close to the junction of boarders of present
day Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and North Afghanistan, was a settlement completely Harappan in character on a tributary of the Amu
Darya on the foot of the ore-rich Badakshan range which had large deposits of lapis lazuli, gold, silver, copper and lead ores. According
to Bernard Sergent,Not one of the standard characteristics of the Harappan cultural complex is missing from it.. Replacement of
Harappan with Bactrian culture in Shortugai may have occurred around 1800 BC. Nobody knows why such a Harappan settlement
came up in the middle of Bactrian settlements except some wild guesses. It was not just a few Harappan traders and miners living
among Bactrians, but a complete Harappan city which seem to have had armed defendants, as pieces of weapons and armour has been
recovered. This is quite unlike the Harappan cities proper, which were believed to have been thinly defended. The Harappan must
have had very good relations with the Bactrians to be allowed such facilities in the area. It is possible that there may have been other
such Harappan settlement nearby. Besides, Shortugai may not have been very far from the Harappan areas as these might have had
presence in many areas of South and east Afghanistan up to Hindukhush Mountains, though archaeological evidence for such presence
is not available at present. But these areas had close cultural, political and linguistic relations with North-West India in later times.
Gandhara, for example, was always thought of as part of Saptasindhu. The greatest Sanskrit grammarian, Panini, was believed to
have been a native of Kandahar or ancient Gandhara.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 51

unresolved issue.
The architectural style of the structures are clearly un-Indic and is possibly Iranian . Roundness in buildings
is highly unusual in Hindu culture, which has a strong preference for square plans, in evidence already in the
Harappan cities.
Sarianidi believes the origin of BMAC is to be sought in Anatolia. Central to Sarianidis imagination is his
belief that the migrants were Aryans, specifically Indo-Iranians, who followed proto-Zoroastrian beliefs and rituals.
Sarianidi also believes that there are close similarities between the archaeological styles in Anatolia, Mesopotamia,
Greece, The Mitannian Kingdom and Iranian plateau and BMAC. He considers BMAC as a trans-Elamite Culture.
His model would imply IE origin in Anatolia which would be unacceptable to many.
Present-day Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan were regions with Iranian culture and
language at the time they made their appearance in written history, mostly in the last millennium BC. While the
position need not have been the same in the pre historic past, this visible Iranian influence in the area shifts the
burden of proof to those who insist that BMAC was Indo-Aryan at some earlier period and that these Indo-Aryans
later made way for Iranians. Many of the artefacts recovered from Dashli sites cannot be labelled clearly as either
Indo Iranian or Indo-Aryan. These include fire altars, many cultural aspects and even the burned remains of a
plant in the altar which is thought to be the Soma plant. Shape of buildings were clearly un Indo Aryan. The
issue is further complicated as North-West India and Iran had a common heritage, and many religious practices,
mythical motifs and various other cultural traits, were the same or closely similar.
Artefacts from BMAC have the same Iranian/Indo-Aryan ambiguity. A vase in Dashli shows a scene with men
wearing a kind of shirt leaving one shoulder uncovered. In this, Sergent recognizes the upanayana ceremony,
in which a youngster is invested with the sacred shirt or thread. This he believes is evidence that BMAC was
Indo-Aryan. But this is both a Vedic and a Zoroastrian ritual, with the latter resembling the depicted scene more
closely. In India the boy wears only a thread, but among Zoroastrians, it is a shirt-like garment.
Asko Parpola has tried to identify the Togolok temple as Indo-Iranian coming from the steppes and possibly
proto-Vedic, citing the Soma sacrifice there as evidence: in The coming of the Aryans to Iran and India and
the cultural and ethnic identity of the Dasas, he identifies the former with Soma-using nomadic Scythians (who
were believed to be Porto Indo-Aryans), mentioned in Zoroastrian texts. However, every testimony we have of
the Scythians, in whose sites traces of the Soma ceremony have been found, is as an Iranian-speaking people.
The use of Soma was a bone of contention within Mazdeism, with Zarathushtra apparently opposing it, while
others, who were equally Iranian, suppoting its use. Thus there is nothing against characterizing the Togolok
fire temple as Iranian, even if the remains of the shrub recovered is soma. Parpola also recognized a tripura as
described in the Vedic literature as the strongholds of the Dasas or Asuras, in the BMAC fortifications with three
circular concentric walls. This would confirm the Indo-Aryan conquest of BMAC, before their further migration to
North-West India. But such an argument is at best speculative, and has little empirical, textual or archaeological
support. Besides he himself later says that the term tripura was unknown to the Rg-Veda and only appears
later, in the Brahmana texts.
But other evidences point to the local origin of BMAC. The residents of BMAC were not the first to settle in
the area. Recent excavations at Adji Kui 1, directed by Gabriele Rossi Osmida (2008; 2011), indicate the presence
of a distinctive earlier settlement, radiocarbon dated to ca.2700 B.C. Stratified above that settlement are several
fully fortified BMAC communities. These point to local development of the BMAC.
Mes Aynak in Afghanistan is not very far from BMAC sites. It is located in Logar Province. The site
contains Afghanistans largest copper deposit, as well as the remains of an ancient settlement with a 40 ha
Buddhist monastery complex. Archaeologists have now found the remnants of an older 5,000-year-old Bronze Age
site beneath the Buddhist level, including an ancient copper smelter and a mint. Historians expect to learn more
about the early science of metallurgy and mining by exploring this site. It is known to contain coins, glass, and
the tools for making these, going back thousands of years. This may well have been an extension of BMAC. This
points to the existence of many well developed urban centres in the area long before the putative arrival of Indo
Iranians or Indo Aryans in the area.
52 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

An alternate scenario suggested is that, the Indo-Iranians stayed in or close to the Andronovo Cultural sites
in the Pontic-Caspian area, in the Afanasevo Culture to the north of Central Asia and in the BMAC in Central
Asia on their way towards Iran and South-Asia. But there are scanty evidence for such a speculation. Most
archaeologists who were involved, point out that these identifications by linguists and historians are not based on
intrinsic evidence, but on forced attempts to substantiate their linguistic and historical theories.
Passages from the Avesta and the Rigveda are quoted by different authors to support the Indo-Iranian
identity of both the BMAC and the Andronovo. The passages are sufficiently general to permit the
Plains Indians of North America an Indo-Iranian identity (LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY 2005:168).
In fact, as archaeologists point out, the cultural features of the BMAC archaeological sites are actually distinctly
non-Indo-European, and could actually be more compatible with a Uralo-Altaic culture than an Indo-European
one. It becomes clear that the only logic behind identifying these archaeological cultures as Indo-Iranian or
Indo-Aryan is that they fit in with the time- space expectations of the linguists and historians as to where the
Indo-Iranians/Indo-Aryans must have been at a particular period of time. These time-space predictions and
expectations are based on purely hypothetical estimates of the chronological dates of the Rigveda and the Avesta.
Linguists and historians appear to have realised the weakness in their model and most of them now say that
BMAC might not have been Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan, but these migrating tribes might have stayed in or close
to these sites for some time resulting in considerable cultural diffusion and linguistic borrowings.
If one wishes to argue for Indo-Iranian migrations from the steppe lands, south into the historical seats of the
Iranians and Indo-Aryans, it will have to be assumed that these steppe cultures were transformed as they passed
through the border lands of BMAC. With the archaeological evidence presented by Sarianidi, which makes it clear
that steppe penetration from north-west into the Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex was a minimum and
that it only extended to the borderlands between the northern regions of the complex and the southern steppe
belt. In short, the material culture of BMAC was quite different from that of the proposed Indo-Aryan pasturalist
migrants from the steppes. Contact is indicated by some presence of Andronovo materials, but this could be
indicative of peaceful trade as opposed to population displacement, especially since the complex reveals no signs
of systematic destruction. Not a single artefact of Andronovo type has been identified in Iran or in northern
India, but there is ample evidence for the presence of Bactrian Margiana materials on the Iranian Plateau and in
Baluchistan. Since there is a minimal effect on the Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex by the Andronovo
culture, and a non-existent effect on either the Indian subcontinent and the Iranian plateau, the only way to
conform the linguistic hypotheses of Indo-Iranian expansion with the archaeological evidence is to assume the
model of a Kulturkegel. This model would have the migrants coming from the steppe completely discard their
Andronovo cultural associations and extensively adopt both Bactrian material and religious culture, while retaining
their language with minimal substratum influence. This will, of course, make the model very messy to say the
least and will test ones credibility.
Besides, if the Porto Indo-Iranians or Porto Indo-Aryans from the steppe, reformed and civilised by contacts
with BMAC, had invaded or migrated or otherwise dominated North-West India, in the middle of second millen-
nium BCE, one would expect many BMAC like structures and urbanisation in the area from that time. But what
we find is that after the collapse of Harappan urban centres towards the beginning of second millennium BCE, till
the urbanisation of the Gangetic planes in the first millennium BCE, hardly any new urban centres were built in
the area, leave alone monumental structures like those in BMAC.
Thus, the conclusion will have to be that any model based on the possible ethnic or linguistic origin or
character of Oxus Civilisation will have to be considered as speculative, without firm empirical foundation, which
can neither be confirmed nor rejected at present. We simply do not know the ethnic or the linguistic identity of
its ancient inhabitants, but it is very unlikely that they were Indo Iranians or Indo Aryans. In short, BMAC is of
little help at present on resolving the issue of IE origin and expansion or its chronology.
Besides there is now extensive textual as well as archaeological evidence for close contacts between South Asia
and Central Asia from prehistoric times, as the following will demonstrate.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 53

Textual Evidences for Contacts Between South Asia and Central Asia from Prehistoric Times

Central Asia and Ancient India had long traditions of social-cultural, religious, political and economic contacts
since remote antiquity, resulting in almost continuous flow of people, material and the ideas between the two. In
ancient Indian tradition, barbarian tribes of the Shakas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Pahlavas, Paradas etc... are attested
to have been coming as travelers, students, traders, invaders and small time thieves from Central Asia to India
in pre-Christian times. Many of them were probably absorbed into the Indian society as different castes. The
Kambojas and Pahlavas, often mentioned in Itihasa/Puranas, are known to have their original settlements in the
east Iranian regions in Central Asia. The historically attested 2nd century BCE Saka invasion of western India
probably involved the tribes or groups of Sakas, Pahlavas, Kambojas, Paradas, Rishikas and other allied tribes
from Northern Afghanistan and Central Asia.
There are many references to Central Asia in texts like Atharvaveda, various Brahmanas, Itihasa/Puranas,
Manusmiriti, Kalidasas Raghuvamsa, Katha-Saritsagara, Rajaratrangini, Mudra-rakshasa and other old Sanskrit
texts. Aitareya Brahmana refers to some ancient nations lying beyond Himalayas. Two names that often recur
in these accounts are of Uttara Kuru and Uttara Madra. These names seems to suggest some kind of relation
to the kingdoms of Kuru, and Madra within the Saptasindhu area. Kuru was the most important kingdom
during the post vedic times and probably the area where Rgveda was composed. The vast area north of the
Himalayas and Hindukush from Pamirs up to Arctic (Somagiri) is stated by some texts to form ancient Uttara
Kuru. Uttara Madra is often identified as the ancient Media Region of North West Iran. But the exact location
of Uttara Kuru and Uttara Madra is uncertain. If the references are to actual places, these should be in North
Afghanistan or Central Asia and possibly places to further north and west, as large scale access to India from the
north was possible only through the Khyber Pass in Hindukhush Mountains. Other references are to the janapadas
of Parama Kambojas, Rshikas and the Lohas. These were also located north of Himalayas, which should mean in
Central Asia.
Aitareya Brahmana (pren himvantam janapada Uttarakurva Uttaramadra) makes first reference to Uttara
Kuru and Uttara Madra as real-life Janapadas. According to Aitareya Brahmana, these two nations lay beyond
the Himalayan ranges (Hindukush). The Brahmana talks of these two Janapadas as practicing of a form of
democracy (vairajiya), where the whole Janapada took part in election of rulers.
The Valmiki Ramayana describes the topography of the whole of Central Asia in detail and in some cases, very
picturesquely. It gives very vivid account of Uttarapatha and several countries located in the north of Himalayas.
It mentions the lands and towns of the Kambojas, Shakas, Yavanas, Varadas along with Himavanta and refers
to the land of the Uttarakurus as lying beyond river Shailoda and Kichaka valleys. Somagiri, probably Arctic,
is described as land without the sun, but the area is still said to have day light. Ramayana also refers to the
famed horses imported by princes of Ayodhya from Kamboja and Bahlika (Bactria or Balkh). The Kambojas
were famous in ancient times for their excellent breed of horses and as remarkable horsemen. Mahabharata says
the kings of the Kambojas and the Tusharas were present in the Rajasuya conducted by Yudhisthira. They had
later participated in Mahabharata war on the side of Kauravas. But the people of the area are looked down
upon as mlechas or barbarians. The Kambojas are mentioned in the works of Panini. Manusmriti states that the
Kambojas, Sakas, Yavanas, Paradas, Pahlavas etc... were originally Kshatriyas of good birth but were gradually
degraded themselves to become mlechas or barbarians as they failed to follow the Brahmanical way of life. This
reminds us about the story of Druhyus mentioned elsewhere in this book.
According to Rajatarangini of Kalhana, king Lalitaditya Muktapida of Kashmir led a war expedition against the
tribes of north (i.e. north of Kashmir) and in sequence, encounters the Kambojas, Tusharas, Bhauttas, Daradas,
Valukambudhis, Uttarakurus, Strirajya and Pragjyotisha, with whom he fights one after the other. Pragjyotisha
is usually understood as the ancient name of present day Assam. But some references, like the above, seem to
place it in the mountains north west of the sub-continent.
Poet Kalidasa drew graphic picture of northern mountainous region of India. He also refers to the Uttara
Kuru. Raghuvamsha describes a war expedition of King Raghu against the Parasikas (Sassanians), Hunas and
54 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

the Kambojas located in Uttarapatha or lands to the north. The encounters with the Hunas and the Kambojas had
occurred around the Vankshu river, probably river Oxus. The ancient Kambojas were probably of Indo-Iranian
origin, but are sometimes described as Indo-Aryans or as having both Indian and Iranian cultural and linguistic
affinities. The Bhuvanakosha states that Bahlika or Bactria was the northern most Janapada of ancient India and
was located in Uttarapatha of Bharata. They might have been ethnically close to the Sakas. It is possible that
the Kambojas and Kushans5 were closely related or even the same. Thus it appears that the people of Central
Asia were considered as an extension of greater India from prehistoric times. Besides such close interaction should
be difficult, unless these people spoke a language or dialect which was mutually comprehensible with that in use
in North West India at that time. Such close interaction between North West India and Central Asia and Tarim
Basin point to the possibility that the ancient tribes who populated these areas were migrants from North West
India at some point in pre historic times.
V. S. Aggarwala thinks that the Uttarakuru was located to north of Pamirs in Central Asia. Thus, it probably
comprised parts of Kirgizstan and Tian-Shan. Incidentally, Uttarakuru was also famous for its horses. The regular
references to horses from Uttarakuru rules out any possibility of locating Uttarakuru in Kashmir and Uttarakhand
states in India as some authors have suggested, since these regions have never been noted for their horses.
Archaeological excavations in Southern Uzbekistan, north-eastern Samarkand and other places in Uzbekistan,
Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan have now unearthed corroborating evidence of links between ancient
India and Central Asia since remote antiquity. Further,it appears that India and eastern Central Asian region of
Xinjiang (China) were also in extensive political, cultural and religious intercourse with each other. The discovery
of manuscripts in Xinjiang (China) and many other finds points to these interactions.
These interactions could also be interpreted as the result of Indo Aryan migration or invasion and the migrants
maintaining contact with people who were their former cousins. But the absence of any archaeological evidence
indicating such a migratory movement precludes this possibly. Besides on the basis of textual evidences, it is
clear that Vedic civilization always considered people of the North-West, in Northern Afghanistan and Central
Asia, as inferior people or Mlechas, an unlikely attitude if these people were the distant cousins of the new
migrant settlers. In the absence of evidences for a migration, the only possible conclusion can be that contacts
between South Asia and Central Asia goes back to pre-historic times. Thus evidences for neighbourly exchanges
and contacts between South Asia and Central Asia, if any, cannot prove movement of IndoAryans from Central
Asia to South Asia or can be proof of any model other than just that there were such contacts from prehistoric
times.

3.1.2 Evidence from Harappa

The Harappan archaeological finds and their interpretations have now assumed crucial, make or break importance,
not only for various models of hypothetical arrival of Indo Aryans in the sub-continent in the second millennium
BCE, but also for the prevailing chronology of the origin and expansion of Indo-European language family. If
it turns out that the Harappans and the Vedic Aryans belonged to the same ethnic and linguistic groups, the
prevailing model will face almost certain failure. As evidences mount, this seems to become more and more a
distinct possibility.
5
Kushan Empire was an empire originally formed in the early 1st century CE under Kujula Kadphises in the territories of the
former Greco-Bactrian Kingdom around the Oxus River (Amu Darya), and later based near Kabul, Afghanistan and todays Peshawar,
Pakistan. The Kushans spread from the Kabul River Valley to also encompass much of the Indo-Greek Kingdom, from which they
took their first official language (Greek), Bactrian alphabet, Greco-Buddhist religion, coinage system, and art. They were one of five
branches of the Yuezhi confederation, a possibly Iranian or Tocharian, Indo-European nomadic people who had migrated from the
Tarim Basin and settled in ancient Bactria. Their official language, the Indo-European Bactrian language, is closely related to the
modern Afghan languages. They absorbed the Central Asian tribes that had previously conquered parts of the northern central Iranian
Plateau once ruled by the Parthians, and reached their peak under the Buddhist emperor Kanishka , whose realm stretched from
Turfan in the Tarim Basin to Pataliputra on the Gangetic Plain. Kanishka was always considered as an Indian emperor; and not as an
intruder or invader.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 55

The ruins of Harappa were first described in 1842 by Charley Masson in hisNarrative of Various Journeys in
Baluchistan, Afghanistan, and the Punjab, which talks about how locals told him of a nearby large ruined ancient
city that extended over 25 miles. In fact locals in the area, including in the arid parts of Sind, Cholistan, Rajasthan
and South-Western Haryana were telling all those who were interested, old myths about ancient abandoned cities,
and a very prosperous past when these desertified areas were well watered and thickly populated. There were
(and still are) sand mounds all over the area, many of which may be hiding ruins buried under them. But no
archaeological investigation was undertaken to verify these places for nearly a century.
In 1856, GeneralAlexander Cunningham, later director general of the archeological survey of northern India,
visited Harappa, where the British engineers were laying the railway line connecting the cities of Karachi and
Lahore. They were finding it difficult to get ballast for the line. When the nearby villagers were questioned, they
were told of an ancient ruined city called Brahminabad near the lines. Visiting the ruins, they found it full of
hard well-burnt bricks. Soon the ruins of the city of Brahminabad were reduced to a heap of dust. A few months
later, further north, another British engineer found that a section of the line ran near another ruined city, bricks
from which had been used by nearby villagers for generations. Such bricks now provide ballast along 150km of
the railroad track running from Karachi to Lahore.
In 1872-75 Alexander Cunningham announced the discovery of the first Harappan seal. But it was in 1912
that more Harappan seals were discovered by J.Fleet, prompting an excavation under Sir John Hubert Marshall
in 1921-22. This resulted in the discovery of what came to be called Indus Valley civilization or IVC for short,
at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. By 1931, much of Mohenjo-Daro had been excavated, but excavations continued,
such as that in 1944, led by Sir Mortimer Wheeler, director of the Archaeological Survey of India.
Since then outposts of the Indus Valley civilization were excavated as far west as Mehrgarh and Sutkagan Dorr
in Baluchistan, as far north as at Shortugai, in northern Afghanistan, probably a trading colony established in
around 2000 BC on the Oxus river to collect semi precious stones from the nearby lapis mines,6 as far east as
at Alamgirpur and Mandi in Uttar Pradesh and as far south as Malwan, Surat Dist. Till now more than 3000
Harappan sites have been discovered or identified. Though some cultural and architectural differences have been
observed, there is little doubt that they all together belong to one single cultural horizon. The true story of
Harappa is still very hazy as only about 5% of the sites have been adequately investigated so far. Many are under
thickly populated villages and towns and others close to the tense militarized border between India and Pakistan
and thus are unlikely to be seriously investigated in the near future. Many of the most promising unexcavated
sites lie in the Pakistani desert region of Cholistan near the tense border with India. One such is the city of
Ganweriwala, discovered in the 1970s and apparently comparable in size with Mohenjo-daro and Harappa.
Chronologically IVC is often divided into three phases with some variation by different estimates.

Early Harappan 3300 BCE to 2800 BCE

Mature Harappan 2800 BCE to 1900 BCE
Late Harappan 1900 BCE to 1300 BCE

The term Harappan civilisation or HP usually referes to the Mature Harappan phase. Some of the discovered
sites, like Mehrgarh in Baluchistan and Bhirrana in Haryana, are older than even Early Harappan. These were
occupied continually from 6000 BCE to well into Late Harappan period. These two places are more than 1000 km
apart.
Most of these identified sites are on the banks of either the Indus River or its tributaries or on the banks of
the paleo canal of an ancient river which flowed from the Himalayan Ranges up to the Gujarat coast. According
to some archaeologists, over 2000 Harappan sites have been discovered along the dried up beds of the Ghaggar-
Hakra River, out of the more than 3500 sites identified so far. Thus the centre of Harappan Culture was the area
between Indus River and the paleo canal or Ghaggar-Hakra River system, which many people believe to be the
ancient Vedic Sarasvati. The course of the river is clearly discernible from satellite imageries and it more or less
6
lapis is a relatively rare semi-precious stone that has been highly prized since antiquity for its intense blue color.
56 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

follows the same course as the Ghaggar-Hakra River system. It is now evident that this ancient river had dried
up by the beginning of the second millennium BCE, probably resulting in the collapse of the civilization. It was
a mighty river before 3000 BCE and had more or less dried up by 2000 BCE. The banks of this ancient river was
probably more important for the ancient civilisation than Indus River. More than half of the mature Harappan
sites were on the banks of the paleo canal/ Ghaggar-Hakra. Also, of the nine major centres identified so far, three
(Harappa, Mohenjo-Daro and Mehrgarh) were on or close to the banks of Indus while six (Banawali, Kalibangan,
Rakhigarhi, Ganweriwala, Dholavira and Lothal) were on or close to the banks of the paleo canal which may be
the old course of Sarasvati. The last two are in Kutch and Sourastra where the river is believed to have drained
into the Arabian Sea. Rakhigarhi in Hisar district of Haryana is now believed to have been the biggest of them
all; bigger even than Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. The size of the lost city was at least 350 hectares, making it
the largest Indus Valley Civilization site in India, Pakistan or Afghanistan. It is spread over nine mounds named
RGR-1 to RGR-9. But major portion of this site has not been excavated yet, as part of it is under two large
villages. Just for comparison, Mohenjedaro and Harappa sites in Pakistan and Dholavira in Indias Gujarat, three
of the biggest sites uncovered so far, have dimensions of 200, 150 and 100 hectares respectively. The Assyrian
imperial capital city,Nimrod on the banks of Tigris River, close to Mozul and capital of Second Assyrian Empire
during ninth and eighth centuries BCE, was also about the same size. This empire, often known as Neo Assyrian
Empire, which ruled the vast landmass from the shores of Mediterranean to present day Iran, Egypt, Arabian
Peninsula and many areas around these for three hundred years, had the military muscle as well as technological
superiority to overcome all its neighbours. Nimrod was the archaeological remains that was in news recently, as
it was damaged by Islamic State followers saying that the ruins were un-Islamic. It is possible that Rakhigarhi
was the biggest city anywhere in the world in ancient prehistoric past. In size, dimensions, strategic location
and unique significance of the settlement, Rakhigarhi exceeds Harappa and Mohenjodaro at every level. Three
layers of Early, Mature and Late phases of Indus Valley civilization have been found at Rakhigarhi or Rakhi
Garh. Similarly Bhirrana on the banks of Ghaggar River in Haryana is now believed to have been a major centre
from 6500 BC, making it one of the oldest sites of Harappan civilization. Based on recent C 14 radio-dating,
the remains in Bhirrana date back to 75706200 BC. Again, just for comparison, it may be pointed out that,
Mehrgarh site in Pakistan is believed to belong to the time bracket of 7000-6400 BC. Mehrgarh is located near
the Bolan Pass, to the west of the Indus River valley and between the Pakistani cities of Quetta, Kalat and Sibi.
It was believed to be the oldest HC site until now. In fact recent excavations have established that a cluster of
at least five Harappan sites in the Ghaggar Basin in Haryana, namely Kunal, Farmana, Girawad, Mitathal along
with Bhirrana are among the oldest Harappan settlements dating back to 4000 BCE or earlier, pointing to the
possibility that this part of Ghaggar Basin might be the original areas of the civilization that later spread to the
Indus sites which are normally thought of as the core and origin of it. Incidently, this was also the area of ancient
Kuru kingdom where Rgveda was composed. This could also mean that early Harappan civilization flourished
more on the banks of Sarasvati and less so along Indus River. For this reason, some scholars say that the name
Indus Valley Civilization is inappropriate and a more appropriate term may be Indus Ghaggar-Hakra Civilization
or Indus-Saraswati or just Saraswati Civilization, as some argue that the dry bed visible in the area is that of
the Vedic Saraswati River. Since the majority of the sites are not on banks of Indus River, it may be better to
call it Harappan Civilization as Harappa was the first IVC site discovered. I have opted for the term Harappan
Civilization or HC for short here, as it seems to be the least controversial.
Geographically HC covered the sea coast from Baluchistan to Cambay in Gujarat and inland along the banks
of Indus and its tributaries up to the foothills of Himalayas. At its peak HC covered an area of about 1.25 million
square kilometre which is larger than ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia put together or a third of the area of
present day India. At its height it might have been home to more than 10 % of world population of that time.
From available evidence, it appears that of the four known major civilizations before 4000 YBP, (Egypt, Sumer,
China Yellow River Valley and HC) HC was superior in terms of not only area, but also technology, economic
development, organization, population and urbanization. The well planned cities, paved roads, extensive drainage
systems, docks, granaries and depiction of coiffured, bejewelled people on clay seals, bronze etc points to a
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 57

civilization that was prosperous and far ahead of its times. The cities were well planned and were constructed in
grids, with exquisite plumbing, the like of which was not seen anywhere in the world again until Rome was in its
heyday two millennium later.
A notable difference between Harappan sites and other contemporary cultures like those in Egypt or Mesopotamia
is the absence of large palaces, lavish burials of the nobles or huge temple structures in the former. It is not clear
if this points to the absence of autocratic kings or emperors or a powerful centralized rule. The similarity, though
not complete uniformity, of the cultural and life style aspects of urban centers, often more than 1000 KM apart,
that remained more or less unchanged for almost a millennium, would not have been possible, if not impossible,
without some kind of central authority. Houses and civic facilities in the lower towns, where apparently the lower
class people of the society lived, were comparatively well served, unlike in Egypt or Mesopotamia. Thus, they
seem to have been a more democratic society, with better wealth distribution, than Mesopotamia or Egypt. What
this means is unclear. Another conspicuous detail is the absence of signs of the presence of a powerful army. On
the basis of this, some early commentators concluded that Harappans were a peaceful, mercantile society. But
absence of indications of a powerful army may be misleading, as prosperous areas like Harappan towns were likely
to have enemies waiting for opportunities for attack and must definitely have been a very good target for invaders
and looters. It seems certain that such a society could not have survived long without a well organized powerful
army and adequate defences and security support. The Harappan towns prospered and flourished, without any
apparent major disturbance or break, for more than one millennium.
Ancient Mesopotamian texts speak of trading with at least two seafaring civilizations - Magan and Meluhha -
in the neighborhood of South Asia in the third millennium B.C. These speak of Meluhha, a term which is believed
to refer to Harappan Cities, as a land of exotic commodities. Such textual references include Sargons (Sargon
of Akkad; the best known ruler from third millennium BC from any part of the world) inscription referring
to Meluhhan ships docked at Akkad.7 Other texts refer to Meluhhan ship-holders and a Meluhhan interpreter.
Gudea of Lagash inscriptions states that the Meluhhans came up from their country to supply wood and other
raw materials for the construction of the main temple of Gudeas capital. The Gudea cylinders are a pair
of terracotta cylinders dating to circa 2125 BC, on which a Sumerian myth called the Building of Ningursus
temple is inscribed.The cylinders were found in 1877 during excavations at Telloh(ancient Girsu), Iraq and is an
inscription describing construction at Gudea, within Eninnu, during the Second Dynasty of Lagash. It is stated
that materials for the construction were brought from a wide area including Susa, Elam, Magan and Meluhha.
Susa was the capital of the Elam Kingdom, located South West of present day Iran. The names of three places,
Magan, Dilmun, and Meluhha are usually mentioned together and goods imported from these three places were
also similar and known to have been available or made in South Asia. The description imply that they were in
close proximity to each other. These sources also mention that Meluhha was to the east of Sumer and very far
off. Most scholars today believes that Meluhha refers to the Harappan Civilization or to some specific town
within it, on the basis of the extensive evidence of trading contacts between Sumer and this region. Maganis
also often identified with Oman. But there is another view that Magan is the ancient Magadha and king Manium
7
Akkadian is an extinct east Semitic language that was spoken in ancient Mesopotamia. It is the earliest attested Semitic language.
Linguists named the language Akkadian after the city of Akkad, a major center of Semitic Mesopotamian civilization during the
Akkadian Empire (2334-2154 BC), although the language itself might have existed many centuries before the founding of Akkad.
Akkadian names were first attested in Sumerian texts from the late 29th century BC. From the second half of the third millennium
BC, texts fully written in Akkadian begin to appear. It used a cuneiform script, which was very similar to the one used to write
ancient Sumerian, an unrelated language. Hundreds of thousands of texts and text fragments in Akkadian have been excavated to
date, covering a vast textual tradition of mythological narrative, legal texts, political and military events. By the second millennium
BC, two variant forms of the language were in use in Assyria and Babylonia, known as Assyrian and Babylonian respectively.
Akkadian had been for centuries the native language in Mesopotamian nations such as Assyria and Babylonia, and indeed became the
lingua franca of much of the Ancient Near East due to the might of various Mesopotamian empires such as the Akkadian Empire, and
later Old Assyrian Empire, Babylonian Empire and Middle Assyrian Empire. However, it began to decline during the Neo Assyrian
Empire around the 8th century BC, as it was gradually replaced by Aramaic. By the Hellenistic period, the language was largely
confined to scholars and priests working in temples in Assyria and Babylonia, but a number of Akkadian loan words, together with the
Akkadian grammatical structure, survive in some local dialects.
58 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

of Magan is Manu of Hindu Puranas. There are other references to luxury items being imported from Meluhha.
Another curious reference is to the presence of a Meluhhan workers village in Sumer and of Meluhhan traders
maintaining their own distinct village in the city of Ur in Sumerian Empire over a considerable span of time in
the third millennium BCE. It is interesting to speculate on what was the nature of the expertise that Harappans
had mastered which the Sumerians valued so much.
A wide variety of objects and seals produced in the Indus region have been found at sites in Mesopotamia
and Bahrain in particular as well as to the north in places like Bactria and Margiana.The trade between these
distant lands was apparently conducted with considerable sophistication. It is interesting in this regard that there
is a reference in Rig Veda to a hundred oared ship, which, if it really refers to an actual ship, must have been
unusually large in ancient times. But this reference is usually rubbished by most western scholars. An intriguing
aspect of this trade was that it seems to have been one sided. Harappan artifacts have been recovered from Egypt,
Mesopotamia, Bahrain, Iran, Bactria and Margiana. But similar goods from these areas are rare in Harappan sites.
Such items recovered so far are mostly from the last centuries of third millennium BCE. The reason is unclear;
but one suggestion is that the trade was largely controlled by Harappan merchants. It is also possible that the
imports were mostly perishable goods and precious stones and metals. This suggests that IVC had a sea-faring
merchant class engaged in extensive trading. But in the absence of reliable evidence/data these conclusions are
speculative at best. 8
Burnt bricks of same measurement appear to have been used in the construction of buildings in Harappan cities
that were as much as 1000 KM apart. The bricks and the constructions were all in definite proportions. Same
type of constructions had bricks of the same size all over the vast Harappan area of all stages. All bricks were in
the strict 1:2:4 proportions all over the area for almost one millennium. It is clear that they had mastered the
technology and chemistry of brick making from the fact that those bricks were so strong and durable that they were
reused, not only for house building in the area, but also for construction of rail lines 5000 years later. Technology
employed in making various artifacts using metals, pearls, clay and other materials point to technological excellence
of a high order. The people of the Harappan Civilization achieved great accuracy in measuring length, mass, and
time. They were among the first to develop a system of uniform weights and measures and the same was used all
over the cultural horizon with only minor variations for almost thousand years. The planning and organization
this calls for at a time when communication and travel must have been extremely hazardous, slow and difficult is
amazing. Their smallest division, which is marked on an ivory scale found in Lothal, was approximately 1.704mm,
the smallest division ever recorded on a scale of the Bronze Age. Harappan engineers followed the decimal division
8
It is now apparent that there was another equally impressive civilization that flourished in the vast area covering Eastern Iran
during this period. Shahdad and Shahr-i-Sokhta are two of the more important archaeological sites among the many ancient settlements
in the Eastern Iran. These are dated from about 3200 BCE to around 2000 BCE, when these settlements were more or less abandoned,
as was the case with the three contemporary civilizations around it; Mesopotamia to the west, BMAC to the north east and Harappan
Civilization to the east. More recent surveys, excavations, and remote sensing work reveal that all of eastern Iran, from near the
Persian Gulf in the south to the northern edge of the Iranian plateau, was peppered with hundreds and possibly thousands of small to
large settlements. These people built large cities with palaces, used one of the first writing systems, and created sophisticated metal,
pottery, and textile industries. They also appear to have shared both administrative and religious ideas as they did business with
distant lands. They connected the great corridors between Mesopotamia and the east, says Maurizio Tosi, a University of Bologna
archaeologist who did pioneering work at Shahr-i-Sokhta. They were the world in between. The artefacts uncovered show the breadth
of Shahr-i-Sokhtas connections. Some excavated red-and-black ceramics share traits with those found in the hills and steppes of distant
Turkmenistan to the north, while others are similar to pots made in Harappan centres to the east. Shahr-i-Sokhta was a metropolis
rivalling those of the first great urban centres in Mesopotamia and the Indus. Radiocarbon data showed that the site was founded
around 3200 B.C., just as the first substantial cities in Mesopotamia were being built, and flourished for more than a thousand years.
During its heyday in the middle of the third millennium B.C., the city covered more than 150 hectares and may have been home to
more than 20,000 people, perhaps as populous as the large cities of Umma in Mesopotamia and Mohenjo-Daro on the Indus River. The
city boasted a large palace, separate neighbourhoods for pottery-making, metalworking, and other industrial activities, and distinct
areas for the production of local goods. A vast shallow lake and wells likely provided the necessary water, allowing for cultivated fields
and grazing for animals. By 2000 BCE these settlements were abandoned. The reasons for this remain unclear.
Thus it is not necessory that the trade between Mesopotamia and Harappan cities was trasacted over sea. It could well have been
over land.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 59

of measurement for all practical purposes, including the measurement of mass as revealed by their hexahedron
weights. These weights were in a ratio of 5:2:1 with weights of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200,
and 500 units, with each unit weighing approximately 28grams, similar to the English Imperial ounce and smaller
objects were weighed in similar ratios.9 The weights and measures later described in Kautilyas Arthashastra were
the same as those used in Lothal. Harappans evolved some new techniques in metallurgy and produced copper,
bronze, lead, and tin. The engineering skill of the Harappans was remarkable, especially in building docks.
The Indus Valley people, though largely urban, domesticated animals, and harvested various crops, such as
sesame, peas, barley, and cotton.

The Mystery of Harappan Script

In spite of uncovering these details, mystery surrounds HC, as we know little else unlike the other three major
civilizations mentioned above. We know nothing about the political organization, rulers, religious practices and
cultural aspects, except what we can infer from the artifacts dug up. We do not even know who these people
were; their ethnical and linguistic identity. The reason for this is that we have not been able to decipher their
writing, if the seals (seals are used to make impressions on malleable material like clay.) represent writing, nor
have we got any other written records, unlike the other three civilizations. Many scholars now say that IVC did
not have a script or writing system as the few thousand seals discovered in Indus Valley cities show some 400
symbols: too few in number for the language to have been logographic, and too many for the language to have
been phonetic (but the number is just right for a logo phonetic script). The difficulty in deciphering the signs is
also due to the fact that we know nothing about the language; whether it was Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, or Munda
or related to Sumerian or Semitic languages. Similarly scholars have not reached an agreement whether the script
is logographic, logo phonetic, syllabic or what are known as abjad. It is most probably logo phonetic or a form of
Cuneiform script. Nor have we yet found bilingual texts like a Rosetta stone,10 discovery of which helped decipher
the ancient Egyptian language, after efforts for at least two hundred years had failed.
Since the discovery of the Rosetta Stone in Egypt in 1799, and the consequent decipherment of the Egyptian
hieroglyphs, epigraphers have learnt how to read a number of ancient scripts. The Brahmi script from India was
cracked in the 1830s and cuneiform scripts from Mesopotamia some time later in the nineteenth century. Some
other scripts that were deciphered in the twentieth century include the Linear B script from Greece and the Mayan
glyphs from Central America. Several important scripts still have not been deciphered. Some of these include
9
The Harappans had apparatly discovered the significance of this ratio. One can measure any weights in multiple of the smallest
unit, using wieghts in this ratio.
10
The Rosetta Stone is an ancient Egyptian stele inscribed with a decree issued in around 200 BC on behalf of King Ptolemy V. It
was discovered by French army engineers at a place called Rosetta; and hence the name Rosetta Stone. The decree appears in three
scripts: the upper text is Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, the middle portion Demotic script, and the lowestAncient Greek. Because it
presents essentially the same text in all three scripts, with some minor differences between them, it provided the key to the modern
understanding of Egyptian hieroglyphs. The decipherment of the Egyptian hieroglyphic texts was announced in 1822; but it took
longer still, before scholars were able to read other Ancient Egyptian inscriptions and literature confidently.
The Rosetta Stone is now 114.4 centimeters (45in) high at its highest point and 72.3cm (28.5in) wide. Parts of it seem to have broken
off at some time in the past. But no additional fragments were found in later searches of the Rosetta site. Owing to its damaged state,
none of the three texts is complete. The importance the discoverers of the stone attached to it is clear from the fact that Napoleon
himself inspected what had already begun to be called la Pierre de Rosette, the Rosetta Stone, shortly before his return to France
in August 1799.
Prior to the discovery of the Rosetta Stone and its eventual decipherment, the Ancient Egyptian language and script was a complete
mystery. This was so at least since the fall of the Roman Empire. There were many attempts to decipher the writings by Arab historians
in medieval Egypt during the 9th and 10th centuries. The study of hieroglyphs continued with fruitless attempts at decipherment by
European scholars. Hieroglyphs have a pictorial appearance in contrast to the Greek and Roman alphabets. This led many people,
including ancient / medieval scholars to think that they were just works of art, and not meaningful writing. It is interesting to note
the parallels with Harappan script.
The discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799 provided critical missing information, that eventually allowed Jean-Franois Champollion
to determine the nature of this mysterious script.
60 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Linear A,11 the Cretan hieroglyphic from the Greek island of Crete, writing in an unknown script found in Easter
Island, and the Indus script. It is not even certain if some of these represent human languages or are just artistic
designs as the Egyptian hieroglyphs were once thought to be.
Another possibility is that Indus signs could be a form of Proto writing. Complete writing systems were
generally preceded by proto-writing, which were systems of mnemonic symbols. It typically might not encode
grammatical words and affixes, making it difficult or impossible to confidently reconstruct the exact meaning
intended by the writer unless a great deal of context is already known in advance. True writing, in which the
entire content of a spoken language is encoded using different symbols, was a later development. In this system
another reader could reconstruct, with a fair degree of accuracy, the exact meaning of what is written down.
The Harappan civilization seems to have adopted standardized writing style over the entire area of its influence
by around 2600 BC and it remained in use till about 1900 BC. Harappan writing can also be found in West Asia, as
far away as Sumer in the present day Iraq. About five thousand samples of inscribed objects have been discovered
from several sites of the civilization. These include steatite or terracotta seals and sealings (impressions of seals),
copper tablets, pottery and other material. The inscribed objects, in general, have a wide variety of designs and
contents. Apart from the yet undeciphered script of the Indus Valley civilization, these objects often have images of
animals, mythical figures, composite and multi-headed animals, scenes with people (perhaps mythical), and other
types of geometric and abstract motifs. The most common animal motif depicted on a majority of these objects is
the Unicorn. Harappan seals provide the earliest known depiction of Unicorn. It is depicted as a legendary animal
later in many other cultures. The purpose of these inscribed objects is not clear. Some of them are suggested to
be used for stamping clay tags attached to bales of goods. However, they may have had other uses as well.
A large fraction of these inscribed objects with the Indus script are in the form of seals largely between 2 to 5
square centimeters in size. Only two samples of Indus script on larger objects have been discovered so far from the
site of Dholavira in Gujarat. One of them is a large wooden board (about three meters in length) with ten Indus
signs. The other sample is a stone slab with four Indus signs which was discovered in an underground chamber at
Dholavira.
Geometric and abstract patterns, in particular, are interesting due to their extensive usage of symmetry and
select number of divisions. Interestingly, a geometric design, that is referred to as Swastika in later literature, is
also found on Harappan seals. There are some very complex concentric circular patterns on objects no more than
a few square centimeters in size, suggesting a strong commitment to precision. Some of their complex geometric
patterns reveal remarkable understanding of geometric space in the art of its creators.
There are differing Views on how many signs there are in the Indus script. Parpola puts the number at about
425; an estimate more or less supported by the Indus script researcher, Iravatham Mahadevan. There are some
other estimates that puts the number below 100. At the other extreme is the high estimate of 958 signs by Bryan
Wells. The reason for this differing estimate is that many of these signs may have variations or the style of creating
the same sign might have differed in different artefacts and over differnt periods.
The number of signs in a script generally defines the type of the script. Logographic scripts, such as Chinese,
have thousands of signs with each sign corresponding to a word. In contrast, in case of alphabetic scripts consisting
of single sound signs, the number of signs often does not exceed sixty. Another class of scripts lying in between
these two extremes consists of about 400 to 900 signs and they are known as logo-syllabic scripts. The scripts
11
Linear A is one of two currently undeciphered writing systems used in ancient Greece. The other is Cretan hieroglyphic. Linear A
was the primary script used in palace and religious writings of the Minoan civilization. It is probably the origin of the Linear B script,
which was later used by the Mycenaean civilization. Linear A has been unearthed chiefly in Crete, but also at other sites in Greece, as
well as Turkey and Israel. In the 1950s, Linear B was largely deciphered and found to encode an early form of Greek. Although the two
systems share many symbols, this did not lead to a subsequent decipherment of Linear A. Using the values associated with Linear B in
Linear A mainly produces unintelligible words. If it uses the same or similar syllabic values as Linear B, then its underlying language
could be unrelated to any known language.
The earliest writing found on Crete is the Cretan hieroglyphs. It is not certain if the two scripts record the same language or whether
the undelying language is Minoan. The Cretan hieroglyphs are often associated with the Egyptians, but they also show relation to
several other writings from the region of Mesopotamia.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 61

such as ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs and Mesopotamian Cuneiform texts belong to logo-syllabic category. It is
probably significant that these three contemporary civilizations, which had close trade and commercial relations,
also used conceptually similar scripts for writing, which was mainly used for trade and commerce in the beginning.
In logo-syllabic scripts, each sign is used both for its pictorial as well as for its phonetic value. Based on the
count of the total number of signs in the signary of the Indus script, it is likely that it is logo-syllabic, like
Sumerian cuneiform or Egyptian hieroglyphs or Mayan glyphs; that is, a mixture of hundreds of logographic signs
representing words and concepts, such as & and % and even for many frequently used words, and a much smaller
subset representing syllables.
The language or languages spoken by the Indus people remain unknown. Sumerian, Egyptian, Elamite, Munda,
Indo-Aryan and Dravidian are but a few of the languages, which have been proposed as the language underlying
the Indus script. The Dravidian hypothesis would appear to have gained the greatest number of backers. There
are strong reasons to believe that speakers of Indo-Aryan languages were living in the Indian subcontinent, earlier
than has commonly been assumed. This claim has led many scholars to the conclusion that the Indus inscriptions
could possibly record an early form of Indo-Aryan. It also seems plausible that the Indus language family died
out altogether and left no traces, which would allow linguists to reconstruct it. This last suggestion would
make a decipherment of the Indus script almost impossible, as an unknown script, which encodes
an unknown language, cannot be successfully decoded. Or to put it differently, Indus Script can be
deciphered only if either the script or the language has some relation with later attested ones.
This great civilization reached its developmental pinnacle in the period between 2500 and 1900 BC. It was
in the short transition period, leading from the Early Harappan to the Mature Harappan period, that the Indus
script emerged. It did so in its fully developed state, showing no signs of having passed through a formative phase,
although some of the symbols had already appeared as potters marks in the Early Harappan period (Parpola
1996: 165). Parpolas finding needs to be confirmed. But if the finding is indeed correct, the reason for it is unclear.
One possible suggestion is that the Harappans learned the technique of writing from some other civilization with
which it had close contact.
But it appears that the Indus symbols were not adopted from any other contemporary literate societies, for the
signs bear no resemblance to any known script, although it contains simplified anthropomorphic and zoomorphic
signs, in addition to geometric forms, such as circles, squares and triangles, as do many other scripts. These may
be accidental similarities that are bound to occur.
The first known script found in India, which we can read, is Brahmi. Asokan inscriptions were written in
Brahmi. This script is the ancestor of all modern Indian writing systems. This includes both Indic and Dravidian
scripts. Besides, many scripts in use in South and South East Asia are derived from it.
Brahmi scripts origin has been controversial. Many scholars hold the view that South Asia was illiterate till
about the time of Mouryan Empire. One of the reason is the sudden appearance of fully developed script in the
inscriptions during Ashokan period and the absence of inscriptions or other written records between Indus valley
and Ashokan period. Asokan edicts12 are found in many places in India. Would the emperor have taken the
trouble, if Indians were illiterate and nobody could have read them at that time? These edicts were clearly meant
to be read by the common man. If so, the obvious conclusion that should follow is that literacy was quite wide
spread in Gangetic Plains by this time.
There are different theories regarding the origins of Brahmi. Puranas tell us that Brahmi script was created
by Brahma. It is mentioned in Narada Smriti that if Brahma has not created the art of writing, the future
would have been deprived of all progress. One theory suggests that it was derived from an earlier Indian script,
12
Asokan edicts are found in India,Nepal,Pakistan andAfghanistan. In India, Rock edicts were found at such widely separated places
like Uttarakhand, Maharashtra, Mount Girnar in Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa. Three languages (Prakrit, Greek and Aramaic)
and four scripts are used for these edicts. Many edicts are composed in archaic forms of Prakrit. Prakrit inscriptions were written in
Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts, which even a commoner could read and understand. The inscriptions found in the area of present day
Pakistan are in kharosthi script. Those edicts, mostly in the North West India, are written in Greek or Aramaic. The Kandahar Rock
Inscription is bilingual.
62 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

while others suggests it was derived from Phoenician or South Semitic scripts. On first impulse, one is tempted
to consider the possibility of Brahmi13 being a script derived from the Harappan. But all efforts to connect these
have failed so far. Besides Harappan was probably a logo-syllabic script, whereas Brahmi was abugida script.
Now, a 30 cm tall varaha found under the foundation of a home in Haryana is providing an interesting clue into
the later usage of the Indus-Saraswati script. This 2 kg, copper figure went on display for the first time in Brussels.
According to the description which appeared in The Art Newspaper, the figure has a cast relief on its chest of
a unicorn-like animal, similar to motifs found on seals of the Harappa culture. But the most interesting part is
the inscription above this creature. It appear to represent a combination of Harappan signs and Brahmi letters,
suggesting that it comes from period of overlap between the Harappan and subsequent cultures. The figure has
some similarity with that of the Hindu god Varaha. The Uttar Pradesh archaeological department has accepted
this as an antique piece and dates it to the second to the first millennium BCE. If this find is confirmed, it could
point to possible connection between Harappan and Brahmi scripts.
Another recent possible breakthrough is an artefact that was found in a museum collection in Afghanistan.
The artefact in question consists of a strip of several thin layers of bark, with seven lines of symbols running across
it. A cursory perusal of the approximately 200 symbols, could lead one with some knowledge of the Indus script,
to propose that the text might have been composed using the Indus script, as some of the most common and
well-known Indus signs seem to be present on the bark manuscript.
However on closer examination, it is seen that the symbols defer from Harappan ones in many specific details.
Thus it can be a script derived from Harappan script. It is also possible that a derivative of Harappan script
was used to prepare a text in another language. The most frequent Indus sign is also the most common Kabul
grapheme and ten of the top 11 most common Kabul graphemes appear in the list of the 60 most frequent Indus
signs. This might be a pointer that the text might be in Harappan language or a later variant of it. The manuscript
might represent a later simplified stage of the Indus script. If confirmed, this would finally disprove the argument
that Harappans were illiterate and confirm that the Indus symbols belong to a speech-encoding writing system
But establishing the date of the strip of birch bark is necessary to confirm that the Kabul manuscript is not a
forgery, as some authors have expressed doubts about its authenticity.
The nature and content of the Indus script have been extensively debated in the literature. The hurdles in
deciphering the script include extreme brevity of the texts, absence of information on their content and usage,
absence of bilingual or multilingual texts, lack of knowledge about the nature of the language or the script and
apparent discontinuity in the cultural and literary traditions after the decline of the Indus Valley civilization.
There are three serious problems standing in the way of deciphering the Indus script. These are - First, no firm
information is available about its underlying language. Was this an ancestor of Sanskrit or Dravidian, or of some
other Indian language family, such as Munda, or was it a language that has disappeared? Linear B was deciphered
because the tablets turned out to be in an archaic form of Greek; Mayan glyphs because Mayan languages are still
spoken.
Second, no names of Indus rulers or personages are known from myths or historical records: no equivalents
of Rameses or Ptolemy, who were known to hieroglyphic decipherers from records of ancient Egypt available in
Greek.
Third, there is, as yet, no Indus bilingual inscription comparable to the Rosetta Stone. It is conceivable that
such a text may exist somewhere like in Mesopotamia, given its trade links with the Indus civilization. The Mayan
decipherment started in 1876 using a sixteenth-century Spanish manuscript that recorded a discussion in colonial
Yucatan between a Spanish priest and a Yucatec Mayan-speaking elder about ancient Mayan writing.
More than one hundred attempts have been made to assign meaning to various signs and sign combinations
13
Brahmi was an abugida script, meaning that each letter represents a consonant. Alphabets in use today can be differentiated into
three types. Abugida scripts are those in which vowels are modifiers of the basic consonant sign, except at the beginning of a word.
Most present day Indian languages use abugida scripts. This contrasts with a full alphabet, in which vowels have status equal to
consonants like English (phoneme - consonant or vowel), and with an abjad, in which vowel marking is absent or optional like Arabic
(phoneme - consonant). In less formal contexts, all three types of script may be termed alphabets.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 63

of the Indus script, relating it to Porto-Dravidian language on one hand to Indo Aryan language on the other.
It has even been suggested that the script is entirely numeric or even that it is a collection of symbols. Most
of the interpretations are at variance with each other and at times even internally inconsistent. None of these
interpretations are satisfactory. Hence, the problem of the Indus script remains unresolved with no universal
consensus on any of the interpretations.
This has led many scholars to conclude that South Asia was illiterate, not only during Harappan times, but
even till about the time of Emperor Asoka. Many authors hold that Entire absence of writing, reading, paper,
or pen in vedas, or during Brahamana period and complete silence in Sutra period (When art of writing was
beginning to be known), the whole Literature of India was preserved in oral tradition only. Panini is best known
grammarian of ancient India. For more details on Paninis work, please see page 175. He mentions Grantha, the
equivalent for written or bound book in the later days in India. Yet, Max Muller believed that there is not a single
term in the Paninian terminology which indicates the knowledge of writing. Muller interprets Granta simply a
composition, which is handed down the generation by oral tradition. In short, Muller believed that Panini was
illiterate.
Yet somehow Panini produced one of the most elaborate and scientific grammar ever known to mankind till
today. in just 3996 short incredibly complete rules, he composed the entire Classical Sanskrit Grammar, without
any redundancy. Anybody with some knowledge of his work will know that it could not have been done without
the help of written notes. Besides, by this time Indians were using tens of thousands of texts in Vedic and Sanskrit
languages, many of which were highly technical. If all these were held in memory and worked on regularly for
many centuries, it must be considered a superhuman intellectual feat, unparalleled in human history. The linguistic
tradition that resulted in Paninis work as well as the vast collection of Vedic and Sanskrit texts could have evolved
only over many centuries on the basis of written forms.
In a 2004 article, Farmer and Witzel presented a number of arguments in support of their thesis that the
Indus script is non-linguistic, principal among them being the extreme brevity of the inscriptions, the existence
of too many rare signs increasing over the 700-year period of the Mature Harappan civilization, and the lack of
random-looking sign repetition typical for representations of actual spoken language (whether syllabic-based or
letter-based), as seen, for example, in Egyptian cartouches. In short, they argued that Harappan Civilisation was
illiterate.
Asko Parpola, reviewing the Farmer and Witzel thesis in 2005, states that their arguments can be easily
controverted. He cites the presence of a large number of rare signs in Chinese, and emphasizes that there is
little reason for sign repetition in short seal texts written in an early logo-syllabic script. Revisiting the question
in a 2007 lecture,Parpola takes on each of the 10 main arguments of Farmer et al., presenting counterarguments
for each. He states that even short noun phrases and incomplete sentences qualify as full writing if the script
uses the rebus principle to phonetize some of its signs. One of these sign, found over 1000 instances, is a U with
two horns protruding from either side. It constitutes ten percent of all script data and, as a rule, it appears at
the end of inscriptions rather than at the beginning. It also transpires that certain combinations of signs recur
with a higher frequency than others and appear in a particular order too, making it seem that the inscriptions
follow certain rules and also that the signs constitute a script. The sequencing of signs also follows definite rules.
Very few signs are used as text enders while relatively large number of signs occur as text beginners, a usual
characteristic of a natural language.
It is hard to believe that Harappan Civilization (HC) was illiterate even when it was apparently more advanced
compared to Egypt or Mesopotamia in many respects, where writing was developed before third millennium BCE.
If the identification of Meluhha as Harappan cities is indeed correct, it is clear that Harappa and Akkad had
very close relations and Harappans surely would have learned writing skills from them. Even if they had failed
to develop a script on their own, they would surely have learned the skill from these lands with which they had
close trade and commercial relation, particularly as writing would have been of tremendous help in their extensive
manufacturing, trade and administration of the vast lands over which the civilization flourished. In fact it
is inconceivable that they could have achieved what they did, without some form of writing. One
64 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

similarity between Harappan seals and Sumerian, Akkadian, Elamite and Hittite writing recovered so far, is that
they are all impressions made on clay. Also most clay tablets from Mesopotamia and Anatolia relate to trade and
commerce.
Thus, the suggestion that Harappans were illiterate cannot be considered very sound. On the contrary all
available evidences point to the distinct possibility that the markings on the different artifacts are part of a
very well designed script. But deciphering it might require a Harappan Rosetta Stone or some other credible
breakthroughs. Till then the relation, if any, between Vedic Aryans and the Harappans will remain an enigma. But
indirect and circumstantial evidences point to the distinct possibility that Vedic Aryans also built the Harappan
Civilization, though any such conclusion may have to await deciphering the Harappan script.

Rigvedic Society and Harappans

When the Aryan Invasion Theory, or the model that hypothesized the arrival of Indo Aryans in North West India
in the second millennium BCE, was proposed by European Indologists in the nineteenth century, it was simple
guess work, and was not supported by any empirical evidence or even credible, consistent logic. However as there
was little opposition to it at the time, it was soon accepted as a fact of history even in academic circles. Later,
though many scholars found various inconsistencies in it, they tended to support the prevailing wisdom, as there
were no emphatic evidences to oppose it or to support it. But in the last few decades, as evidences from multiple
fields began to be available, it is becoming increasingly clear that there was no large migration into North West
India for the last 7000 to 8000 years at least. Most genetic studies conducted so far have come to the conclusion
that there had been no major genetic input into the sub-continent for the last 10000 years. Skeletons unearthed
from the Harappan sites are anthropologically similar to those of present day population of the area. There is not
a single archaeological find that can be emphatically identified as those of incoming Indo Aryans, either in North
West India or anywhere else. There is no sudden change in cultural or life style practices or demographic structure
in North West India for at least the past 5000 years. There is no unambiguous myth about a migration event,
from the north or North West, in any Vedic Literature texts.
Thus, not only that there is absolutely no evidence for a large scale arrival of Indo Aryans in the North West
India in the second millennium BCE, there are multiple evidences to show that such an event could not have
occurred. Most linguists and historians now accept that such is the case. This has prompted some of them,
who are firm believers of the prevailing chronology, to suggest a Trickling in and elite dominance model, which
is discussed in detail in pages from 69 in this book. The key element of this model is that the Indo Aryans
arrived in a number of small groups, who were able to impose their language on the locals, because of some special
circumstances. David Anthony, in his Revised Steppe Hypothesis suggests that the spread of the Indo-European
languages in South Asia did not happen through large scale migrations, but by the introduction of these languages
by ritual and political elites, which were adopted by large groups of local people, a process which he calls elite
recruitment. According to this revised model, the migration into northern India was by small groups of elite males
who were genetically diverse.14 Dominance by these small groups led to a complete language shift in northern
14
Many authors now say that the original Proto Indo Europeans or the Proto Indo Aryans, who came to South Asia, were not
genetically or ethnically of same origin; rather they were a mix of many ethnicities. However we now find the majority of IE language
speaking people all over the world with one characteristic similarity; most of them have face angle of 90 or above, whereas most
speakers of languages of other major families like Africans, Chinese, Semitics among others have face angle below 90 . Face angle
is one of the physical characteristics that define those known as Caucasian. The name Caucasian derived from the Southern
Caucasus region or what are now the countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Physical characteristics that were believed to be
typically Caucasian include thin nasal aperture (nose narrow), a small mouth with thin lips, facial angle of 90 to 100 with minimal
protrusion of the lower part of the face and retreating cheekbones, making the face look more pointed
In the nineteenth century the concept of face angle was a serious subject of academic studies, mostly in support of the theory of
racial superiority of white races. It was discredited, particularly after the Second World War, as there was no scientific support for
the concept. Nobody takes it seriously today. However, though it may have nothing to do with superiority or inferiority of races,
the difference in face angle between different groups of people is an observed fact, though there are some notable exceptions like the
Turks, Hungarians and Jews. The similarity in face angle could be a pointer to possible genetic relation between speakers of this
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 65

India in the second millennium BCE.15

The locals also adopted the culture, life style and religious practices of the new comers and also promptly
forgot their past; their ancestors and lot else. Names of places, rivers, mountains and even their own personal
names were changed to Indo Aryan ones. Remember that while the new comers were only few in numbers, the
locals might have been in tens of millions and this happened all over a geographical area covering millions of square
kilometers. Also bear in mind that the Harappans would have considered the new comers as barbarians. Such
a scenario seems to be completely irrational, implausible and tests ones credibility. The special circumstances
that are usually suggested as reason for this very unlikely change is that, the Harappans were desperate at that
time because of the collapse of their urban centers and so were ready to accept the barbarians as their rulers.
But according to the usual chronology, the Indo Aryans would have arrived at least a couple of centuries after
migration of the locals from their abandoned towns, believed to have occurred due climate change and drying
up of water sources. No doubt that the Harappans would have been greatly distressed; but it would have been
a slow process and the immediate effects would have been spread out over many decades and centuries, time
enough to adapt to a changed life style, suitable for the new circumstances. This would have softened the impact
somewhat. Far harsher conditions and mass sufferings have occurred all over the world regularly. It is doubtful
if such conditions will drive a once proud, prosperous people to accept a few barbarians as their saviours and
accept changes as mentioned above like own names and religious beliefs and practices, apart from total switching
of language. Besides, there is no evidence that such a process had occurred.
There is one probable clue that show that we are missing something here. The Harappan civilization was
clearly an advanced civilization and yet these people have left absolutely no literary records in spite of having long
close contact with civilizations that had attested literary traditions and developed well advanced writing systems.
Remember that archaeological and anthropological evidences are now emphatic that there was no cultural or
demographic change in the area from the third to first millennium BC and yet nothing of their literary traditions
or even myths have survived. The Vedic Aryans on the other hand have left us a literature that is probably
the largest and most profound in the world from that period. But there is absolutely no archaeological record
that they ever existed either on the Indian soil or outside its boundaries. So we have archaeology of a vast
civilization lasting thousands of years that left no literature and a huge literature by the Vedic Aryans who left
no archaeological records. To get over these difficulties some scholars, like Frits Staal, now suggest that Vedic
Culture was a mixture of Harappan and Indo-Aryan Cultures. Staal believes that Vedas were composed in India
in the language brought into India with some inputs from the local myths, incidents and cults like Soma and Agni.
Wendy Doniger, Professor, History of Religions at the University of Chicago, in her now controversial book The
language family. This is not a conclusion based on scientific investigation, but an opinion based on casual observation; nor is it of
crucial importance to the present subject of discussion.
15
There was another related process of which we are largely in the dark. It is clear that the Rigveda was composed in the North west
parts of South Asia. Most versions of the South Russian Home Land model would require most parts of North India except North West
India to be non Indo Aryan language speaking, immediately after the Rigvedic times. But the post-Rigvedic texts contain no reference
to the migration of the Indo Aryan speakers from the Punjab or their spread to the plains and plateaus of North and Central India, or
to their interaction, or conflicts, with the non-Aryan inhabitants of these areas, or to the what must have been disruptive adoption by
these non Indo-Aryans of completely new and unfamiliar Aryan speech-forms. The hundreds of post Vedic texts on every imaginable
subject and the innumerable stories in them do not recount even one that could be interpreted as description of the apparent conflict or
disruption this spread caused. The absence of any such references adds further support to the thesis that most of North India and parts
of Deccan Plateau was linguistically, culturally and ethnically close immediately after the Rigvedic times, though speaking different
dialects of Indo-Aryan; not all of them necessarily mutually comprehensible. The Veda based religious practices and culture was also
got synthesized with local practices in the Dravidian South without any apparent conflict. All Dravidian languages now have many
Sanskrit loan words and in some of them these loan words constitute a very substantial part of the vocabulary. All Indian languages,
including most languages of the North as well as South, have 36 consonants and the 16 vowels with some minor variations. All these
are pronounced in more or less in similar way and all are derived from Brahmi script. Though there are recent claims that use of force
caused this adoption or adaption, extensive Tamil literature, from at least the beginning of Common Era, do not mention any such
struggle or conflicts. This smooth spread of the culture all over India, among apparently diverse linguistic and ethnic communities, in
pre historic times, was remarkable. But our knowledge about the circumstances and dynamics of this spread is limited or non-existent.
This could be a pointer to some wide gap in our understanding of prehistory of South Asia.
66 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Hindus: An Alternative History goes further and says that Indo-Aryan contribution to Hindu religion and ancient
literature is limited to Vedas alone. She says

Though the Vedic people told the story of their early life in India, and their descendants controlled
the narrative for a very long time, most of what Hindus have written about and talked about and
done, from the Mahabharata on, has not come from the Veda. The non-Veda is the fons et origo of
Hinduism.

Thus her conclusion is that every custom, practices, myths and imageries associated with Hindu Religion at
present, except Vedas, have come from non-Vedic sources, most of which presumably from Harappa, but also with
contributions from other cultures which were present in the sub-continent and also those which entered the area
later.
Assuming that the Puranas and Epics are also mostly made up of local myths and incidents, we are still faced
with inconsistencies. Some of these are

If the local myths and incidents were restated in the language of the intruders, one would expect some
references to that process in the innumerable stories in the Puranas and Epics. To date nobody has pointed
out any such references. Also one would expect many words of Harappan origin in the Vedas. There may be
some Dravidian and Munda loan words in the Vedic, the two other major language families in South Asia.
But not everyone agrees to this.16 Besides, these supposed loan words in Vedic are too few to account for
the admixture of the language of a few trickled in intruders and the vast majority.

If the Harappans spoke a language belonging to Dravidian family as some believe, one would expect some
traces of the myths about their ancestors life in the Saptasindhu area and the migration from there to the
south in the ancient Tamil literature. Again nobody has suggested anything of that nature.

If Harappan Language was not Dravidian, one would expect the language of the vast majority to survive at
least in some pockets. Nowhere had the language of the majority completely displaced by that of a limited
number of intruders who were otherwise completely assimilated by the local population with little impact
on the anthropological features, culture, lifestyle and genetic make-up of the locals.

According to the prevailing wisdom, the incoming small groups of Vedic Aryans completely displaced the
languages spoken in the comparatively thickly populated, vast, Indo-Gangetic planes, with little impact on
the material culture, life styles or genetic make-up of the locals. Yet when they moved further into peninsular
India, the effect was just the opposite. There was little impact on the languages, except Sanskrit loan words
in these languages, but the intruders impact on local material culture, life style and religious customs was
quite substantial.

According to the AIT/AMT narrative, the transformation that happened in the Harappan areas after the
arrival of Vedic Aryans, was absolutely total. It left almost no traces of the original beliefs, mythology and
language, or of the original complex of material and spiritual culture. The local people not only adopted Indo-
European systems of ancestor worship, they completely abandoned and forgot their own actual ancestors and their
own actual ancestral history, and adopted the ancestors and ancestral history of the Indo-Aryans as their own.
All these commenced some time after 1500 BCE, and was more or less completed within a period of 200 to 400
years; a suspiciously short time for such complete transformation. This scale of transformation caused by a few
trickled in outsiders is incredible and without parallel.
16
Such imaginary discovery of foreign words in a language is not uncommon. In the 18th century when a version of Pahlavi Avesta
was first published in Europe by Anquetil Duperron, there were many critics who found many Arabic words in it. Later it became clear
that this was based on superficial reading or Anquetil papers. The Arabic words were all from the later portion of the texts, created
well after the Arabs became the masters of the entire area.
3.1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES 67

The Harappans had many well planned large cities. If their language was not IE, it is surprising that few pre-
Indo-Aryan place-names as well as river names survive in the North India. Contrast this with what happened in the
Americas; the pre-colonial place-names of the native American Indians of the USA have survived in large numbers
to this day, in spite of the fact that American Indians had few towns and cities. Also the European migrants
almost annihilated the the local Red Indian population and established a completely Europeanised nation, with
little indication of the Red Indian past. Yet they did not attempt to change the Indian place names, which they
could have easily done without any resistance from the Indians. This is also the case in England. In fact, not
only in America and British Islands, but nowhere else in the world, there is a case where new migrants changed
all the place names and river names, in the new areas where they settled, with words in their own language.
This has also not happened anywhere, where we know Indo-Europeans had settled, except in South Asia. A
non-Indo-Aryan substratum in the river-names and place-names of the Rigvedic homeland would
support an external origin of the Indo-Aryans. However, most place-names in the Rigveda and the
vast majority of the river-names in the North India are Indo-Aryan. Witzel writes:

A better case for the early linguistic and ethnic history of India can be made by investigating the
names of rivers. In Europe, river names were found to reflect the languages spoken before the influx
of Indo- European speaking populations. in northern India rivers in general have early Sanskrit names
from the Vedic period, and names derived from the daughter languages of Sanskrit later on. This is
especially surprising in the area once occupied by the Indus Civilisation where one would have expected
the survival of older names, as has been the case in Europe and the Near East.

The examination of 300 skeletons from the Indus Valley sites and comparison of those skeletons with modern-
day Indians by Kenneth Kennedy has concluded that the Harappan IVC inhabitants were no different from
the inhabitants of India in the following millennia or the present population of the area. Kennedy, a physical
anthropologist and archaeologist studied most of the skeletons recovered from different Harappan sites, including
those of the victims of the alleged massacre of locals by invading Aryans at Mohenjodaro. He found that only two
skulls showed signs of injury, and that even those two individuals did not die immediately from these injuries, but
rather several months later, possibly from other causes. Kennedy further states that after examining the skeletons
of the Harappans, he recognizes a biological continuum of many of their morphometric variables in the modern
populations of Punjab and Sindh.. This clearly negates the Aryan invasion theory, because the tall, blue-eyed,
fair-skinned Aryans were supposed to be so unlike the short, black, noseless natives that they defeated. The
invasion of the Aryans should have resulted in a significant change between the Harappans and the present-day
people. George Erdosy asserts that Physical anthropologys failure to demonstrate a racial divide in South Asia
in the second millennium BC is quite conclusive, even considering the limitation of available data.
The work of U.S anthropologists Kenneth Kennedy, John Lukacs and Brian Hemphill now firmly concludes
that there is no trace of demographic disruption in the North-West of the subcontinent between 4500 and 800
BCE, thus ruling out a large scale influx of an alien race into the area for the last 4000 years or more and also the
hypotheses that todays South Indians are the descendants of the defeated people and present day North Indians
that of the invaders. Kenneth Kennedy says

If vedic Aryans were a biological entity represented by the skeletons from Timargarha (near Peshawar,
Pakistan), then their biological features of cranial and dental anatomy were not distinct to to a marked
degree from what we encountered in ancient Harappa

Thus there is clearly a biological continuum of many of Harappan morphometric variables in the modern
populations of Punjab and Sindh. This is further confirmed by the fact that depictions of human faces recovered,
including the one Sir Mortimer Wheeler described as priest-king, have thick beard, long nose and long broad face
and look very much like the present day natives of the area. The famous seated male sculpture, made of white,
low fired steatite, was recovered from Mohenjo-daro.
68 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

It now appears that even current Indian food habits may have been inherited from Harappans. A recent study
by scientists from Washington State University, of human teeth and a cooking pot recovered from Farmane; a
major Harappan site in Haryana, reveals that the inhabitants consumed spicy food. Ginger and turmeric were
extensively used. The food also included lentils, moong dal, rice and bananas. There was no trace of meat
based or non-vegetarian food. But to conclude on the basis of such absence of evidence that the Harappans were
vegetarians, will be pre-mature. But the material evidence for spicy and other foods consumed by them stands on
firmer footing. Liberal use of ginger and turmeric in food preparations is very common in South Asia today, far
more than other parts of the world.
It is possible that this issue may be get some clarity shortly. Skeletal remains of four individuals have been
recovered from Rakhigrahi sites. According to newspaper reports a scientist who helped in the project said We
have found what has not been found at any other Harappan excavation site before; a DNA extraction from the
skeletal remains. The important aspect that we are working on, which has never been done before, is the facial
reconstruction of the Harappan people. The South Koreans have developed a software in which if we feed the
DNA data along with the morphological features, like measurements of bones, it can help us reconstruct the face.
For the first time, we will be able to see what Harappans looked like, the color of their skin, their eyes and so on.
Some leading institutions like National Geographic are now involved in the project. The final results are expected
any time now.
The main reasons why many authors favour the idea that Vedic and Indus Valley Civilizations were completely
different and my own take on these are
Vedic and Harappan cultures were completely different as there were too many cultural and lifestyle differences
between them. The more important among these are that Rig Veda does not mention any of the artefacts or urban
techniques of the Indus Valley and none of the things the Veda describes look like the things archaeology has dug
up from the Indus sites. The Rig Veda does not mention inscribed seals or a Great Bath. It does not mention
bricks while Harappan towns are built with very well formed bricks.
But if it could be shown that Rigveda was composed in same area, a millennium before Early Harappan period
these differences could be easily explained as later developments. Besides Harappan Archaeology, particularly in
the Ghaggar Basin is still in the initial stages for various reasons and it is likely that a lot more will be revealed
in future.
Rigveda mentions iron, but Harappan archaeology has not found any trace of iron so far.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In most cases it might only mean that we have not looked
for the evidence closely enough; or we do not have the necessary tools for recovering the evidences at present.
There is in fact evidence that iron was in use in India in the beginning of second millennium BCE, before the
putative arrival of Aryans in India. Iron artefacts from that period were discovered in Jhasi, near Allahabad. This
contradicts the prevailing wisdom that Indians did not know the use of iron until well into the first millennium
BCE, well after the end of the late phase of Harappan Culture. Besides Ayas, the word usually thought to refer
to iron in Rigveda might not have meant iron specifically, but only a metal, at the time they were being composed.
Also there is a serious contradiction here; if Rgveda mention iron, the vedic Aryans must have been using it by
the middle of second millennium BCE. Still it is being said that Indians did not know the use of iron until well
into the first millennium BCE.
Rigveda mentions horses and chariots frequently, but there are not many traces of these in Harappa.
The relevance of this argument is doubtful, as these are equally rare in the archaeological remains of second
millennium BCE, when the IE speakers with their horses and chariots, were supposed to have entered Punjab.
Horse remains in significant quantities only begin to appear in the area (Kuru-Pancala domains) well into the first
millennium BCE (PWG). Rigveda rarely mention horse riding as such, but only chariots and that too by Devas
and kings. The awe and glamour attached to horses and chariots may be on account of its comparative rarity.
Besides horse bones have been recovered from Harappan sites like Lothal, Surkotada and Kalibangan. A related
issue is that Rg-Veda speaks about spoked wheels, but the Harappan wheels appear to be discoid. But this is
disputed. Patterns which look like spoked wheels have been found in mature Harappan layers at Rakhigarhi and
3.2. ELITE DOMINANCE AND TRICKLE IN THEORIES 69

Banawali.
It is believed that a period during fourth or fifth millennium BCE for composition of Rigveda is not possible
as it is difficult to find an archaeological counter-part among pre-Harappan settlements in Punjab to the material
culture as described in Rg-Veda.
But again absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Besides such an argument should be considered
barred by its own inherent contradictions, as archaeological counter-parts have not been found for arrival of Vedic
Aryans in North-West India or their material culture as described in Rg-Veda, in the second millennium BCE
and thus the possibility of the putative model also will have to be denied. Archaeological investigation in the
area is still in the preliminary stage. Besides the ancients, who were mostly pastoralists, but also practised simple
agriculture, and living in very modest dwellings, might not have much archaeological visibility.

3.1.3 Conclusion
There is absolutely no evidence to support a scenario of Vedic Aryans entering North West India in the second
millennium BCE as invading forces or as a large migratory movement or as small groups of elite warriors, except
the time space expectation of such an event in the hypothesised chronology of the Steppe home land Model
of IE origin and expansion, favoured by many linguists and historians. On the contrary, there are now enough
indications that Indo Aryan Languages were in use in many parts of North India for a very long time, at least for
the past 5000 years or more. If it is not autochthonous to the area, it could have reached the area before 6000
BCE. If the people of Harappa and Vedic Aryans were linguistically, genetically and anthropologically similar, it
is logical to conclude that the Rgvedic hymns were the literary output of the pre or early Harappan culture that
existed in the area. However this could inflict considerable collateral damage to the Steppe home land Models
like Kurgn hypothesis.
Archaeological evidence now offer little support for the suggestion that the civilization that existed in North
West India from the middle of second millennium BC was different from the one that existed in the same area
during third millennium BC. Such evidences now overwhelmingly point to continuation with gradual changes in
culture, lifestyle and technologies used by the population. There is nothing to suggest a sudden change in the
area between Indus and Ganges between third and second millennium BCE. Support of archaeology for Kurgan
Hypothesis is also weakening except for a possible migration event from the area between River Volga and Ural
mountains towards Central Europe some time in the second millennium BCE.
Though firm conclusions about absence of invasions and cultural continuity began to appear in the archaeolog-
ical literature from the seventies, historical linguists and some historians have continued to assume the traditional
theory as an undisputed truth.

3.2 Elite Dominance and Trickle in Theories

As discussed earlier, current archaeological data do not support an Indo-Aryan or Indo-European invasion into
South Asia any time in the pre or proto-historic periods. As consensus emerged against the invasion hypothesis,
the model was reframed as Aryan Migration Theory or AMT. This theory has a number of variants, but in general
it proposes that the IE migrants entered Punjab plains in around 1500 BCE in a series of waves and merged with
the local population. The IVC was in complete decline by then and the demoralized and desperate locals accepted
the newcomers language as well as part of their culture. The Vedic civilization was a mixture of the two.
But on the basis of data uncovered so far, the putative IE influx into South Asia in the second millennium
BC has no support from archaeological evidences. There were no signs of sudden cultural or life style changes in
the area during the relevant period. Again archaeologists so far have not been able to uncover even one remains
of what one could emphatically claim to be settlements of of incoming IE/Indo-Aryan people, either in the Indus
plains or Punjab. This is in fact true also of the vast area from east of Urals and Central Asia except some disputed
finds. BMAC once claimed to be Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan does not seem to qualify for such a description any
70 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

more. Again all prehistoric human remains recovered thus far from the Indian subcontinent are phenotypically
identifiable as ancient South Asians.... In short, there is no evidence of demographic disruptions in the north-
western sector of the subcontinent during and immediately after the decline of the Harappan culture. As detailed
elsewhere in this book, genetic evidence also now is not consistent with large scale immigration into South Asia
in the second millennium BC.
In the absence of evidence in support of large scale immigration into South Asia in the second millennium BC,
the above model was further modified as Elite dominance and trickle in theory. According to this new model,
the immigrants were few in number, but they were elite soldiers who employed the efficient new war technology of
mounted horses and war chariots and were able to quickly overcome the locals who were in great distress because
of the breakdown of Harappan Culture. The new immigrants came as small bands of warriors or they trickled into
North- Western India. As they were able to dominate the locals they were also able to impose their language on
the locals.
But even this model has serious weaknesses. If the immigrants were able to impose their language on the
locals, why there was no impact on the culture and life style of the locals? If Vedas are the literary output of
immigrants into South Asia just after their arrival, one would expect many references to the migration process
in the Veda Samhitas, other Vedic Texts, the epics or Puranas. Absence of such references must be considered a
serious weakness of the theory.
Raids by horseback nomads led by Chariots and cavalry formations, similar to the later nomadic conquerors in
Europe and other areas of Eurasia, does not really explain language displacement. Europe had suffered numerous
invasions from riders such as the Scyths, Sarmatians, Alans, Huns, Avars, Magyars, Mongols and others. Even
though many of these invasions were quite successful, not a single one of these peoples managed to implant their
language significantly outside the steppe. Most of these have left no linguistic evidence in Europe and only one,
the Magyars, have managed to preserve their language at all in Europe west of the steppe. Neither have the
nomadic invasions from the steppes left significant linguistic marks on other civilizations such as in China or in
India. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that an invasion of horsemen from the steppe simply was not sufficient to
force the complete displacement of languages in settled agricultural communities.
The elite dominance cannot be more effective in replacing a language spoken by a large population when
even invasions and conquests failed to achieve such a result. The assumption is that once an IE speaking elite
had conquered the indigenous peasant population, the locals found it to their benefit to adopt the language of
their conquerors. An example sometimes mentioned of such language displacement through elite dominance is the
manner in which the Romans implanted their language in the lands they conquered. But the Roman example is
not quite relevant when we take a closer look. The Romans did not implant their language in the eastern half of
their empire, except in some pockets in the Balkans, probably through colonies established by veteran soldiers.
Besides, Romans probably matched the people in the conquered lands in numerical terms.
There were many other large human migrations, invasions and colonizations of of distant lands throughout
history; many of them well recorded and others of which details are hazy. But very few have resulted in language
replacement of the locals.
An interesting case is that of Magyars, who are believed to have arrived in medieval Europe in the late 9th
century AD as invaders. These horse riding barbarian nomads from the area around Urals became present day
Hungarians and now have only a minimal trace of the Uralic genes, indicating that they inter bred and closely
interacted with the locals. Magyars retained their own religious practices until they adopted the local religion,
Christianity, in around 1000 CE. They also adopted the culture and life styles of their neighbours and now look just
like their other European neighbours. Quite unusually they even changed their Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups.17
17
Many Hungarians now belong to haplogroups in the R1a family and their other Y-DNA haplogroups are also those found in their
neighbours; the Austrians and Slovaks. A few Hungarians have retained small frequencies of Y-DNA haplogroups from Central Asia
and Northern Asia such as N, Q, and C families. In a recent study, aDNA was extracted from the skeletons of 4 Hungarians who lived
in the 10th century. Two of the skeletons were anthropologically Caucasoid-Mongoloid hybrids and carried the Y-DNA haplogroup
N3, while one of them carried the Caucasoid mtDNA haplogroup H. However it should be admitted that there are grey areas in our
3.2. ELITE DOMINANCE AND TRICKLE IN THEORIES 71

Thus, in spite of changing the culture and life style and most unlikely, their DNA haplogroups, these people
retained their language, whereas people all around them speak Indo European languages.18
There are several other examples in European history where we find a conquering elite speaking a different
language from the indigenous population. But usually it is the conquerors language that disappears. The Lombard
invaders in Italy became Italian speakers, the Franks in Gaul adopted the Romance languages of their subjects,
and the Vikings in Normandy became French-speaking Normans who in turn became English speakers after they
conquered England. Centuries of Roman governance were not enough to eradicate the indigenous language of
Britain; the Celtic, which still survives in Wales and Brittany. It seems more logical to conclude that if there was
both genetic continuity and cultural continuity in Europe as well as South Asia during the period from 3000 BCE
to 500 BCE, there must have been linguistic continuity as well. It is unheard of for the language of a limited
number of intruders to supplant that of a much larger native population and that too without any cultural impact.
Yet another example is that of Irish language and culture, which survived for almost 800 years, in spite
of persistent efforts using very harsh oppressive measures by the Norman and Tudor rulers of Briton, actively
supported by Catholic Church, to kill these. Irish Gaelic is a language of the Celtic branch of Indo-European
language family. Today, though most Irish people consider English as their main language, majority of them have
at least minimum familiarity with Irish language.
Another one such case is in India itself. Indo Aryan language speaking people had moved into Peninsular India
in large numbers, probably from the beginning of Common Era. Today the culture, lifestyles, religious practices,
myths and even genetic profile of the South Indians are similar to the northerners. Descendants of these migrants
appear to have also dominated the political and intellectual life of the South. In spite of these the Dravidian
languages flourished19 and the migrants actually adopted the local languages. Here is known case of trickling in,
by the same groups who are believed to have entered North West India some 1500 years earlier; but the effect was
just the opposite. The locals adopted many things from the newcomers; but it was the newcomers who adopted
the language of the locals.
Then, there are recent cases of people from British Islands colonizing North America and Australia and Spanish
and Portuguese speakers colonizing South America. In these cases the colonizers language prevailed. The opposite
happened with the Africans brought to the Americas and the many islands in Atlantic and Pacific Islands.
One can see from all these instances that the conditions required for language displacement of the locals
include substantial demographic advantage for the newcomers and political and military superiority, cultural and
intellectual domination by them, among others. Particularly without substantial demographic advantage such
language displacement will be impossible. And this is what the Indo Aryan migrants did not have, if they did
understanding of the pre history of Magyars and exactly from where they came from.
18
The Hungarian language belongs to the Finno-Ugric branch of the Uralic family. Languages belonging to Uralic family are now
spoken mostly in the northern extremities of Eurasian landmass. Hungarian is an isolated member of the family in Central Europe.
19
The origin Dravidian civilization is a puzzle. The first evidence of it we have are an advanced treatise on grammar (Tolkaappiyam)
and a work on philosophy (Tirukkural), both dated to around second century BCE. Civilizations dont just start with complex grammar
and philosophy. These could not have come from a vacuum, but must have been the result of a long period of evolution. Mahabharata
refers to the empires in the south such as the Cholas and Pandyas. These references should pre-date the time of Tirukkural. But we
have not found any Tamil literature or artefact to connect with that time. One of the earliest Tamil work; Agatthiyam; is believed
to have been written by a saint common to both Dravidian and Vedic cultures; Agastya. Agastyas are one of the ten Rshi clans who
heard or composed Rgveda. Agastya or Agastya Maitravaruni is the Rshi of RV hymns 1.165 to 191 and a few others in Mandalas
8, 9 and 10. At the same time Agastya is associated with many places in the south and there are many local myths with Agastya as
a main character. Jains and Buddhists from the north were prominent in the earliest Tamil literature. Tiruvalluvar, the composer
of Tirukural, was probably a Jain monk. Ashokan edicts describes the Andhra kingdom. Akkadians, Greeks and Romans probably
traded with various locations in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala long before 300 BCE. But we know nothing about these Dravidian
civilizations before 200 BCE or when the migrants from the north began to arrive in south.
This puzzle is also somewhat shared in case of Vedic civilization. The first known evidence of Vedic culture comes from Rig Veda
- an extraordinarily long, complex and monumental work. It is not a collection of a few standalone poems, but over 1028 metrical
and often profound hymns. There must have been a formative stage before these poems were composed. But we know nothing about
anything prior to it, except many mythical stories in Rgveda, which are too vague, as well as Itihasa/Puranas, which cannot be taken
at face value.
72 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

arrive in South Asia in the second millennium BCE.

The changes that happened in South Asia in the second millennium BCE according to the South Russian or
Invasion model, apparently included

the transformation was total.

the people who brought about this transformation were illiterate, pastoral nomadic tribes, who trickled into
the area in small groups.
The people who were transformed were the inhabitants of the most densely populated and most advanced
urban civilization of the time. It would be extremely unlikely that such a population would have accepted
replacement of their culture and language with that of a few incoming pastoral, illiterate, nomadic people,
even under extreme duress.
the changes took place within a few hundred years or less.
it left absolutely no traces in the archaeological record, either of the conflicts and struggles involved or the
resultant changes in ethnic and material composition, cultural traits or anthropological profile of the areas
after the transformation.

Consider also that later invaders like the Greeks, Huns and Sakas simply got merged into the local populations,
with minimum impact. In the case of the larger Muslim invasions later, though they ruled over large parts of
South-Asia for the next six hundred years or more, the local populations managed to retain their original culture,
languages and religion on a major scale. This is the pattern with the the various invaders of Europe, except where
the number of new comers were substantially larger than the locals.
To support the model of Elite dominance, the example of Mitanni Empire that dominated Eastern Asia
Minor and Northern Syria from 15th to 12th century BC, is usually highlighted as a parallel.

3.2.1 The Mitanni Empire

Mitanni Kingdom came to be a regional power in northern Syria and south-east Anatolia from 1500 BC 1300
BC after the Hittite destruction of Amorite Babylon in 1585 BC (i.e. 1531 BC per the short chronology) and a
series of ineffectual Assyrian kings created a power vacuum in Mesopotamia. The Mitanni kingdom was referred to
variously as the Maryannu, Nahrin or Mitanni by the Egyptians, the Hurri by the Hittites, and the Hanigalbat by
the Assyrians. The different names seem to have referred to the same kingdom, but it is not certain. The capital
of Mitanni Kingdom was Washukanni, whose exact location is not known, but believed to be on the headwaters
of the Khabur River. The kingdom also had another capital called Taite. They had the Kassite Babylonia to the
south east, Hittites to the North West and Egypt to the south west. It was believed to be a state with majority
Hurrian-speaking people ruled by an Indo-European elite. At the beginning of its history, Mitannis major rival
was Egypt. However, with the ascent of the Hittite empire, Mitanni and Egypt made an alliance through a marrige
between an Egyptian Pharaoh and a princess of Mitanni,20 to protect their mutual interests from the threat of
Hittite domination.
20
Queen Nefertiti of Egypt, was queen alongside Pharaoh Akhenaten from 1353 to 1336 B.C. and may have ruled the New Kingdom
outright after her husbands death. They were possibly cousins; being children of two different wives of the earlier Pharaoh. She was one
of the most mysterious and powerful women in ancient Egypt and a modern icon of feminine beauty and power. Akhenaten reoriented
Egypts religious and political structure around the worship of the sun god Aten, displacing Egypts earlier chief god Amon in favour
of Aten. Amenhotep IV changed his name to Akhenaten, on account of this new faith. Nefertiti might have been the daughter of a
Mitannian princess married to the Egyptian king. An alternate theory suggests she was a princess from the Mittani kingdom. In any
case there probably was a Mitannian connection.
Nefertiti disappears from the historical record around the 12th year of Akhenatens 17-year reign. Whether this was on account of
her death or adoption of a new name; Neferneferuaten, as her husband did earlier, is not clear. Akhenaten was followed as Pharaoh
by Smenkhkare, who some historians believe may have been another name for Nefertiti. Tutankhamun, who was the next Pharaoh, is
3.2. ELITE DOMINANCE AND TRICKLE IN THEORIES 73

No native sources for the history of Mitanni have been found so far. The Mitannian Language itself is unattested
and it is not certain if there ever was a Mitannian language, closely related to Indo Aryan. We only have a few
possibly borrowed words in Hurrian, which might have come from some unknown branch of Indo Aryan. Also,
as mentioned above, Hurrian also is poorly attested. The account is mainly based on stray Assyrian, Hittite and
Egyptian sources, as well as some stray inscriptions from nearby places in Syria, like those from Nuzi.21
The history of Mitanni is further complicated as the area at the time seem to have been home to many
linguistic, ethnic and political groups without clear differentiation or geographical separation. The ethnicity of
the people of Mitanni is difficult to ascertain. It may have had people with many different ethnic backgrounds,
with a probable Hurrian majority. In the 14th century BC numerous city-states in northern Syria and Canaan
were ruled by persons with Hurrian and some Indo-Aryan names. People with Hurrian names are attested in
wide areas of Syria and the northern Levant that are outside the area of Mitanni. There is no indication that
these persons owed allegiance to the political entity of Mitanni. If this can be taken to mean that the population
of these states was Hurrian as well, then it is possible that these entities were a part of a larger polity with a
shared Hurrian identity. Differences in dialect and regionally different religious and cultural practices point to the
existence of several groups of Hurrian speakers. The term Hurrian expatriates has been used by some authors.
But evidences for all these are very sketchy.
A treatise on the training of chariot horses by one Kikkuli the Mitannian contains a number of Indo-Aryan
expressions.22 The Mitanni warriors were called marya (Hurrian: maria-nnu), the term for young man (warrior)

believed to be a son of Akhenaten by another wife. Tutankhamun, who died at the age of 19, is in news now as it is believed that his
burial chamber hides the much larger one that of Nefertiti. Some archaeologists believe that his dead body was rushed into an outer
chamber of what was originally Nefertitis tomb.
21
Part of our information about Mitanni comes from the Nuzi tablets recovered from Yorghan Tepe (ancient Nuzi) in north-eastern
Iraq and Tell al-Fakhar in the vicinity of modern Kirkuk. It was discovered in 1925 by Edward Chiera. Nuzi was occupied from at
least 3000 BCE. It was a small town, without any particular importance. The population of the town (including suburbs) has been
estimated to be about 1,500-2,000 people. It consisted of both walled and unwalled portions indicating economically and socially diverse
housing. It had administrative and religious centres within the walled portion. More than 6,500 cuneiform tablets and fragments have
been discovered from the excavations at Nuzi. The vast majority of finds are from the Hurrian period during the second millennium
BC, with the remainder dating back to the earlier period. Nuzi was a city in the kingdom of Arrapha, vassal to the larger kingdom of
Mitanni.
The language in which most of the texts are written is Middle Babylonian, but many Hurrian words, expressions and grammatical
constructs seem to have been used. Some of these Hurrian words are believed to be loan words from an Indo Aryan language. Hurrian
language itself is poorly attested and not well understood. It was a non-Indo-European and non-Semitic language, probably related to
languages spoken in the Caucasus region.
The Nuzi tablets allow scholars to understand the political, economic, and social structure of second millennium BCE Near East.
These documents, though they have recorded mostly mundane, local matters, also reveal a complex social structure. The king of
Arrapha was the head of the local government. Under him were the judges, mayors, and other government officials. The middle class
consisted of property owners and professional workers. Under them were slaves. They were either prisoners of war or indentured poor.
The varied documents in these archives include those related to commercial law involving real estate, loans, servitude, as well as family
law relating to marriage, adoption and property settlement. The law texts found at Nuzi bear striking resemblance to the Code of
Hammurabi and the laws that prevailed in the Biblical society.
Perhaps the most important contribution of Nuzi was that it proved to be a great help in Biblical studies. This in part stems from
the array of social customs attested to in these texts. Earlier scholars were often baffled by the strange social customs apparent in
many Biblical stories; practices such as Abraham calling Sarah; his wife as Sister. It was believed that these were either inaccurate
descriptions or that these had some secret meaning. The Nuzi texts showed that such practices were common in the second and first
millennium Near East.
Nuzi was probably destroyed by the Hurrians and later by Assyrians some time towards the end of fourteenth century BCE, along
with the Mitannian Kingdom as well as other Hurrian settlements. The Mitannians along with the Hurians simply disappeared from
all historical records after that.
22
The so-called Kikkuli Text is the oldest surviving horse training manual in the world. It was discovered in 1906-07 during the
excavation in Hattusa in Turkey by Hugo Winckle. The elaborate work was written in 1345 BCE on four tablets and contains 1080
lines by a Mitanni horse trainer named Kikkuli. It begins with the words, Thus speaks Kikkuli, master horse trainer of the land of
Mitanni and uses various Indo-Aryan words for horse colors, numbers and names. It is written in Hittite language, but uses many
Hurrian words, some of which appears to be loans from Indo Aryan. Some authors believe that the text might have been copied from
an earlier much older text.
74 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

in Vedic as well. Names of the Mitanni aristocracy frequently are of Indo-Aryan origin, but it is specifically the
names of their deities like Indra, Mitra, Varuna and Nasatya which show Indo-Aryan or Vedic roots. These
deities are invoked in what appears to be a treaty between the king of Mitanni and a nearby city. The treaty
tablet between a Khatti king, probably a Hittite chief, and Mitanni King Mattiuaza, was signed in around 1380
BCE. Linguists are divided on the nature of the language as some say it was derived from the still undivided
Indo-Iranian language, but others hold the view that it was Indo-Aryan while others think that they are more
immediately related to the Kassite Language. Some scholars believe that it was founded by an Indo-Aryan ruling
class governing a predominately Hurrian population, a case of elite dominance. But evidence for such a conclusion
is very sketchy at the moment. Besides Indo-Europeans might not have been a small minority in Anatolia, the
Levant and Mesopotamia at the time as the Hittites, Kassites and Mitannians apart from others like Luwians,
Lycians, Lydians, Milyans, Sidetics and Pisidians were all apparently Indo-Europeans.
A recent book by Bernard Sergent has data about the large IE and specifically Indo-Aryan presence in West
Asia: Indo-Aryan names were quite common in Syria and Palestine in the 15th-13th century BC. The Palestine
town of Sichem was ruled by one Birishena, or Vira-sena, the one who has an army of heroes. Qiltu near
Jerusalem was ruled by one Suar-data, or gift of Heaven. Sergent also finds quite a few personal names with
the name element Asura in West Asia, e.g. the Mitannian general Kart-ashura, the name Biry-ashura attested
in Nuzi and Ugarit, the names Kalm-ashura and Sim-ashura also in Nuzi. Similarly there was the Cilician king
named Shun-ashura, while in Alalakh (Syria), two people were called Ashura and Ashur-atti. Thus it is not at
all certain that the Mitanni Empire was a case of Elite dominance. Besides Mitannians, there was also the case
of Kassites who ruled Babylonia practically without interruption for almost 400years; from 1530 BC to 1155 BC
the longest known rule by any dynasty in Babylonian history. Though Kassite language has not been classified,
it is known that they worshipped horses, a typical IE characteristic and their names were usually Indo-European.
Babylonia had a majority Semitic population.
The Mittani Indo-Aryan language is considered older than Vedic or Avestan because it has aika instead of
eka. Vedic is supposed to to have merged ai to e and hence is considered younger. But the word for seven in
Mittani, satta, is much later than Vedic form. Thus this method of dating based on selectively chosen words is
of doubtful validity. It has to be noted that there is no evidence of the actual presence of Mitanni IA language
in northern Iraq/Syria during the period 1600 to 1300 BCE. There was possibly, only the non-Indo-European
Hurrite or Hurrian language. The only fact known for certain is that the language of the Mitanni kingdom as
well as Kassite language, contained a number of loan words from the an Indo-Aryan (IA) dialect; and the ruling
class of this kingdoms bore IA names, indicating perhaps that the ruling class was descended from Indo-Aryans or
had close cultural contacts with a branch of Indo-Aryans at some time, which could well be centuries before the
emergence of Mitanni kingdom. Mallory refers to these loan words and names as the residue of a dead language
in Hurrian. the Indic elements seem to be little more than the residue of a dead language in Hurrian, and that
the symbiosis that produced the Mitanni may have taken place centuries earlier says Mallory. It is significant
that, in 16 century BCE there could possibly be the residue of a dead Indo-Aryan language in a non-Indo-Aryan
language in the Levant.
The main reason mentioned by many authors for concluding that the Mitanni IA language is an earlier form
of Vedic Language is that the vocabulary does not yet show signs of typical South Asian influence: for example,
there is no retroflexion in its pronunciation. Retroflex sounds is typical of Vedic as we know today. But languages
and people moving out of India tend to lose retroflex sounds: The Romany or Gypsies emigrated from India at
a later point of time, when retroflex sounds were even more an intrinsic part of the Indo-Aryan phonetic system
and yet they did not retain the retroflex sounds. Observe also the speech of many post-second generation NRIs,
when they speak their ancestral Indo-Aryan languages. According to Madhav Deshpande: While The Mitanni
documents, the Old Persian documents and the Asokan edicts, coming from inscriptions as they do, are frozen in
time, that is not the case with the Rgveda or the Avestan texts. These have been subject to a long oral tradition
before they were codified, and the texts available to us represent a state of affairs at the end of this long oral
transmission, rather than at the starting point of their creation and thus it is impossible to determine whether
3.2. ELITE DOMINANCE AND TRICKLE IN THEORIES 75

the Vedic had or did not have retroflexion at the time RV was composed.
Besides it is impossible to know whether the Mitanni IA language had cerebral (retroflex) sounds or not. It is
possible that Mitannian and Kassite did have those sounds, but that those sounds are not recorded in the written
form in Hittite or Semitic language texts, in an unsuitable script and an alphabet without distinct representation
of dental and retroflex sounds.
Another argument usually put forward to conclude that Mitannian was an earlier form of Indo-Aryan is that
it does not have many common Vedic words. But the available Mitanni IA word list is so limited that there is no
way to know which words were absent in the Mitanni IA language. Also, since these IA loan words were probably
a residue of a long dead language these loan words could be from a stage of IA language before the composition
of Rigveda.
The Vedic personal names found among Mitannian and Kassite elites are all those found only in middle and
late Rgvedic hymns. The large presence of the name element Asura among the names of Mitannian and Kassite
elites should be considered significant. Similarly, the suffix Ratha in personal names is common to the four
groups of the Late Rigveda, the Avesta, the Mitanni and the Kassites. The Kassite conquerors of Mesopotamia
have a sun god Suriias, perhaps also the Marut and maybe even Bhaga (Bugas?), as well as the personal name
Abhiratha. Thus it is possible that the Late Rigveda, the Avesta, the Mitanni and the Kassites shared a common
culture. the Early and Middle Books are distinctly different from this common culture and appear to represent a
period earlier to the period of development of this common culture.
At least three aspects of Mitannian kingdom in northern Mesopotamia in the middle second millennium BC is
considered as evidence in support of Kurgan hypothesis. Firstly, it is considered as evidence that the Trickle in
and Elite Dominance model is valid. Secondly, it validates the chronology of the putative model. The argument is
that, as these tribes were moving towards South Asia, one branch separated at some point on the way and moved
west towards northern Mesopotamia. As the language was an early form of Indo-Aryan, Vedic language could not
be older than the attested period of Mitannian language. If the period of an earlier version of the language was
the middle of 2nd millennium BC, Vedic language must have a later date. Thirdly, it is argued that it is proof of
the movement of the language from west to east or from the Steppes and Central Asia and from there to Iran,
Mesopotamia and South Asia. Apart from these, the horse manual mentioned above, is also often treated as proof
of the relation between Mitannians and Vedic Aryans.
However the attested evidence of Mitannian language is not adequate to arrive at such a conclusion, particularly
as it could be the residue of a long dead language. Whatever we know about it comes from vague, stray records
in Assyrian, Hittite and Egyptian sources and none from an independent Mitannian source, either in an Indo
Aryan or even in a Hurrian dialect. The only Mitanni IA words in the record are the names of a handful of Vedic
Gods, some numerals, some words connected with horses (their colours, chariots, racing, etc.), a handful of other
words and, a few personal names adopted by the ruling class. Beyond this very limited word list, nothing is known
about the how the IA words entered the Hurrian language. It is impossible to arrive at a generalised conclusion
about the Indo Aryan language which contributed these, based on this limited data, particularly as even these
limited resources are available only as loan words in a Caucasian language, appearing as stray attestations in some
Semitic and Hittite language texts, in a cuneiform script, both of which are unsuitable to represent Indo-Aryan
languages. It is not even certain that there ever was a Mitannian Indo Aryan Language. What we have are
only a few probable Indo Aryan loan words in a poorly attested Hurrian language, which could well be borrowed
words, as a residue of a long dead language. It is interesting to note the similarity between the presence of Indo
Aryan loan words in Finnish and Hurrian languages. The donor could well be the same Indo Aryan dialect, while
the both recipients originated in the Caucasus. But the later is a far more complex case as the recipient is poorly
attested and barely understood.
Thus this model is speculative at best and not based on very firm footing, as the movement of the ancient
speakers of the language could just as well have been from east to west. There is no archaeological, genetic or
even clear unambiguous linguistic evidence for either argument, except that the east to west movement scenario
will be in conflict with the favoured model. But for this conflict, an argument of east to west movement of these
76 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

pre-historic people can also be just as valid.

Besides mitochondrial DNA data indicates the presence of Bos indicus; a cattle breed of South Asian origin in
northern Mesopotamia, in the area of Mitannian kingdom, in the 2nd millennium BC. This could be asignificant
clue of the Indian origins of the Mitannian rulers, as Bos indicus is clearly a cattle breed of Indian origin.
The credibility of the model is further weakened as the location of the Mitannian kingdom was far away from
the assumed route taken by the Indo-Iranians towards South Asia and Iran.
Another difficulty with this model is that IA loan words in Mitannian language could well have been from a
centum language like Hittite, and not from Proto Indo Aryan, which was a satem language. Many centum
languages like the Hittite, Luwian23 , Lycian, Lydian, Milyan, Sidetics and Pisidian, which had probably evolved
from the Proto-Anatolian, were in use in the area during the period. There is attested evidence that another
satem language, Median, reached North Eastern Mesopotamia only towards the end of second millennium BCE.
Thus there is a possibility that the words in Mitannian could also have been from a centum language and not
from an early form of Indo-Aryan or Vedic satem language.
To sum up, the loan words in Hurrian might have originated in some IA dialect. But based on the present
level of our knowledge about these, any further speculation on the basis of these will be quite unwarranted.

3.2.2 George Erdosys Model

George Erdosy, a Canadian archaeologist, proposes a slightly revised Trickling in and elite dominance model,
which is in many respects better than the traditional models of arrival of Indo Aryan tribes in South Asia in the
second millennium BCE. He rejects many of the basic premises of the traditional view. He says.

Physical anthropologys failure to demonstrate a racial divide in South Asia in the second Millennium
BC is quite conclusive, even considering the limitations of available data. We reiterate that there
is no indication in the Rigveda of the Aryas memory of any ancestral home, and by extension, of
migrations. Given the pains taken to create a distinct identity for themselves, it would be surprising
if the Aryas neglected such an obvious emotive bond in reinforcing their group cohesion. Thus their
silence on the subject of migrations is taken here to indicate that by the time of composition of the
Rigveda, any memory of migrations, should they have taken place at all, had been erased from their
consciousness.

He rejects the invasion as a misreading of RV as an account of foreign invasion.

All these developments(Decline of Indus Civilisation or the rise of complex societies in the Ganga
Valley) may be explained by the internal dynamism of South Asian cultures; an approach which
threatens to render the entire problem of Indo-Aryan languages and their speakers irrelevant. By
contrast, linguists, in attempting to explain the current linguistic map of the subcontinent, continue
to assume the immigration of Indo-Aryan speakers at the very time that the transition from Indus to
Gangetic Civilisation took place

.
However Erdosy is of the view that Indo-Aryan language group is external to South Asia, but it arrived in
South Asia in an earlier time frame. He proposes the last centuries of third millennium BC and the first centuries
of second millennium BC as the best archaeologically acceptable dates for entry of Indo Aryan languages into
the boarder lands of South Asia; thus taking the dates back by 500 years or more; sufficient for the new comers
to more or less forget the hazardous migration undertaken by their ancestors. But he do not identify the Vedic
settlements with the Harappan. According to him, the archaeological evidence is available for this model in the
form of similarities in culture, life style, religious practices evident in places like BMAC in Central Asia and North
23
Luwian Civilization was centered around Western Turkey and Troy was an important Luwian city.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 77

western India. He suggests that the majority of early old Indo Aryan speakers might have had a Dravidian mother
tongue, which they abandoned gradually, to change over to Indo Aryan dialects.
Regarding the adoption of Indo Aryan languages by the locals in North India, he offers a slightly revised
Trickling in and elite dominance model. He writes

The second millennium BC saw, not only the collapse, but also gradual rebuilding of complex societies,
in which territorial expansion took an increasing part. A social system that could absorb newcomers
in increasingly polyethnic contexts provided significant adaptive advantage for the language in this
case Old Indo Aryan in which it was expressed. In time the language will become the property , not
only of the ruling elite, but of the general population as well

While Erdosys proposal is definitely better than most other traditional models, it still fail to answer many
troubling inconsistencies. Some of these are

By the end of third millennium BCE, the Sarasvati River was beginning to dry up. Yet, Rgveda, which
according to this model was composed in about the middle of second millennium BCE, speaks about a very
large river system, with many lakes on its route and which sustained the Aryas.

The astronomical references in vedic literature is incompatible with the chronology of this model. It need to
explained satisfactorily.

Archaeology has not unearthed any BMAC like structures in North West India.

According to the model the incoming migrants were few in number and the local population must have been
incomparably larger. Yet the local names of places, rivers, mountains etc. were replaced by Indo Aryan ones.
This is quite inconceivable and and unlike what had happened in many other instances all over the world.

The model assumes that the locals abandoned not only their language, but also their culture, life style,
religious practices and even their names in favour of Indo Aryan ones. Such a transformation is incredible,
if not impossible, given that the locals were far larger in numbers and just as civilised, if not superior to the
newcomers.

3.3 Evidences from the Vedas

A wide range of opinions have been expressed on almost every aspect of Rigveda. Some of them might sound
hilarious today. For example, according to F E Pargiter: tradition or myth directly indicates that the Ailas (or
Aryans) entered India from the mid Himalayan region. All ancient Indian belief and veneration were directed
to the mid-Himalayan region, the only original sacred outside land, and it was thither that rishis and kings turned
their steps in devotion, never to the northwest. Thus Pargiter believed that the entry point of Aryans into India
was not North-west India, but mid-Himalayan Mountain ranges; from Tibet or the area around Mount Kailas.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there were speculations that Indian caste system was on account
of a major invasion/migration from Egypt in pre-historic times and Egyptian priests became Brahmins and elites
became Kshatriyas in India.
Another theory which was once popular was that before Aryan invasion, there was another invasion of India
by Dravidian agriculturalists from the Fertile Crescent or the Elam region of South-West Iran. They subjugated
the locals and made them untouchables. These Dravidian were the people who created Indus Valley Civilization.
Later Aryan invaders defeated them and pushed them towards South India.
Laurence Austine Waddell (1854-1938) believed that Sumerians were the original Aryans or Indo Europeans
who created the civilizations of Indus Valley, Minoan Crete, Phoenicia, and Egypt. He believed that the Sumerian
King List and Puranic lists have the same origin. He compiled a long list of similar names in both the lists with
78 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

comparable relative chronology. One example is Naksha, of Second Sumerian Dynasty, and Nahusha of Puranas.
Both are third in the respective lists and he determines their period as 3336- to 3273 BCE
Many authors hold Varuna; the Rigvedic Deva; to be non-Aryan on the ground that many verses in the Rigveda
describe him as Asura and depict a rivalry between Indra and Varuna, and hymn 10.124 shows Indra abducting
the leadership of the Gods from Varuna.
According to Malati Shendge, Indra represents the conquering Aryans, Varuna as his powerful equal represents
the non-Aryans, and, according to R.N. Dandekar, the mythological rivalry between Asura Varuna and Indra
represents the rivalry between the Assyrians of the Indus Valley and Indra of the Vedic Aryans.. He believed
that Indus Valley Civilization was created by Assyrians. Malati Shendge, in fact, decides that all the Vedic Gods,
except Indra and Visnu, are non-Aryans; and not even non-Aryan Gods, but non-Aryan human beings.
But, according to S.K. Chatterji, Visnu is partly at least of Dravidian affinity as a sky-God whose color was of
the blue sky. D.D. Kosambi, perhaps on the basis of Visnus dark skin, goes further: among the Gods adopted
from the pre-Aryans, according to him, is the obscure Vishnu, who was later to find a great future in India.
Similarly many authors have concluded that most, if not all, Rigvedic Rshies were non-Aryan.
But a major flaw in such facile conclusions, based on often flimsy grounds, is that all these names are linguisti-
cally Indo-Aryan in origin. Their names not only do not have Dravidian or Austric etymologies, but they actually
have purely Indo Aryan etymologies, so that they cannot even be identified with extinct non-Indo-European groups.
Says John Muir, I have gone over the names of the Dasyus or Asuras, mentioned in the Rigveda, with the view
of discovering whether any of them could be regarded as being of non-Aryan or indigenous origin, but I have not
observed any to be of that character.
B R Ambedkar believed in a new racial theory of his own based on varius references in Rigveda. He explains
What we can say about the races of India is that there have been at the most only two races in the field, the
Aryans and the Nagas The Dravidians and the Nagas are the one and the same people. Naga was a racial or
cultural name and Dravida was their linguistic name. before the Aryans came it was the language of the whole
of India, and was spoken from Kashmere to Cape Comorin. The Nagas in North India gave up Tamil which was
their mother tongue and adopted Sanskrit in its place. The Nagas in South India retained Tamil as their mother
tongue and did not adopt Sanskrit, the language of the Aryans. The name Dravidian came to be applied only
for the people of South India, in view of their being the only people speaking the Dravida language after the Nagas
of the North had ceased to use it. Though he says Aryans came from somewhere, he vehemently rejects any
invation senerio elsewhere in his book.
At the other extreme, S D Kulkarni believed that the Vedas are the compositions of a highly civilized people
the Rigvedic people were the civilizers of the world in the post-glacial epoch the Aryans dispersed to different
lands in Europe, North Africa, the rest of Asia, and America, and developed the ancient world civilizations in
their respective regions. He estimates 21788 BCE as the period, at least, of the origin of the Rigveda. the
verses have come down to us from remotest antiquity when forefathers of all the peoples of this wide world were
living together. should consider this original language as Sanskrit itself, instead of Indo-European. Thus he
believes that Proto-Indo-European dialect was actually Sanskrit. B G Tilak estimates the period of composition
of Rigveda as about 10000 BCE and the original home of Indo Europeans to be in the Artic. Fortunately, such
extreme opinions have been rare in the past few decades, saving us the trouble of countering such outlandish
theories.
The above comments should not be seen as belittling the undoubted scholarship or honesty of the authors
mentioned above. These were their honest interpretations, but probably a bit colored by their ideological leanings.
Besides, they formed their views on the subject at the early stage of evolution of the current theories on the subject
and did not have access to the level of data and information we now have on the subject from multiple fields like
linguistics, archaeology, genetics etc.
The Rigvedic hymns contain many references to the geography of the place of residence of its composers, their
lifestyle, religious and social customs, though many of these are too ambiguous and thus are open to different
interpretations. This ambiguity is not only on account of the archaic language and the substantial differences in
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 79

the syntax and semantics between early Vedic and classical Sanskrit, but also as one can arrive at any number
of different interpretations of these verses making use the various tools available today like Yaskas Niruktam,
Sayanas Vedartha Prakasha or various English-Sanskrit Dictionaries avilable today like the one by Sir Monier-
Williams. Besides it is possible that Veda Samhitas were composed in an early form of sutra style which became
popular later. Most sutras are very brief aphorisms which do not make much sense without detailed explanations.
In spite of these difficulties various Vedic Verses have been the subject of many scholarly studies. Similarly the
etymology and philology of Vedic language has been the subject of many studies. Both AIT and OIT enthusiasts
have highlighted some of these as evidence supporting their arguments. As these are too many, I only intend to
discuss a few of them here.
According to AIT narrative, terms like Asura, Dasyu and Dasa frequently appearing in Vedas denotes the
Harappan people Aryans encountered in Indus plains whom they defeated with the help of mounted horses. The
following examples of Griffiths comments on various verses will demonstrate the pre-conceived notions with which
western Indologists perceived Rigveda.
Dasa is a general term applied in the Veda to certain evil beings or demons It means, also, a savage, a
barbarian, one of the non-Aryan inhabitants of India. Griffith says in his comments on RV 1.32.11
1.51.8: Arya: The Aryans are, first, the people who speak the language of the Veda, and the Dasyus are the
original and hostile peoples of India.
I.112.5: Rebha and Vandana: Rebha and Vandana are said to have been thrown into wells by Asuras or
demons In these and similar instances, says Wilson, we may probably have allusions to the dangers undergone
by the first teachers of Hinduism among the people whom they sought to civilize.
There is nothing in Rigveda that can justify these comments. Strictly on the basis of the texts, Dasas and
Dasyus can be anybody other than those belonging to Puru clan. The word Dasa is found in 57 verses and the
word Dasyu is found in 71 verses. Both are found in all the Mandalas of Rigveda. The term Dasa appears to refer
to other non-Puru tribes whereas the term Dasyu could mean something similar. Besides, both terms are often
used to refer to non-personal nature demons. In majority of these references, it refers either to human enemies of
the Purus or Vedic Aryans, or to atmospheric demons killed by Indra. In many of the cases, it is difficult to know
which of the two is being referred to.
There are eight verses which refer to both Arya and Dasa enemies together; and in these cases it is certain
that human enemies are being referred to. These Aryas are other Puru tribes who are enemies of Bharatas as the
following verse RV 7.83.1 seems to say.
1. LOOKING to you and your alliance, O ye Men, armed with broad axes they went forward, fain for spoil.
Ye smote and slew his Dasa and his Aryan enemies, and helped Sudas with favour, Indra-Varuna.
Sudas, the Bharata king, has both Arya and Dasa enemies. But referring to Aryas and Dasas together is
significant and should imply some commonality or comparability between them. It is quite unlikely, if Dasas were
the natives, Vedic Aryans encountered in South Asia, who were ethnically and linguistically very different from the
Aryas.
According to RV 4.28.4 (Lower than all besides hast thou, O Indra, cast down the Dasyus, abject tribes of
Dasas), the Dasyus are a section among the Dasas. Dasyus are often called A-karma (riteless), A-deva, anya-vrata
(those who follow other faiths), avrata, ayajna and grathin. Dasas are often powerful enemies from whose fury
and powerful weapons the poets ask the Gods for protection or from whom the Gods rescue the poets. In contrast,
Dasyus never figure as rich or powerful enemies. Apparently, the Dasyus were regarded with uncompromising
hostility, while the attitude towards the Dasas could vary from adulatory, respectful or hostile. Thus Dasa and
Dasyu might be just terms to denigrate the enemies of Bharatas or Purus or just people other than Purus. But
there was some subtle difference, the actual nature of which is not quite clear from the references to them in
Rigveda.
Then there are three verses which contain references which are friendly towards the Dasas. All these three are
in Mandala 8; 8.5, 8.6 and 8.46 and all are Daanastuties. A special feature of these Daanastutis (hymns that
prise gift givers) is that, while everywhere else in the Rigveda we find patrons gifting cattle, horses and buffaloes,
80 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

these particular patrons gift camels (ustra). The names of the Dasa patrons (Dasa Balbuthas and Taruksas gifts)
are all Iranian sounding. These include Kasu, Tirindira Parsava and Prthu Sravas son of Kanita. Griffith in his
footnote to RV 8.6.46 says that the names Parsu and Tirindira are both Iranian. Thus it is possible that Dasas had
some Iranian connection. They are often described as the tribes of Nahusas. According to Puranas, Nahusa was
the grand father of King Puru and thus a distant ancestor of the important Rigvedic tribes of Yadus, Turvasus,
Druhyus, Purus and Anus. The expression the tribes of Nahusas should imply that Yadus, Turvasus, Druhyus,
and Anus were closely related to Purus and Bharatas and they were all ethnically and linguistically similar.
In Rigveda most references to Dasas appear to indicate that they were powerful, wealthy, mostly respected and
were givers of valuable gifts to the Rigvedic poets. Only when they fight Aryas, they are condemned. At least two
early Vedic kings belonging to the Bharata clan, had Dasa as suffix to their name. Many eminent authors are
of the view that Vedic Aryans and their principal opponents; Dasas, spoke mutually intelligible dialects; possibly
closely related branches of Indo Iranian or Indo-Aryan. Rigveda names five major tribes other than Purus; Yadus,
Turvasus, Druhyus, Anus and Trksies. There are numerous references in Rigveda where Trksi, Yadu, Turvasus
and Anu kings are eulogized as patrons and gift givers. But in none of these instances, they are referred to as
Arya. Thus it appears that the term Arya is used to denote a Puru and Dasas could be tribes other than Purus
and even Purus when they are opposed to Bharatas.24
Rgveda refers to hostile or uncouth speech of the Dasas; not unintelligible speech, though some early authors
have rendered the term Mrdra vac as unintelligible speech. Incidentally, all references to Aryas in Rigveda are to
those from Puru tribe and more particularly to Bharata clan within Purus. When other puru clans fight with
Bharatas, these other Purus are also called Dasyu. Dasyus also could have been Purus, as at least one Rigvedic
hymn indicates.
Griffiths transalation of RV 10.49.3

With deadly blows I smote Atka for Kavis sake; I guarded Kutsa well with these saving helps.
As Susnas slayer I brandished the dart of death: I gave not up the Aryan name to Dasyu foes.

The context is Indra boasting about some of his heroics. He refuses to call the Dasyu foes Arya. The reason
24
King Bharata was the most important ruler in the Vedas and even later texts. According to Puranas, it was from him that South
Asia got its name. According to Mahabharata and Puranas, he was the son of King Dushyanta and Shakuntala. But the Rgveda
knows Bharata only as an ancestor of contemporary dynasties, tribes and clans. He is already an old memory by the time the earlist
Mandala six was composed, as the following verse indicates.

RV 6.16.4 Devata Agni

4 Thee, too, hath Bharata of old, with mighty men, implored for bliss.
And worshipped thee the worshipful.

Kings like Deodasa and Sudas were said to be his descendants. There is nothing in the Rig Veda about Bharata the person, let alone
Bharata the emperor. There is absolutely no mention of any of his deeds or triumphs or any danastutis or hymns glorifying his gift
giving. But nevertheless he was the most important ancestor, though he was just one among the many generations of Chandravamsi
kings. The reasons for this importance is not clear based on the references to him in Rgveda or even later texts. Most composers of
family books or Mandala II to VII, seem eager to emphasise their association and allegiance to a descendant of the Bharatas. There are
several references to sons of Bhaaratas or where contemporary kings or chiefs are referred to as a Bhaarata, suggestive of a virtue
or praise. This means Bharata was a mythical or actual person from days even before the earliest hymns of Rgveda. In fact, Rigveda
can be considered as texts of Bharatas or Purus, for Bharatas, by Bharatas or by poets belonging to these clans or those dependent on
them. The name Bhaarata for the country was purely a local name as outsiders were unaware of such a name for the country. Thus,
on the basis of Rigvedic evidence of Bharata, the king, it could be argued that Vedic Aryans were living in Saptasindhu even before
the first Rgvedic hymn was composed.
South Asian legends speak about at least three important King Bharatas. First is Bharata of the Mahabharata Adi Purva and
Kalidasas immortal work Sakuntalam, who is probably the one that is frequently mentioned in Rigveda. Then there is the Bharata
of the epic Ramayana, son of Dasharadha and Kaikeyi, a princess from the clan, Kekeya, decendents of ancient Anu tribe. Then there
is the King Bharata of Jain legends, who was the son of Rishabha, the first Jain tirthankara and the elder brother of Bahubali whose
huge statue at Sravanabalagola still attracts thousands of devotees every year. It is possible that these legends have a common origin.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 81

for the reluctance is not clear from the verse. But it seems to imply that the Dasyu foes were actually Aryas. If
the enemy was not Arya, the issue of calling them Arya do not raise at all.
Dahas or Dahae or Dasas were an ancient Eastern Iranian tribe, which included at least 3 sub-tribes, one
of which was known as Parni. The Parthians, who later established one of the great Persian empires, might
have been descendants of Parnies. Thus Dasas and Panies could be Iranian tribes. The term Dasyus cognates
with the Avestan of dahyu and means tribe, province and district. While the terms Dasa and Dasyu have a
negative meaning in Sanskrit, their Avestan and Pahlavi counterparts Daha and Dahyu have positive (or neutral)
meaning.25 Dah-means male, man in Avestan. The dahyu-pati (also dahyunam) was the head of the tribe.
Thus it is clear that Dasas and Dasyus were not the black natives of North West India as many western indologists
assume. The close cousins of Vedic Aryans; the Iranians; considered themselves as Dasas and Dasyus.
Similarly while Deva is a term to denote a god in Sanskrit, it is used for a villain in Avesta. The position is exact
opposite in the case of Asura in Sanskrit and Ahura in Iranian. In fact the three main gods of Zoroastrians are the
Ahura triad of Ahura Mazda, Ahura Mitra and Ahura Burz. Ahura Mazda is the highest deity of Zoroastrianism.
Similarly Deva or Daevas represents evil in Avestan. This aspect is discussed in more detail in the next section.

The Myth of Vrtra

Early Indologists like Griffith recognized that the term Asura could also be references to nature Gods. In his
footnote to RV 1.31.1, he quotes Wilson: the legend of Indras slaying Vrtra in the Vedas is merely an allegorical
narrative of the production of rain. Vrtra, sometimes also named Ahi, is nothing more than the accumulation of
vapor condensed or figuratively shut up in, or obstructed by, a cloud. Indra, with his thunderbolt, or atmospheric or
electrical influence, divides the aggregate mass, and vent is given to the rain which then descends upon the earth.
Interestingly many Indo-European mythologies record the killing of a mighty serpent by Godlike characters; the
Greek Zeus kills the Great Serpent Typhoeus, and the Teutonic Thor kills the Great Serpent of Midgard.
Then there is the Hittite mythology of the Great Serpent, who is interfering with the rainfall, being killed by
Inar; the God. Note the similarity of the names Inar and Indra.
There are many references to Vrtra in RV. He appears as a dragon blocking the course of the rivers and is
heroically slain by Indra. Ahi and Susna might be alternate names of Vrtra. Vrtra is described as a serpent or
dragon and could be the symbolic personification of drought.
According to the vague descriptions of the myth in Rig Veda, Vritra kept the waters of the world captive
until he was killed by Indra, who destroyed all the 99 fortresses of Vritra (although the fortresses are sometimes
attributed to Sambara or to Vangrida in other instances) before liberating the imprisoned rivers. The combat
began soon after Indra was born, and he had drunk a large volume of Soma at Tvastrs house to empower him
before facing Vritra.Tvastr fashioned the lightning thunderbolt(Vajrayudha) for Indra for this task. An interesting
detail is that Vishnu is mentioned in some of these hymns as an assistant of Indra.
Vrtra is never called an Asura in RV, but is described as a Danava in RV 2.11.10. RV 2.11.18 also mentions
one Danava Aurnavaabha, which might be another name of Vrtra. But in Puranas Vrtra is an Asura.
Though almost every hymn in RV that eulogize Indras heroics mention his slaying of Vrtra, the real import
of this is obscure. Early Indologists believed that the myth is an account of the invading Aryans defeating the
black natives in South Asia. Other scholars found that almost every early Indo-European society had very similar
myths. Other authors have concluded that it narrates a water war between Vedic Aryans and a clan of Naga
people called Ahi, who had a leader called Vrtra and who blocked the water flowing into Aryan lands. A more
rational explanation may be that it describes a long sever draught, which ended with lighting, thunder and heavy
rain. In any event, it is clear that the circumstances around which the myth was created was a defining moment
in Vedic Aryans pre-history and it happened during pre-Rigvedic times. An intriguing hymn that narrates the
myth is RV 1.32 reproduced in part below.
25
The Vedic s sound has become h in Avestan. Thus Sanskrit Sindhu became Hindu in that language and its descendant
dialects.
82 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

RV 1.32
8 There as he lies like a bank-bursting river, the waters taking courage flow above him.
The Dragon lies beneath the feet of torrents which Vrtra with his greatness had encompassed.
9 Then humbled was the strength of Vrtras mother: Indra hath cast his deadly bolt against her.
The mother was above, the son was under and like a cow beside her calf lay Danu.
10 Rolled in the midst of never-ceasing currents flowing without a rest for ever onward.
The waters bear off Vrtras nameless body: the foe of Indra sank to during darkness.
11 Guarded by Ahi stood the thralls of Dasas, the waters stayed like kine held by the robber.
But he, when he had smitten Vrtra, opened the cave wherein the floods had been imprisoned.
12 A horses tail wast thou when he, O Indra, smote on thy bolt; thou, God without a second,
Thou hast won back the kine, hast won the Soma; thou hast let loose to flow the Seven Rivers.

Here we are told that Vrtras mother was Danu and Indra killed her also. But many allusions in it are opaque.
Another myth often narrated by RV which may be related to that of Vrtra, is that of Visvarupa, the brother
of Vrtra.
RV 10.8.8.
Urged on by Indra and well-skilled in the use of his father Aptyas weapons, (Trita) fought the battle.
Then Trita slew the seven-rayed, three-headed foe (Visvarupa) and freed the kine (cattle) of Tvastrs son
(Visvarupa).
The Vedic demigods Traitana and/or Trita have counterparts in Avesta named Thraetaona and Thrita. They
share many characteristics and roles in their respective mythologies. In Avesta, Thraetaona and Thrita are
mentioned in consecutive verse of the same chapter; as if referring to two different individuals. Avestan Thraetaona
is the son of Athwya while Vedic Trita is the son of Aptya.It is possible that these two names in Avesta and Vedas
might be referring to the same character.
The references to Tvastr in Rgveda is interesting. He is the maker of divine implements, especially Indras
Vajraudha and is also the guardian of Soma. He is a demigod invoked in all Apri Suktas. And yet he is engaged
in a losing battle with Indra. And there seems to be some inconsistency between the stories in RV and Puranas,
as Tvastrs son was killed by Indra and then Tvastr goes and creates Vagrayudha for Indra.
According to Bhagavata, Trisiras, also known as Visvarupa, is the three-headed son of Tvasta. He was created
by Tvasta to defeat Indra. With one head he ate; with another head he observed his surroundings; and with
third head he read theVedas. He grew so powerful that Indra became frightened of him. After Trisiras scorned
the women Indra sent to seduce him, Indra killed him. Enraged, Trisiras father, Tvasta, createdVritra to avenge
his sons killing. It is interesting to speculate on possible relation of this Visvarupa with to what was revealed to
Arjuna just before the battle of Mahabharata.
RV mentions many enemies of Indra mainly in hymns eulogizing his heroic deeds. Sambara, Susna and Vrtra
are the ones most frequently mentioned. Others include Karanja (RV 1.53.8), Parnaya (RV 10.48.8), Vangrada,
whose 100 puras are destroyed by Indra (RV 1.53.8), Ahisuva, Srbinda, Rauhina, Arbuda, Anarsani, Pipru, Krivi
and Arunavaabha, who is also described as a Daanava. There is rarely any mention as to why Indra had to kill
them. In later texts they are represented as Asuras; forces of evil with superhuman powers.
While many of these references might be to natural forces as the case of Vrtra, some of the names that
are mentioned in hymns eulogizing the deeds of Indra could be actual persons. Since these names are mostly
linguistically Indo Aryan, it is more reasonable to assume that these people were Indo Aryan; ethnically and
linguistically.
In fact Rigveda mentions many other groups or races or beings with which the composers had adversarial,
neutral or friendly contacts. These include Rakshasas and Yatudhamas (Probably Nagas) mentioned in RV
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 83

1.35.10, Panis mentioned in RV 10.108, Gandharvas RV 10.139.4,5 and 6 26 and pishacas. Itihasa-Puranas
mentions other groups like Yakshas, Nagas, Kinnaras, Kimpurushas, Suparnas, Vanaras, Vidyadharas, Valakilyas
and most of them as decedents of Kashyapa; the wish-born-son of Brahma or thus half brothers of Devas and
Asuras. Many of these groups are often described as residents of various parts of North-west and Central India,
north of Godavari River, though in other contexts some of them are described as inhabitants of Patal-Lok or under
water. Among these, at least Nagas can be considered historically attested, as Buddhist and Jain sources mentions
Naga communities and even Naga kings in many places in India. Many castes of people who now live in different
parts of South Asia are believed to be descendents of the ancient Nagas. These Nagas were neither aborigine nor
Dravidian.
Thus it seems more logical to assume that the battles described in Vedas were fought by Vedic Aryans against
their neighbours, who were racially, culturally and linguistically related to them. All the personal names mentioned
in Rigveda have either Indo-Aryan or Iranian / Old Persian / Avestan etymologies. There is no uncontested claim
of Rigveda mentioning any of these groups as different from the composers of the hymns physically, linguistically
or ethnically.

RV 8.96 As Evidence for Aryan Invation

In this context an interesting reference from Vedas that is sometimes quoted as evidence of Aryans overpowering
a dark race which eventually led to the caste differentiation in India is in RV 8.96.13-15. The relevant part of the
hymn in the original (English script) and its translation by Ralph T H Griffith is reproduced below.

ava drapso amsumatimatisthadiyanah krsno dasabhih sahasraih

avat tamindrah sacya dhamantamapa snehitirinmana adhatta
drapsamapasyam visune carantamupahvare nadyo amsumatyah
nabho na krshamavatasthivamsamisyami vo vrsano yudhyatajau
adha drapso amsumatya upasthe adharayat tanvam titvisanah
viso adevirabhyacarantir brhaspatina yujendrah sasahe
English translation by Ralph T H Griffith
13 The Black Drop sank in Amsumatis bosom, advancing with ten thousand round about it.
Indra with might longed for it as it panted: the hero-hearted laid aside his weapons.
14 1 saw the Drop in the far distance moving, on the slope bank of Amsumatis river,
Like a black cloud that sank into the water. Heroes, I send you forth. Go, fight in battle.
15 And then the Drop in Amsumatis bosom, splendid with light, assumed its proper body;
And Indra, with Brhaspati to aid him, conquered the godless tribes that came against him.

The word Krishna is rendered as black as is done by Sayana;27 black being used purely as a metaphor for
evil. One comes across many translations which treat this part of the hymn as a description of a fight between
Indra supported by Sage Brhaspati and Krishnasura (demon named Krishna). This version, in which Indra, with
the help of Brhaspati, kills Krishnasura and his ten thousand followers in a battle on the banks of Amsumati
26
Rishi of RV 10.139 is one Vishvavasu Deva-Gandharva
27
Sayanacarya was a minister in the court of Bukka 1 and Harihara 2 of Vijayanagara Empire in 14th century. Most modern
translations of Rig-Veda depend on his Vedartha Prakasha, a translation cum commentary of Vedas, as the meaning of Vedas remain
opaque even for the most erudite. Prof. H. H. Wilson says about Sayana: He undoubtedly had a knowledge of his text far beyond
the pretension of any European scholar, and must have been in possession, either through his own learning or that of his assistants, of
all the interpretations which had been perpetuated by traditional teaching from earliest time.
84 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

(Yamuna) River, has a number of variants. For another possible interpretation of this hymn, please see page 171.
It is often quoted as evidence of white, tall Aryans defeating a black coloured race in battle. The rendering by
Sayana (Griffith has followed Sayana in his work) should be considered more authentic and the story of the battle
seems to be a product of some fertile imagination. In any case, Mandala 8 is a late part of Rgveda. One would
expect the discription of a migration event, if it did occur, in an early Mandala like Mandala 6 or 7.
In RV 5.29.10, the word anasa is used in connection with the Dasyus. In fact it is just one of the many
derogatory names used for Dasyus in Rigveda like those mentioned above. Some scholars have translated anasa as
nose less to conclude that Dasyus belonged to a Dravidian race with small low noses compared to the prominent
high Aryan noses. But the Sayana had translated anasa as without mouth or face (anas = an negative+
as mouth). Sayanas translation is supported by the occurrence of the word Mrdra vac in the same verse.
Sayana explains the word mrdra vac as having defective organs of speech The description of Dasas as with
defective organs of speech could be because their speech differed from that of Aryans or was not fully intelligible
to them. We are familiar with the demonising enemies and calling them all sorts of names even in modern
times. Alternatively, the composers of Rgveda might be expressing their disdain for the manner of articulation of
their enemies. Regrettably this kind of doubtful interpretations are used extensively in various homeland models,
particularly when the context is IE arrival in South-Asia.
Many authors resort to pointing to various obscure references as evidences in favor of their point of view.
Regrettably, this often degenerates to deliberate misrepresentations. Confusion and uncertainty prevails when
later authors quotes these misrepresentations as proven facts. This kind of subtleties and doubtful practices have
often found their way into even respectable scholarly publications.
As an example, I will just quote two such gems of wisdom. RV 2.11.18, contains a phrase which means on the
left. One reputed author comments on it thus on the left can also mean to the north, and indicates that Vedic
poets faced the east - their presumed goal in contemplating the world. The original verse in English alphabets
and Griffiths translation is quoted below.

dhisva savah sura yena vrtramavabhinad daanumaurnavabham

apaavrnorjyotiraaryaya ni savyatah sadi dasyurindra
18 Hero, assume the might wherewith thou clavest Vrtra piecemeal, the Daanava Aurnavabha.
Thou hast disclosed the light to light the Arya: on thy left hand, O Indra, sank the Dasyu.

This comment is part of his efforts to establish that Vedic Aryans were moving from west to east or were
moving from Central Asia towards South Asia. The entire hymn do not talk about migrations, far away lands or
encounter with strangers. The conclusion the author draws from it seems to be completely unwarranted. This
kind of logic and conclusions might suit fairy tales, but can hardly be credible in a scholarly work.
The myth of Sarama and the Panis is found the Rigveda 10.108. The hymn, according to Griffith is a colloquy
between Sarama, the messenger of the Gods or of Indra and the Panis or envious demons who have carried off the
cows or rays of light which Indra wishes to recover. The hymn seems to narrate some obscure myth and it in
itself is not very enlightening. It seems to record an encounter between cattle traders or cattle thiefs and a bird
which represents Indra. There is certainly nothing in it that has a bearing with the Aryan question we are trying
to unravel. Nor is there any further reference to it in Rigveda. It is narrated in Jaiminiya Brahmana with more
colorful details, but without anything that has to do with Aryan migration. Yet this hymn has been interpreted
in many imaginative ways by different authors, so as to forcibly bend it to favor their pet thesis.
There is some mystery about the many references to Panies in Rgveda. They are mentioned in 36 Rics of
RV, which should mean that they had some significant role during Rgvedic times. They are often mentioned along
with Sarama, cattle and a cave. One Ric mention them as Pani Asura. Some Rics say that they were rich and
wise. One calls them Dasyu. Most authors treat them as cattle traders or thieves. But Max Muller thought it
was some kind of nature force. He says, It is a reproduction of the old story of the break of day. The bright cows
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 85

the rays of the Sun or the rain clouds, for both go by the same name, have been stolen by the Powers of darkness,
by the Night and her manifold progeny. Gods and men are anxious for their return.
Yaska points out in his Nirukta (2.17), the word Vani is derived from the word Pani ( panih vanij bhavati).
Vani is root from which words like Vanik and Vanijya evolved. Interestingly many Indo European societies had
ancient myths in which cognate forms of Pani or Vani figure, with very similar characteristics. Even the myths
are often similar.
Another argument relates to the word for beaver found in the vocabulary reconstructed for Proto Indo European
and its altered form found in Vedic. For example, the beaver is not found inside S. Asia. It occurs, however,
even now in Central Asia, its bones have been found in areas as far south as N. Syria and in mummified form in
Egypt, and it is attested in the Avesta. Avestan basri- is related to the descriptive term, IE *bhebhru brown,
beaver which is widely attested. The respective word in Vedic, babhru(-ka), however, means brown, mongoose
(Nenninger 1993). While the mongoose is not a water animal, some Indian types of mongooses vaguely look
like a beaver, and clearly, the IE/IIr term for beaver has been used, inside South Asia, to designate the newly
encountered animal, the mongoose.
As to why the transfer could not have been in the reverse order, from the early form of Vedic to other IE
languages, the argument is that the word babhru is impossible in Vedic, unless one can accept an exception of
the laws of phonetic changes. This seems to be a strange argument; if the phonetic change is unacceptable in a
transfer from Vedic to other IE languages, how come it is acceptable for transfer from other IE languages to Vedic?
To put it differently, why it did not undergo the phonetic change after the Vedic speakers reached South Asia? It is
said that the word is found in the vocabulary reconstructed for Proto Indo European. When Proto Indo European
evolved into Indo Aryan, it resulted in extensive phonetic changes. But why this particular word retained its PIE
phonetic characteristics and did not evolve as other Indo Aryan vocabulary did? The only rational answer can be
that we simply do not know. It is better to suspend judgment till we have more reliable data.
Similarly two other references which were often quoted as supporting AIT hypotheses are The battle of ten
kings described in RV 7.18, 7.33 and 7.83 and the reference to movements of Ayu and Amavasu in the much
later text Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra (BSS 18. 44:397. 9)

3.3.1 The Dasarajna Hymns

The battle of ten kings described in The Dasarajna hymns RV 7.18, RV 7.33 and 7.83 is sometimes pointed
out as an actual historic record of Aryan invasion into Punjab.28 These hymns appear to describe a battle fought
by Puru tribes, allied with some other tribes, against the hero of the hymn; the Bharata king, Sudas.29 The Purus
and their allies were defeated in an epic battle on the banks of River Parusni (Ravi) against all odds, with the
help of theAryas Comrade; Indra (aryasya sadhama), and the spiritual power of the sage Vasishta, the chief
priest of Bharatas and the composer of the hymns as also most of Mandala 7. The situation leading up to the
battle is described in RV 7.18.6: The Turvasas and Yaksus (Yadu), together with the Matsya tribe appear and
ally themselves with the Bhrgus and the Druhyus. Their confederation was further increased by the Pakthas, the
Bhalanas, the Alinas, the Shivas and the Visanins (7.18.7). They were led by a king and a priest with Iranian
names Kavasa and Kavi son of Cayamana. Thus the ten kings included those from the east, south-east , south,
west and north-west of the Bharata Kingdom on the banks of River Sarasvati. The battle itself took place on
the banks of the Parusni (Ravi). It appears (7.18.5) that Sudas was close to defeat and was surrounded by the
enemy, but managed to cross the Parusni safely with the help of the spiritual power of sage Vasishta and Indra,
28
Some authors, who are strong supporters of the Steppe Home Land model, now have changed their narrative slightly and say
that the Indo Aryan tribes entered South Asia in many separate waves and the Bharatas or Vedic Aryans were in the last wave.
They overpowered the earlier Indo Aryan migrants and established their supremacy in the Saptasindhu area. According to this new
narrative, Vedas are a record of this migration and conflicts with other Indo Aryans of earlier waves as well natives.
29
According to Puranas, Purus and Bharatas were distant cousins. Puru was the tenth and Bharata the twenty second king of the
Moon Dynasty
86 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

as the river was made shallow and easy for Sudas to cross, while his foes, trying to pursue, were scattered by a
flood and either drowned or were slaughtered by Sudas men. 7.18.12 says persons named Druhyu, Vrdha and
Syathan drowned in the water and at this point, those of their men who praised Indra joined the ranks of Sudas.
The cause of the conflict is stated to be that the tribes opposing Sudas were godless, deviant and did not perform
Yajnas. It could have been a rebellion by petty kings, as leaders of forces opposed to Sudas are described as
Rajnyas or petty kings. Sudas probably faced many rebellions in his reign as RV 7.18.19 and 7.83.4 says he killed
King Bheda, the leader of three tribes of Ajas, Singrus and Yaksus on the banks of Yamuna River, presumably
in another battle. Priestly rivalry might have added spice to the conflict, as sage Visvamitra was the priest of
Bharatas during the earlier Mandala 3 and sage Vasishta appear to have replaced him by the time of the later
Mandala 7.30 Hindu mythology also has many stories about the persistent rivalry between Visvamitra and Vasista.
It is believed that the result of the war was that Bharatas were able to settle in Kurukshetra and establish their
unchallenged power in the Kuru Kingdom, the most important Kingdom of vedic age extending from Yamuna
in the east to Sindhu in the west. Many of the ten tribes31 mentioned like Purus, Turvasas, Yaksus, Matsyas,
and also probably Bhrigus and Druhyus were Indo Aryan tribes from Saptasindhu itself. The other hostile tribes,
Panis, Pakthas, Parshus, Prthus and Bhalanas may be Indo-Iranian tribes from present day Iran and Afghanistan.
Some scholars argue that these terms refer to Paktoons, Parsies, Parthians and Baluchs, all of them IE language
speaking and probably linguistically and racially related to the Indo Aryans. 32
Griffiths translation of parts of RV 7.18.5-9 is reproduced below

5 What though the floods spread widely, Indra made them shallow and easy for Sudas to traverse.
He, worthy of our praises, caused the Simyu, foe of our hymn, to curse the rivers fury.
6 Eager for spoil was Turvasa Purodas, fain to win wealth, like fishes urged by hunger.
The Bhrgus and the Druhyus quickly listened: friend rescued friend mid the two distant peoples.
7 Together came the Pakthas, the Bhalanas, the Alinas, the Sivas, the Visanins.
Yet to the Trtsus came the Aryas Comrade, through love of spoil and heroes war, to lead them.
30
There might be another version of this story of fight between sages of Rgveda. It emerges from various references in Brahmanas
and Itihasa-puranas. Vasista was the chief priest of Bharata King Sudas. For some reason Visvamitra, who was a distant Puru relative
of Sudas, assumed that position later. Later during a sacrifice by Sudas, there was a debate between Visvamitra and Sakti, the son of
Vasista, in which Visvamitra suffered an inglorious defeat by the young man. Sudas was enraged by seeing the dejected and shamed
Visvamitra and killed Sakti by throwing him into the fire.
Looking for revenge, Vasista conducted a yagna for begetting a son to avenge the killing of Sakti. Some Brahmanas say Vasista thus
Overcame the Sudases, probably meaning that decedents of Sudas suffered great loss. In Mahabharata there is a reference to Vasista
committing suicide by jumping into River Sarasvati. It is said that as a result, Sarasvati broke into many small streams or lakes. This
may be a reference to the drying up of Sarasvati, which would have devastated the lands of Bharatas or Sudasas as Bharatas are said
to live on the banks of Sarasvati.
This story could be partly historical. If so, chronologically Mandala 7 might precede Mandala 3 by a brief period of time, as mandala
7 of Vasista clan and 3 of Visvamitras have many hymns extolling the virtues of King Sudas.
31
Groups mentioned in RV and described as tribes by many authors, might be independent kingdoms. Early Indologists translated
it as tribes under the assumption that they were newly arrived, horse riding Indo-Aryan migrant groups from Central Asia. However
there is nothing in these hymns to support such a view. They might just as well have been individual kingdoms of the area. The
implication of this is that they were not nomads, but were sedentary communities settled in the area for a lone time. For example,
the Anu king, Abhyavartin Chayamana, is described in RV 6.27.8 as a Samrat or emperor. (dvayanaghne rathino vimsatim gha
vadhumato maghava mahyam samrat abhyavarti cayamano dadati dunaseyam daksina parthavanam). Description of a nomadic
tribal chief as Samrat or emperor is quite unlikely, unless the word is used in a less flattering sense.
Abhyavartin Chayamana is also described as a Parthav. The term is usually taken to mean a descendant of Pruthu. But it could
also mean a person from Parthia, a region of ancient Persia. Support for this view comes from the mention in RV 7.18 describing
the Battle of ten kings, that the Anus lived far away. Parthav also cognates with Parthava, listed in the Bisitun inscription of
Achaemenid king, Darius I as a region under his rule, mentioned elsewhere in this book.
32
The Parsus are usually identified as the Persians. This is based on the evidence of an Assyrian inscription from 844 BC referring
to the Persians as Parshu, and the an Inscription of Darius I referring to Parsa as the home of the Persians.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 87

8 Fools, in their folly fain to waste her waters, they parted inexhaustible Parusni.
Lord of the Earth, he with his might repressed them: still lay the herd and the affrighted herdsman.
9 As to their goal they sped to their destruction: they sought Parusni; even the swift returned not.
Indra abandoned, to Sudas the manly, the swiftly flying foes, unmanly babblers.

It is interesting to note that king Sudas calls his enemies Dasyu including the Aryan tribes who opposed him.
This seems to negate the AIT position that Dasyu was a term used by invading Aryans for the inhabitants of
Indus Valley. As mentioned earlier, many references in Rigveda depict Dasas and Dasyus as the prime enemies
of Aryas during Vedic times. But there is nothing in these to the effect that Dasas or Dasyus were any different
from Aryas physically, ethnically or linguistically. Besides, if Sudas and his men were newly arrived invaders, it is
unlikely that they would know the names and tribal identity of the local enemies. Though both Sudas and Diodasa
were kings of the Bharata clan, the most important of Vedic clans, they had names ending with Dasa. The name
or name element Dasa might have acquired an unfavourable connotation later, as is not found in personal names
in the rest of the Rigveda or subsequent Samhitas. Diodasa and Sudas are mentioned as currently ruling kings in
Mandalas 6 and 7, two early books of Rgveda.
RV 7.6.3 says Far far away hath Agni chased those Dasytis, and, in the cast, hath turned the godless west-
ward.. It says that these godless men were pushed westward, which should mean that they came from that
direction. The later Puranas also says that King Yayati gave Druhyu the western part of his kingdom and thus
the land of Druhyus must have been in the west or north west of Saptasindhu. Again, if the composers of Rgveda
were recent migrants from the west or north-west, and if they were fighting the locals for supremacy of the area,
it is unlikely that their enemies will be pushed out in that direction. It is far more likely that they will be driven
out in the opposite direction.
The incident narrated in these hymns hardly seems to be a description of Aryan invasion from the north west
into Indus Valley, subjugating the locals or an invasion by horse or chariot riding elite Aryan warriors. These
hymns also do not mention chariots or horse riders.

3.3.2 Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra

Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra is clearly a much later text and the verse referred above relates to the story of
Pururavas and Urvasy mentioned in RV 10.95 and repeated in many later texts including Satapadha Brahmana,
Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra (BSS) and Mahabharata and also by Kalidasa in Vikramorvasiyam in different forms.
Ayu and Amavasu were sons of Pururavas. BSS 18.44 rather vaguely says Ayu went east while others stayed home.
It is claimed by Michael Witzel that this is a reference to Aryans coming from Central Asia to Indus plains. Many
authors supported him initially, while others found the passage too vague to base any conclusion.Koenraad Elst
criticized Witzels translation of the BSS passage and stated: this text actually speaks of a westward movement
towards Central Asia, coupled with a symmetrical eastward movement from Indias demographic centre around
the Saraswati basin towards the Ganga basin. Many others have expressed doubt about the meaning assigned
by Witzel for the passage. This kind of speculative arguments can also give American Indians an Indo Aryan
identity. A more reasonable explanation may be that it refers to the migration from Punjab to the Gangetic
plains further east in Bihar that probably happened at around the time of texts like BSS. The straight forward
explanation may be that this might be a reference to some unrelated minor incident without any relevance to the
west to east movement of vedic people. One would expect to find a reference to the migration from Central Asia,
if it did happen, in the earliest Vedic texts and not in BSS which came at least a millennium later.

3.3.3 Comparitive Chronology of the Mandalas and its implication

There are many reasons why a dependable internal chronology of the Rigvedic Mandalas cannot be confidently
accepted. It is known that Rigveda was preserved for a long time in oral form. A text, once written down,
88 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

usually retain its linguistic form. Estimate of when Rigveda was first written down is problematic. Even if it was
written down on an early date, access to it was probably limited and it was mainly transmitted from generation
to generation orally for a very long time. When a text is preserved thus for a very long time, it is likely that
it undergoes phonetic changes gradually, as the language of the preservers undergoes such changes. Over a long
enough time this can result in changes to the original words, phrases and even whole verses. There is no way
for us now to determine whether Rigveda has undergone such changes and if so how deep such changes are. We
now find that the family books of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and even 8 and parts of book 1 are composed more or
less in similar language, though it appears that some specific words and grammatical forms are found only in
particular Mandalas. The language of Mandala 10 is often different and this can be said about Mandala 9 also.
But the possibility exists that originally the language of different hymns and Mandalas was far more differentiated,
depending on the actual time gap between compositions of these. Thus, the linguistic homogeneousness we find
in them could be misleading and we will have to be skeptic of any conclusion on the relative chronology of the
Mandalas based on linguistics.33
Another source is the names of individuals mentioned in the hymns. Thus the Bharata King Sudas name
appears in mandalas 3 and 7 as a contemporary ruler. So we can conclude that these two mandalas are chronolog-
ically close. But here again, these references could be restatements of old myths or sometimes individuals could
be referred to in the name of their long dead ancestors.
A more dependable method of arriving at the relative chronology is on the basis of references to geography
in these texts, like description or occurrence of river names, snowy mountains or any such clearly identifiable
landmarks. Here again problems arises as there are a number of probable interpolated hymns and verses in the
textual form available to us today. Some of such well known hymns include the eleven hymns, known as the
Valakhilya hymns in Mandala 8. Similarly, Aitareya Brahmana mentions some six hymns in Mandala 3 as being
late interpolation. There are a few others in this category on which there is general consensus. There could be yet
others which are interpolations. The fact that some of the hymns are interpolated is now used by many authors
to declare other hymns as interpolations, if they happen to be inconsistent with their own views on the internal
chronology of the Rigvedic Mandalas or the Home land model they happens to favour. We have no dependable
tool to determine which hymns are actually interpolations. Thus, the logical option may be to be skeptic of any
claim of interpolation of any hymns other than the Valakhilya hymns and those listed in Aitareya Brahmana.
Determining the relative chronology on the basis of references to geography, even without the known or unknown
interpolated hymns, have now become controversial. This is because these can be interpreted in different ways,
depending on ones belief in any particular hypotheses related to Vedic Aryans arrival in South Asia. Most
conclusions about the geography of the Rigveda and movements of Vedic Aryans are based on the need to fit the
textual data within the favored theory, rather than on the material within the verses of Rigveda. For example
book 8 has many references to the flora and fauna as well as rivers in Afghanistan. For this reason those who argue
for the steppe home land model would conclude that book 8 is among the earliest layer of Rigveda. Others who
believe in the Out of India model would include it in the latest layer for the same reason. Another difficult to
resolve issue is the doubt expressed by some authors regarding the actual location of rivers mentioned in Rigveda.
The problem is particularly acute in the case of River Sarasvati frequently mentioned in it. Some authors argue
that at least some of these references are to a river in Afghanistan familiar to Vedic Aryans on their way to South
Asia. It is clear that most references to this river in Rigveda are to an ancient river which flowed through present
33
Many scholars are, however, of the opinion that the text available to us today has not undergone significant changes from the time of
its composition. Rigvedic versions available at such distant regions as Kashmir, Kerala and Orissa today has exactly the same wording,
in spite of the fact that Vedic scholars from these areas did not have any mutual contacts for a very long time. Unbelievably, even the
long-extinct musical accents and meters have been preserved. Thus, the transmission and oral preservation of Rigveda from generation
to generation over millennia was far more efficient than that of the Hebrew Bible or the Greek, Latin, Avestan and Chinese classics.
This, in spite of the fact that these texts are known to have been written down far earlier than Rigveda. Witzel says, In addition,
unlike the constantly reformulated Epics and Puranas, the Vedic texts contain contemporary materials. They can serve as snapshots
of the political and cultural situation of the particular period and area in which they were composed. As they are contemporary, and
faithfully preserved, these texts are equivalent to inscriptions.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 89

day Punjab and Haryana. RV 10.75, the Nadistuti Sukta, makes it very clear that this was the actual geographical
position of the legendary river. But in a number of such references the exact location of the river cannot be
confidently determined based on the particular verse where the name occurs. The argument that these references
are to a river somewhere else can neither be proved nor disproved at present. Logically the burden of proof should
fall on those who make such arguments; such proofs being incontrovertible and based on unassailable data; and
not on what they believe to be a priori self evident.
In spite of these difficulties there is now general consensus among eminent authors that the Family books of
Mandalas 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the oldest layer and Mandala 10 is the latest. There are variations as Witzel
believes that the relative chronology of the family books is in the order of books 2, 4, 8, 5, 6, 3 and 7. The following
is an analysis of river names mentioned in the text.
Book 1 mentions Sarasvati, Sindhu and rivers in Afghanistan. Book 2 mentions Sarasvati. Book 3 mentions
what is probably Ganga as Jahnavi34 , Sarasvati, Vipasa or Beas and sutudri or Sutlej; the last two being the
easternmost rivers of Punjab.
Book 4 mentions some rivers in Punjab, Sindhu and rivers in Afghanistan. Book 5 mentions Yamuna and
Sarasvati in the east, rivers in Punjab, Sindhu and rivers in Afghanistan.
Book 6 mentions Ganga and Sarasvati and some unknown rivers between these two that have probably dried
up long ago. Book 7 mentions Yamuna, Sarasvati, Beas and Sutlej and the next two rivers of the Punjab from the
east: the Parusni and Asikni.
Book 8 mentions Sarasvati, Sindhu, some rivers in Punjab and many rivers in Afghanistan. Book 9 mentions
Sarasvati, Sindhu and some rivers in Afghanistan. Book 10 mentions rivers from Ganga in the east to many rivers
in Afghanistan, mainly in the Nadistuti Sukta.
We will leave out books 1, 9 and 10 as there is consensus that these are the latest books, although some authors
believe book 1 could contain hymns from all stages. Out of the remaining 7 books, book 6 mentions only rivers
east of Sarasvati, apart from Sarasvati, and books 3 mentions the first two rivers west of Sarasvati and book 7
next two rivers of the Punjab from the east: the Parusni and Asikni, but none further west. Book 2 mentions only
Sarasvati. The remaining books 4, 5, and 8 mentions eastern rivers as well as Sindhu and rivers in Afghanistan.
It may be noted that this is almost as in the case of book 10, known to be the latest.
Can we arrive at any rational conclusions from the above data? If the Vedic Aryans had come from the Central
Asia they would be familiar with rivers in Afghanistan before entering South Asia. Thus books 4, 5 and 8 could
be among the oldest. But such a conclusion will have to account for the fact that these books also mention eastern
rivers like Ganga and Yamuna, apart from Sarasvati. Book 2 is neutral as it mentions only Sarasvati. Thus the
conclusion will have to be that Vedic Aryans had reached Western Uttarpradesh before the first Rigvedic hymn
was composed. There is nothing illogical about such a conclusion, but it will be unacceptable to most scholars
who support the traditional theory. Besides, such a scenario will have to assume that the Vedic Aryans moved
from Southern Afghanistan to the shores of River Ganges within a short period, possibly within one generation,
crossing many large rivers on the way. This is so, as the description of these rivers in these Mandalas are not
of some old retained memory, but as current experience. Alternatively, the position will have to be that these
references are to rivers in Afghanistan or that these are not river names, but something else.
The above data can also be consistent with east to west movement of Indo- Aryans. In this case, book 6 will be
the oldest book, as it does not mention any river west of Sarasvati. Books 3 and 7 will the next, as these mention
the first rivers west of Sarasvati. There are, of course, some disputed mention of Sindham in these Books.
Further, in this scenario, the Vedic Aryans were expanding (not migrating) west, during the composition of
books 4 and 5, and were fully established in Afghanistan by the time of composition of book 8. Thus, based on
the mentions of river names in Rigveda, both the above scenarios are possible, but the east to west movement of
Vedic Aryans could be a more credible option of the two.
There are other data that should make an east to west movement the preferred choice. Sarasvati is referred to
34
A fuller discussion on Rigvedic references to Rivers Ganga, Sarasvati and Sindhu can be found in the next section
90 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

many times in Mandalas 6, 3 and 7. There are three hymns dedicated to it in these Mandalas: 6.61; 7.95, 96. It
is referred to in nine Mandalas out of ten in the Rigveda. It is mentioned as one of the Three Great Goddesses
in the Apri Suktas of the ten most important families of Vedic composers, but the Indus finds no place in these.
These Apri Suktas appear to be from the time of the earliest hymns of Rigveda. Thus it appears that Sarasvati
was the most important river during the earliest period of Rigveda. A discussion on Apri Suktas can be found in
page 161 of this book.
Similarly all references to Saptasindhu; the land between Rivers Sarasvati and Indus are found in mandalas
4, 5 and 8; and not in mandalas 6, 3 and 7. The Indus is referred to in only Mandalas 1, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10.
RV 10.75 the Nadistuti Sukta lists many rivers, including a few west of Indus and those in Afghanistan, known
to the composer. But the most important river for him is Sindhu. The importance given to River Sindhu in this
late hymn, while River Sarasvati was the most important in mandala 6, 3, 7, and 2 indicates that these are the
early hymns and this also point to an east to west movement of the Vedic people.
All references in Rigveda to geography, flora and fauna of Afghanistan and areas further west and north are
found mainly in Mandalas 4, 5, 8, 9, 1 and 10. Particularly mandala 8 has many references to camels, wool sheep,
snow and mountains. According to some scholars, the 8th Mandala has the most striking similarity to the Avesta.
It contains allusions to Afghan and Central Asian Flora and Fauna and mentions kings with Iranian sounding
names. The term ustra for camel in Vedic and Avestan are cognates and it occurs at least in four Mandala 8
hymns and only once elsewhere in Rgveda. The river name Suvastu in 8.19.37 is believed to refer to the Swat
River in Afghanistan.
RV 8.19.36,37

36 A gift of fifty female slaves hath Trasadasyu given me, Purukutsas son,
Most liberal, kind, lord of the brave.
37 And Syava too for me led forth a strong steed at Suvastus ford:
A herd of three times seventy kine, good lord of gifts, he gave to me.

References to Gandhara, an area south of Hindukush Mountains in Afghanistan and the Gandharvas, the name
of a divine class of beings or simply, the people of the area, are found only in hymns in mandalas of 8, 9, 1 and 10.
Only exception is RV 3.38. But RV 3.38 is one of the hymns which is named in the Aitareya Brahmana as being
late interpolations into Mandala 3. Considering the above, an order of Books 6, 3 and 7 as the earliest, Books 4,
5 and 8 as middle, Books 9 and 10 as the last and Book 1 as containing hymns from all stages seems to be quite
logical. I have treated these as such throughout this book. Book 2 do not fit into this order as it do not mention
any river other than Sarasvati.
An analysis of descriptions of River Sarasvati also leads to an inference that Mandalas 6, 3 and 7 are the oldest.
The name Sarasvati occurs in 47 hymns of Rigveda spread over all Mandalas, except Mandala 4. Off these, three
are entirely dedicated to the river. Besides there are seven verses that speak about Sarasvati. In RV 2.41, there
are three such continuous verses, but it is not clear if the references is to Goddess Sarasvati or River Sarasvati. In
RV 7.36.6 the reference is clearly to the river. In RV 10.17, verses 7 to 9 clearly refers to Goddess Sarasvati. All
ten Apri Suktas in Rigveda invokes Goddess Sarasvati.
7 hymns in Mandala 1 refers to Sarasvati; all of them praying to Goddess Sarasvati for various boons.
All references in book 2 to Sarasvati is to the goddess; except RV 2.41.16-18, in which the river is both a river
and goddess.

16 Best Mother, best of Rivers, best of Goddesses, Sarasvati, We are, as twere, of no repute and dear
Mother, give thou us renown.
17 In thee, Sarasvati, divine, all generations have their stay. Be, glad with Sunahotras sons: O Goddess
grant us progeny.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 91

18 Enriched with sacrifice, accept Sarasvati, these prayers of ours, Thoughts which Grtsamadas beloved
of Gods bring, Holy One, to thee.

In book 3, reference in 3.4.8, the Apri Sukta of Visvamitras, mention the river as goddess Sarasvati. All other
references in the book to Sarasvati is to the river.
There is no reference in book 4 to Sarasvati.
RV Mandala 5 is the Atri clans family book, as most hymns in this book are by members of the clan. Apri
Sukta of Atris is hymn 5 of Mandala 5. RV 5.5.8 is a prayer to Ila, Sarasvati, Mahi.35 Other references to
Sarasvati in the book include RV 5.42.12 and 43.11

12 May the House-friends, the cunning-handed Artists,

may the Steers Wives, the streams carved out by Vibhvan,
And may the fair Ones honor and befriend us,
Sarasvati, Brhaddiva, and Raaka.

The verse has many vague, obscure references and it is not clear, if the reference to Sarasvati is to the river or
the goddess.
Another reference in 5.43.11 is to the goddess
In Mandala 6, 6.61 is dedicated to River Sarasvati and most references in the book to Sarasvati is to the river.
In Mandala 7, 7.2.8 is the Apri of Vasistas. Verse 8 refers to the river thus; Sarasvati with all her kindred
Rivers. Here, Sarasvati is a river and Goddess, as should be expected in an Apri Sukta. Hymns 95 and 96 are
entirely dedicated to the River Sarasvati. These hymns, as well as some other references in this book, makes it
very clear that Sarasvati was a mighty river.
Incidentally, RV 6.61 and RV 7.95 and 96 are the only three hymns in Rigveda entirely dedicated to River
Sarasvati or to any river for that matter. No other river gets this distinction of entire dedicated hymn in Rigveda.
These hymns describe it as a large and full flowing river. This implies that it was a large and full flowing river
during the composition of these Mandalas, as the following verses indicates.
RV 7.95.1

1. THIS stream Sarasvati with fostering current comes forth, our sure defense, our fort of iron.
As on a car, the flood flows on, surpassing in majesty and might all other waters.

RV 7.96.1,2 Sarasvati

1. I SING a lofty song, for she is mightiest, most divine of Streams. Sarasvati will I exalt with hymns
and lauds, and, O Vasistha, Heaven and Earth.
2 When in the fullness of their strength the Purus dwell, Beauteous One, on thy two grassy banks,
Favor us thou who hast the Maruts for thy friends: stir up the bounty of our chiefs.

Purus or Bharatas, the main heros of Rigveda, are said to live on the banks of Sarasvati. Vasista is the Rshi
of the hymn and was the chief priest of the Bharata King Sudas.
Book 8 has about four brief references to Sarasvati and all of them could be a river or Goddess, except in RV
8.54.4 which seems to refer to the river. All are single word references.
In book 9 there are about 3 such references; one of them in Apri, RV 9.5.8. Others also could be either the
river or Goddess. Again all are single word references.
35
The dedication to Mahi, instead of Bharati, as in other Apri Suktas, probably indicates that the decedents of Atri were not
dependent on Bharata rulers or that Bharatas had lost their power and eminence by then.
92 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

In Mandala 10 verse 75.5 clearly refers to the river. But it is just one of the rivers in this Nadistuti Sukta;
Sindhu being the most important river. About ten other brief references in this Mandala are apparently to the
goddess.
It is apparent from the above that only Mandalas 6, 7 and 3 speak about Sarasvati as a river. These books also
speak of it as a large mighty river. The only other verses which speak of it as a river is RV 10.64.9 and 10.75.5;
the Nadistuti Sukta. In these verses it clearly is a minor river.
If mandalas 7 and 6 are the latest family books and 8, 5 and 2 the earliest, how is it possible that Sarasvati
was a full flowing river during later times and an insignificant river; but a goddess in the earlier times? Note that
Rigveda mentions many rivers, but no other river, including Indus got the status of a goddess. It is significant
that, in a repeat of this process, River Ganga became a goddess in post Rigvedic times when its banks became
major population centers. Thus, a large river, which provide sustenance to a large population, could be raised to
the status of Goddess, but it is improbable that a goddess become a river, or a small insignificant river become
a goddess.
Given these references to Sarasvati in different Rgvedic Mandalas, the South Russian Home Land model
would require River Sarasvati to transform itself from a small river or river goddess to a large river system. The
only way to explain the transformation of a goddess to a river, consistent with the popular model, would be
to say that these are just poetic imagination running wild or that Sarasvati mentioned in books 6 and 7 were
in Afghanistan; arguments that are unsupported by falsifiable evidences, an essential mark of a sound theory.
It is difficult to explain this transformation under any of the South Russian Home Land models like Aryan
Invasion/migration/trickle-in theories or a migration in an earlier time span (2500 to 2300 BCE) as George
Erdorsys model suggests.
The most plausible inference one can make from the above is as follows.
Sarasvati was a large full flowing river during the composition of Mandalas like 6 and 7. It is described as the
as the best of all the rivers and that all life spans abide on the Sarasvati. The Purus and Bharatas or The Vedic
Aryans lived on its banks and were sustained by it. This large dependence on the river lifted it to the status of a
goddess in Rigveda, finding place in all ten Apri Suktas. Thus, the reasonable inference is that Mandalas 6 and 7
along with 3 are the earliest books.
Later, as the river began to dry up, composers of these hymns began to move to better watered places like
the banks of Indus and its tributaries. Indus thus became the most important river, but Sarasvati remained a
Goddess or River Goddess.
Though the evidence of the references to rivers in Rigveda appear to support the above order of the Books, it
cannot be considered emphatic. But consider the following.
Eleven Kings of the Bharata dynasty are referred to in the Rigveda; Bharata, Devavata, Srnjaya, Vadhryasva,
Divodasa, Pratardana, Pijavana, Devasravas, Sudas, Sahadeva and Somaka. Based on what one can make out
from the references, the names are in natural order; not necessarily in the order of direct decedents, since it is
possible that there are intervening generations of Kings who are not named in the Rigveda. Bharata is directly
named in only one verse; RV 6.16.4 as an ancient ancestor of Bharatas. Devavata and Srnjaya are also mentioned
as ancient figures as the following verses will make clear.
RV 6.47.23, 24, 25

23 Ten horses and ten treasure-chests, ten garments as an added gift, These and ten lumps of gold have
I received from Divodasas hand. 24 Ten cars with extra steed to each, for the Atharvans hundred
cows, Hath Asvatha to Payu given. 25 Thus Srnjayas son honoured the Bharadvajas, recipients of
all noble gifts and bounty.

The Rshi of the hymn is Bharadvaja. It makes it clear that Mandala 6, Rshi Bharadvaja and Bharata King
Divodasa were cotemporaries.
RV 3.53.9,11
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 93

9 The mighty sage, God-born and God-incited, who looks on men, restrained the billowy river. When
Visvamitra was Sudass escort, then Indra through the Kusikas grew friendly. 11 Come forward,
Kusikas, and be attentive; let loose Suadass horse to win him riches. East, west, and north, let the
King slay the foeman, then at earths choicest place perform his worship.

The composer of this hymn is Visvamitra and the verses make it quite clear that Sudas was Visvamitras
contemporary.
RV 7.18.22

22 Priest-like, with praise, I move around the altar, earning Paijavanas reward, O Agni, Two hundred
cows from Devavans descendant, two chariots from Sudas with mares to draw them
RV 7.18.25
25 Attend on him O ye heroic Maruts as on Sudass father Divodaasa. Further Paijavanas desire with
favor. Guard faithfully his lasting firm dominion.

The above verses clarifies the relation between these Bharata chiefs. It is clear that Devavata and Srinjaya
were ancestors who lived before the composition of Book 6, because they are mentioned as ancestors of Diodasa;
Diodasa was a contemporary of Book 6 and Sudas was a contemporary of Book 3 and 7. Sudas was a contemporary
of Book 7 as the Dasarajna Hymns also make clear. Incidentally, Diodasa and Sudas are the most frequently
mentioned Bharata kings in Rigveda.
RV 4.15.4 and 8, 9, 10

4 He who is kindled eastward for Srnjaya, Devavatas son, 8 And truly those two noble bays I straightway
took when offered me, From Sahadevas princely son. 9 Long, O ye Asvins, may he live, your care,
ye Gods, the princely son. Of Sahadeva, Somaka. 10 Cause him the youthful prince, the son of
Sahadeva, to enjoy Long life, O Asvins, O ye Gods.

The above verses from Book 4 makes it clear that Sahadeva was the father of Somaka and both were Bharata
kings, since Devavata and Srnjaya are also mentioned in verse 4 of the hymn. It mentions Somaka as a current
king.
RV 4.26.1-3 Dedicated to Indra

1. I WAS aforetime Manu, I was Surya: I am the sage Kaksivan, holy singer. Kutsa the son of Arjuni
I master. I am the sapient Usana behold me. 2 I have bestowed the earth upon the Arya, and rain
upon the man who brings oblation. I guided forth the loudly-roaring waters, and the Gods moved
according to my pleasure. 3 In the wild joy of Soma I demolished Sambaras forts, ninety-and-nine,
together; And, utterly, the hundredth habitation, when helping Divodasa Atithigva.

Indra is boasting about his old deeds. The verse mentions Divodasa as a king of the past whom he helped to
demolish Sambaras 99 forts.
As per Vishnu Purana, Diodasa, Mytrayu, Chyvana, Sudas, Saudasa, Sahadeva, Somaka, Ajamida, Rsha,
Samvara and Kuru were descendants of Bharata in that order. This Puranic list is clearly independent of Rigvedic
list, as Rigveda do not mention Sahadeva and Somaka as decendants of Sudas and a few names in the Puranic list
do not occur in Rgveda. It was from Kuru, Kurushetra got its name and Rgveda do not mention Kurushetra.
These seems to validate the Rgvedic King List I mentioned above. If the list of Bharata kings mentioned in
Rigveda is valid, we can infer the chronology of the four Books as 6, 3, 7 and 4.
RV 2.19.6
6 Once to the driver of his chariot, Kutsa, he gave up greedy Surya, plague of harvest;
And Indra, for the sake of Divodasa demolished Sambaras nine-and-ninety castles.
94 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

This verse appear to narrate an old myth connecting Divodasa with Indras demolition of Sambaras nine-
and-ninety castles. As Divodasa has already become a mythical figure by the time of Book 2, it should come after
Books 6, 3, 7 and 4.
RV 5.53.1, 2. and Griffiths translation of the verses

ko veda janam esam ko va pura sumnesv asa marutam

yad yuyujre kilasyah
aitan rathesu tasthusah kah susrava katha yayuh
kasmai sasruh sudase anv apaya ilabhir vrstayah saha
1 Who knows the birth of these, or who lived in the Maruts favour in the days of old
What time their spotted deer were yoked?
2 Who, when they stood upon their cars, hath heard them tell the way they went?
Who was the bounteous man to whom their kindred rains flowed down with food of sacrifice?

Griffith has translated kasmai sasruh sudase as Who was the bounteous man. The verses seem to say that
Sudas lived in the Maruts favour in the days of old. If Sudas lived in the days of old during the composition of
Book 5, it should chronologically come after Books 6, 3, 7 and also Book 4, in which Sudas is only the grandfather
of the currently ruling king.
RV 8.103.1, 2.
1. THAT noblest Furtherer hath appeared, to whom men bring their holy works.
Our songs of praise have risen aloft to Agni who was barn to give the Arya strength.
2 Agni of Divodasa turned, as twere in majesty, to the Gods.
Onward he sped along the mother earth, and took his station in the height of heaven.
Verse 2 seems to refer to some ancient myth connecting Agni to Diodasa. Thus, he is almost a godlike
figure by the time of composition of Book 8. So Book 8 should be later than Books 6, 3, 7 and 4. Thus we get
confirmation of chronology arrived at on the basis of river names occurring in Rigveda, from the names of Bharata
kings mentioned in it.
According to the scholars, the Soma plant was a species of Ephedra found in the northwestern parts of South
Asia, extending to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Species of Ephedra found in South Asia do not yield the kind
of extract described in the Rigveda. Interestingly most references to soma, particularly in Mandalas 6, 3, 7, 4 and
older hymns of book1, speak of it as being available in the heaven or in far away mountains. The following verses
seems to suggest that Soma was brought from some unknown, faraway place by hawks or falcons
RV 1.80.2

2 The mighty flowing Soma-draught, brought by the Hawk, hath gladdened thee,
That in thy strength, O Thunderer, thou hast struck down Vrtra from the floods, lauding thine own
imperial sway.
RV 3.43.7
7 Drink of the strong pressed out by strong ones, Indra, that which the Falcon brought thee when thou
longedst;
In whose wild joy thou stirrest up the people, in whose wild joy thou didst unbar the cow-stalls.
RV 4.26.5
5 When the Bird brought it, hence in rapid motion sent on the wide path fleet as thought he hurried.
Swift he returned with sweetness of the Soma, and hence the Falcon hath acquired his glory.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 95

It seems that the Soma was mysteriously brought to the Rshies and Vedic Aryans did not know its source. It
clearly was not a nearby forest or mountain. It appears that only two clans of rshies of Rgveda, out of the major
ten, are associated with Soma; the Brgus and Kasyapas. Both these clans appear to have had external association
or origin; Brugus with Persia and Kasyapas with mountainous areas north of Saptasindhu.36 70% of the verses
composed by Kasyapas are dedicated to Soma Pavamana. Apri Sukta of the Kasyapas is the only one that is
dedicated to Soma, while all the other nine AprI Suktas are dedicated to Agni.
Description of Soma in the family books of Rigveda suggests that it was available in mountains far away from
Vedic lands. According to RV 1.116.12, 117.22 and 119.9, all from the same period as family Mandalas, the
location or abode of Soma was a secret.
RV 1.116,12
Atharvans offspring Dadhyac made known to you the Somas sweetness.
RV 1.117.22
True, he revealed to you, O Wonder-Workers, sweet Soma, Tvastars secret, as your girdle.
That this place was alien to the Vedic people during the composition of the early Family Books is clear from
the fact that the eagle, which bring Soma from some faraway place, is said to have to hurry (IV.26.5) to escape the
guardians of Soma, who are described as attacking the eagle (IV.27.3) to prevent it from taking the Soma away.
(Ancient secret smugglers of Soma!)
But the situation changes in Book 8 and by now the poets know where the best Soma comes from. The prime
Soma-growing areas are identified in RV 8.64.11 as the areas near the Susoma and Arjikiya rivers (the Sohan and
Haro, north-eastern tributaries of the Indus, originating in the mountains north of the Punjab and north-west
Kashmir) and Saryanavan (a lake in the vicinity of these two rivers). The best Soma is said (RV 10.34.1) to grow
on the Mujavat mountains.
1. SPRUNG from tall trees on windy heights, these rollers transport me as they turn upon the table.
Dearer to me the die that never slumbers than the deep draught of Mujavans own Soma.
Incidentally, the hymn is dedicated to Dice.
The Mujavat tribes are identified in Atharvaveda 5-22-5, 7, 8 and 14 with the Gandharis. That Gandhari in
the Rigveda is associated with Soma is clear from the specific role assigned in the Rigveda to the Gandharva or
Gandharvas (mythical beings associated in the Rigveda with that region). In the words of Macdonell: Gandharva
is, moreover, in the RV often associated (chiefly in the ninth book) with Soma. He guards the place of Soma and
protects the races of the gods (9.83.4; cp. 1.22.14). Observing all the forms of Soma, he stands on the vault of
heaven (9.85.12). Together with Parjanya and the daughters of the sun, the Gandharvas cherish Soma (9.113.3).
Through Gandharvas mouth the gods drink their drought (AV.7.73.3). Tvastr is one of the obscurest members
of the Vedic pantheon and is especially the guardian on Soma, which is called the mead of Tvastr (I.117.22)
and Indra is described as conquering Tvastr in order to obtain the Soma. In his footnote to 1.43.8, Griffith
refers to the people of the hills who interfere with the gathering of the Soma plant which is to be sought there.
Interestingly, there is a similar Zoroastrian character named Thrita, connected with Haoma or Soma.
The only possible inferences from the above seems to be that during the composition of the family Mandalas,
the composers were unsure of the location of Soma growing areas, except that it was somewhere on a far away
mountain. By the time of some later hymns, particularly those in Mandala 9, they more or less knew the location
and were fighting with the guardians of Soma and even conquering them. However such an inference will go
against the prevailing model. This model assumes that the use of Soma started during the Indo Iranian times in
Central Asia. When the Vedic Aryans moved towards South Asia, they would have passed through the Gandhar
or Kandahar area and would surely have known the source of Soma in the area; and would have known it during
the composition of even the earliest Rigvedic hymn.
Thus, references to Soma in Rigveda also seem to suggest an east to west movement of Vedic Aryans.
36
The Rshi clan, Kashyapa; could have been from present day Kashmir, as it was known as Kashyapmeru in Vedic and Sanskrit texts
and as Kasperia in Greek in ancient times, perhaps pointing to a connection to the Kashyapa clan.
96 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

RV 7.68.5 seems to refer to the gradual appearance of the Sun at dawn, as the Asvins; the Gods of Twilight,
makes Atri (the Sun) increasingly bright and glorious with food and nourishment from their rich store. RV 6.50.10
and 7.71.5 also seem to refer to sun as Atri. These refer to the Asvins rescuing Atri from great darkness. As
Griffith points out in his footnote to RV 7.71.5: The reappearance, heralded by the Asvins or Gods of Twilight,
of the departed Sun, appears to be symbolized in all these legends.
But by the period of Mandala 5, the same myth undergoes a subtle change. Rshies of Mandala 5 mostly belong
to Atri clan. Here The Asvins rescue Atri, the Rshi, from a pit or cavern (RV 5.78.4). In all further references to
Atri, particularly in Mandala 5, the word Atri is used interchangeably for the Sun God and the Rshi or the
sun is equated with the sage. A reasonable explanation for this transformation is that the Atri clan deliberately
raised the status of their eponymous ancestor to that of a God, to enhance the prestige and standing of their
clan.
If the above inference is correct, it follows that Mandalas 6 and 7 were earlier to Mandala 5.
There is another aspect of Rigveda Mandalas that might be a pointer to the relative chronology. As shown
elsewhere in this book, Mandalas 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are pure or almost pure family books. Mandala 5 is predominantly
by Atri composers, but has hymn by other family composers also. Mandalas 1, 8, 9 and 10 have hymns by a number
the ten prominent families. Thus, the ten Mandalas can be divided into two groups; the pure family Mandalas
of 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 and the remaining five with multiple composer families. From the above discussion, we know
that Mandalas 6, 3 and 7 are early books. They are also comparatively purer compared to books 4 and 2. Almost
every author on the subject has concluded that books 9 and 10 are the latest. On the basis of this distinction, a
reasonable inference would be that the pure family Mandalas are the early books and the remaining, later ones.
RV 3.23.4 tells us that Devavata, probably a pre Rigvedic ancestor of Bharata clan, established Agni at a spot
called Ilas Place, just as RV 8.103.2 quoted above. This appears to reflect an ancient custom of maintaining a
perpetual fire at the place of permanent residence, a custom still followed by many orthodox Brahmin families
in India. The Zoroastrians also have such a custom. This seems to indicate that Ilaspada or Ilas place was the
original home of Bharatas or Vedic Aryans.

dasa ksipah purvyam simajijanan sujaatam maatrsu priyam aghnim stuhi daivavaatam devasravo
yo janaanaamasad vasi
ni tvaa dadhe vara aa prthivyaa ilayaas pade sudinatve ahnam
drsadvatyaam maanusa aapaaayam sarasvatyaam revadaghnedidihi
3 Him nobly born of old the fingers ten produced, him whom his Mothers counted dear.
Praise Devavatas Agni, thou Devasravas, him who shall be the peoples Lord.
4 He set thee in the earths most lovely station, in Ilas place, in days of fair bright weather.
On man, on Apaya, Agni! on the rivers Drsadvati, Sarasvati, shine richly.

Griffith has translated Maanusha in verse 4 as on man. But according to description in Mahabharata of
important pilgrimage centers around Kurukshetra, there was a place known then as Manusa in the area. The place
is now known as Mansa, about 30 KM west of Kurukshetra, still a pilgrim centre. In any case Griffiths translation
as on man makes no sense in the given context. Mahabharata then says that there was a river called Apaga, east
of Maanusa, another important place of pilgrimage. Mahabharata also says Ilayaaspada or Ilspada or Ilas place
was near a place called Saaraka. It is now known as Shergadh. Incidentally, according to Puranas, Chandravamsi
line started with Ilas son, Pururuvas. Thus, the most important Vedic kings like Bharata, Divodasa and Sudas
were her decedents. Kuruskhetra got its name from another later King of the same line, Kuru. It is probable
that Kurushetra was a later name for Ilayas Pada or these places were close to each other. Ila is invoked in the
Apri Suktas of all the ten families of composers in the Rigveda. Both Drsadvati or Dirshadvati and Sarasvati were
ancient rivers which flowed through this area and Apaya could be another which flowed between these.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 97

The following verse again mention this myth.

RV 3.29.4

ilaayastva pade vayam naabha prthivya adhi

jaatavedo ni dhimahyaghne havyaya vohave
4 In Ilas place we set thee down, upon the central point of earth,
That, Agni Jatavedas, thou mayst bear our offerings to the God

It says Agni Jatavedas or Fire was set down at Ilas place, and the place is described as Naabha prthivya
or earths naval or the central point of earth.
Thus all the place names like Ilas Place, Maanusha or Mansa, rivers like Apaya, Dristavati and Sarasvati
mentioned in RV 3.23.4, can now be identified around Kurukshetra, in present day Haryana, east of Gaghar river
(possibly what is now left of the legendary River Sarasvati) and its dried up tributaries. It is also apparent that
Vedic Aryans considered this area the holiest place on earth. The confirmation of these geographic landmarks
in Mahabharata and the fact that some of these exists to this day as pilgrimage centres, should be considered
as emphatic confirmation that during the composition of Rigveda Mandala 3, Vedic Aryans considered the area
around present day Kurushetra as their ancestral home land. The adulatory tone of the verses is very unlikely if
they were recent migrants in the area and seems to suggest that this area was their original Home Land. The
description of the area in glowing terms as most lovely station on earth and as Vara Pridhviya or as earths gift
and Naabha prthivya or The center of earth clearly points to this. If the places around present day Kurukshetra
was the Home Land of Vedic Aryans, their expansion recorded in Rigveda, would obviously be from places east
of River Sarasvati towards River Indus and beyond.
The relative order of Rigvedic Mandalas may be only of academic interest. But its implication for the possible
direction of movement or expansion of Vedic Aryans is of great importance for the subject of this book. If the
Vedic Aryans considered areas east of River Sarasvati as their original home land or if they were expanding from
areas east of Punjab, across Punjab onto Afghanistan during the composition of Rigveda, as it seems to have
happened on the basis of the above, it will seriously destabilize the Aryan Invasion or Migration Theories and also
by extension, the Steppe Home Land model; at least as they are formulated at present.

3.3.4 References to Rivers Sarasvati, Indus and Ganges in Rigvedic Verses

As mentioned earlier, books 6, 3 and 7 describes Sarasvati as a mighty river. These books have only a few references
to River Indus and even these are contested. Books 4, 5, 8, and the books 9 and 10 on which we have consensus
that they are the latest, mention eastern rivers like Ganga and Yamuna, middle rivers like those in Punjab and
western rivers of Indus and its tributaries and rivers in Afghanistan. This implies that the Vedic Aryans were
expanding from areas east of Sarasvati towards Afghanistan and beyond during the composition of Rigveda. As
this might seem to be inconsistent with The South Russia Home Land model, many authors have interpreted the
evidence differently. Some of these are discussed below.
A well known scholar, who has many publications on the subject, has argued that River Sarasvati was already
drying up by the time of composition of Mandala 3 on the basis of RV 3.33 reproduced below (as translated by
Griffith)

1. FORTH from the bosom of the mountains, eager as two swift mares with loosened rein contending,
Like two bright mother cows who lick their youngling, Vipas and Sutudri speed down their waters.
2 Impelled by Indra whom ye pray to urge you, ye move as twere on chariots to the ocean.
Flowing together, swelling with your billows, O lucid Streams, each of you seeks the other.
3 I have attained the most maternal River, we have approached Vipas, the broad, the blessed.
98 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Licking as twere their calf the pair of Mothers flow onward to their common home together.
4 We two who rise and swell with billowy waters move forward to the home which Gods have made us.
Our flood may not be stayed when urged to motion. What would the singer, calling to the Rivers?
5 Linger a little at my friendly bidding rest, Holy Ones, a moment in your journey.
With hymn sublime soliciting your favour Kusikas son hath called unto the River.
6 Indra who wields the thunder dug our channels: he smote down Vrtra, him who stayed our currents.
Savitar, God, the lovely-handed, led us, and at his sending forth we flow expanded.
7 That hero deed of Indra must be lauded for ever that he rent Ahi in pieces.
He smote away the obstructors with his thunder, and eager for their course forth flowed the waters.
8 Never forget this word of thine, O singer, which future generations shall reecho.
In hymns, O bard, show us thy loving kindness. Humble us not mid men. To thee be honour!
9 List quickly, Sisters, to the bard who cometh to you from far away with car and wagon.
Bow lowly down; be easy to be traversed stay, Rivers, with your floods below our axles.
10 Yea, we will listen to thy words, O singer. With wain and car from far away thou comest.
Low, like a nursing mother, will I bend me, and yield me as a maiden to her lover.
11 Soon as the Bharatas have fared across thee, the warrior band, urged on and sped by Indra,
Then let your streams flow on in rapid motion. I crave your favour who deserve our worship.
12 The warrior host, the Bharatas, fared over the singer won the favour of the Rivers.
Swell with your billows, hasting, pouring riches. Fill full your channels, and roll swiftly onward.
13 So let your wave bear up the pins, and ye, O Waters, spare the thongs;
And never may the pair of Bulls, harmless and sinless, waste away.

The hymn is a special ode to the two rivers; Sutlej and Beas by Sage Visvamitra for facilitating the crossing
of the rivers by the Bharatas and himself. It does not mention River Sarasvati at all. The logic of the argument
seems to be that it talks of Flowing together, swelling with your billows, O lucid Streams, each of you seeks the
other. The pair of Mothers flow onward to their common home together, which according to him means that the
two rivers, Sutlej and Beas, had already met in a confluence. This, in turn, means that Sutudri or River Sutlej had
already stopped flowing into Sarasvati, resulting reduced water flow in the later and it becoming a week seasonal
river. The logic seems too farfetched. Besides the very next verse says We two who rise and swell with billowy
waters move forward to the home which Gods have made us, which means that the rivers were still separate (we
two; not one) and were flowing separately to their destination. These two rivers meet just below Amritsar at
present and were close to each other even in ancient times. The courses of these rivers were just to the west of
ancient Sarasvati. In any case, the reason for the drying up of Sarasvati is still not quite certain. Sutudris change
of course may or may not have contributed to it. The reason for introducing such an argument is that it has now
become quite evident that there was a large river system flowing through present day Haryana, Rajasthan, Sind
and Kutch in ancient times and it had ceased to be a large river by 2500 BCE and had became a seasonal river or
more or less dried up by about 2000 BCE. There are no apparent reasons to deny that it was the Vedic Sarasvati,
except that it will be difficult to explain under popular chronology. If the composers of family books of Rigveda
had seen a full flowing Sarasvati River, these texts will have to be dated at least to the middle of third millennium
BCE. This will seriously undermine the prevailing chronology. But the inference based on the contents of the
above hymn, that River Sarasvati was drying up by the time the family books were being composed, seems quite
unwarranted.
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 99

This hymn is considered as another historical hymn, as it is thought to record the movement of Vedic Aryans
from west to east. But the hymn itself do not say that the Bharatas were crossing from the west to east and there
is absolutely no reason to assume that the crossing was in that direction, except that it is in conformity with the
popular model. It could have, just as well, been from east to west.
The word Sindhu often occurs in Rigveda in the plural, and can be translated only as rivers. Where the word
occurs in the singular, it often refers to some other river, which is clear from the context of the reference itself.
Many authors have argued that RV 2.15.6 and 7.33.3, quoted below, actually refer to crossings of the River Indus
by the incoming Indo Aryans. An examination of the two verses shows that these verses might not be referring
to the Indus at all, but to other rivers or just rivers. They also do not refer to the crossings of these rivers, leave
alone doing it from west to east. In both verses the term mistranslated is Sindhum. Griffith has translated the
first as stream and the second as river; and not as River Indus. In Rigveda there are many instances where the
term is used in the sense of just any river. Griffiths translation of the two verses is reproduced below.
RV 2.15.6
With mighty power he made the stream flow upward, crushed with his thunderbolt the car of Usas,
Rending her slow steeds with his rapid coursers. These things did Indra in the Somas rapture.
The context is an obscure myth about the coming of Usas or morning and how Indras sword facilitated the
process. It has nothing to do with Indus or any river.
RV 7.33.3
So, verily, with these he crossed the river, in company with these he slaughtered Bheda.
So in the fight with the Ten Kings, Vasisthas! did Indra help Sudas through your devotions.
In RV 7.33.3, the context is the Battle of ten kings and the river referred to is clearly Parusni. Western
Indologists generally believe that the Battle of ten kings was a historic reference to the Vedic Aryans invading
North West India from the west. The battle was fought on the banks Parusni River (Ravi) and the enemies of
Sudas are described in VII.5.3 as the people of the Asikni (ayann asikni rasamana). Thus the word Sindhum
here clearly means River Parusni or Ravi. The Asikni (River Chenab) is to the west of the Parusni. Hence it
is clear that the enemies of Sudas were coming from the west of the Parusni, while Sudas was fighting from the
east. Griffith has inexplicably translated the term Asikni as dark-hued. In RV 7.83.1, two of the tribes fighting
against Sudas; the Prthus and the Parsus; are described as marching eastwards (praca) towards him. The lands
of Prthus and the Parsus or Parthians and Persians are to the west. This again seems to indicate that Sudas was
not coming from west towards South Asia, but was facing the enemy coming from the west.
Two other verses which use the term Sindhu in the sense of any river is given below.
RV 7.95.1
pra ksodasa dhayasa sasra esa sarasvati dharunamayasi puh
prabaabadhaana rathyeva yaati visva apo mahina sindhuranyah
1. THIS stream Sarasvati with fostering current comes forth, our sure defense, our fort of iron.
As on a car, the flood flows on, surpassing in majesty and might all other waters.
Sindhu-ranyah is translated by Griffith as all other waters
RV 8.54.4
pusa visnurhavanam me sarasvatyavantu sapta sindhavah
aapo vaatah parvataaso vanaspatih srnotu prthivi havam
4 May Pusan, Visu, and Sarasvati befriend, and the Seven Streams, this call of mine:
May Waters, Wind, the Mountains, and the Forest-Lord, and Earth give ear unto my cry.
100 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Sapta sindhavah is translated as Seven Streams. The expression Sapta sindhavah often found in the later
Mandalas of Rigveda, can only mean many streams or land of many streams. Obviously it cannot mean many
River Sindhus. Thus, it is clear that Sindhu can mean stream. Most occurrence of the word Sindhum or its
variants in Mandalas 6, 3 and 7 appears to be of this category.
Some of the references to what could be River Ganga and the interpretation by mainstream authors is given
below.
The name Ganga occurs in two Rgvedic hymns. There is some doubt about the reference in RV 6.45.31, mostly
because the mention of River Ganga in the possibly the oldest mandala of Rigveda cannot be explained under the
steppe home land model favored by many scholars. Its occurrence in RV 10.75 Nadistuti Sukta is quite strait
forward and cannot be denied. But as the reference is in the last Mandala, nobody has tried to propose a woman
with that name or another river of that same name in Afghanistan.
The verses are reproduced below.
6.45.31

31 Brbu hath set himself above the Panis, over their highest head,
Like the wide bush on Gangas bank.

The original term is ganghyah. The word is said by some to be the name of a woman. Griffith translates the
term as Gangas bank. Those who say that Ganga here means a woman, would have to explain what a womans
bank and wide bush could mean.
The name Jahnavi, which was an ancient name of River Ganga, also occurs in two hymns; RV 3.58.6 and RV
1.116.19. These are also controversial for the same reason and is translated by the scholars as something other
than the name of a river.
RV 1.116.18,19

yadayatam divodaasaya vartirbharadvajayasvina hayanta

revaduvaha sacano ratho vam vrsabhasca simsumarasca yukta
rayim suksatram svapatyamayuh suviryam naasatya vahanta
aa jahnaavim samanasopa vaajaistrirahno bhagham dadhatimayaatam
18 When to his house ye came, to Divodaasa, hasting to Bharadvaaja, O ye Asvins,
The car that came with you brought splendid riches: a porpoise and a bull were yoked together.
19 Ye, bringing wealth with rule, and life with offspring, life rich in noble heroes; O Nasatyas,
Accordant came with strength to Jahnus children who offered you thrice every day your portion.

RV 3.58.6

puranamokah sakhyam sivam vam yuvornara dravinam jahnavyam

punah krnvanah sakhya sivani madhva mademasaha nu samanah
6 Ancient your home, auspicious is your friendship: Heroes, your wealth is with the house of Jahnu.
Forming again with you auspicious friendship, let us rejoice with draughts of meath together.

The original term in RV 3.58.6 is Jahnaavyaam and in RV 1.116.19 is jahnaavim . Griffith translates it as
Jahnus children (1.116.19) and the house of Jahnu (3.58.6). I am not sure if the vyaam became vim because
of natural evolution of language or it can have as different meanings as Griffith assigns for them. If the word is
taken as the name of River Ganga, the verse can be translated as
3.3. EVIDENCES FROM THE VEDAS 101

Your ancient home, your auspicious friendship,

O Heroes, your wealth is on the banks of the Jahnavi.

This translation makes far more sense than that of Griffith. In any case your wealth is with the house of
Jahnu seems to make little sense. It seems to refer to some old memory that connect the ancestors of Bharatas
to the area around the place then known as Ilaspada or Ilas place.
In later Sanskrit literature, the word Jahnavi or the daughter of Jahnu often occurs as another name of
River Ganga, though the phonetics seems to have undergone some minor change. For example, Padma Purana
section 62, which is about River Ganga, mentions Jahnavi as a name of the river.
The name is based on the Puranic story of King Bhagiradha. It is said that the Suryavamsi King Bhagiradha,
did penance for a thousand years to make the heavenly River Ganga to flow through his land and thereby gain
the release his 60,000 ancestors (sons of King Sagara) from the curse of saint Kapila. Finally, Lord Siva agrees
to release Ganga and allow her to flow on earth. But the great impact of the huge rivers fall to the earth causes
the deep meditation of Sage Jahnu to be broken as it destroys the Rshis abode. Enraged, the sage drinks up the
entire waters of Ganga. Bhagiradha again prays to the sage, who finally agrees to release Ganga, which then flows
down from Himalayas. It is said that River Ganga got the name of Jahnavi because it came out of the mouth of
Sage Jahnu.
Thus, there is no reason to conclude that Jahnavi is the name of some obscure person, as many authors have
done or to assume that the Rigvedic and Puranic words are different or had different meaning. Besides, verse
1.116.18 also mentions the Gangetic dolphin, Simsumaara.37 Griffith also has translated the term as porpoise
or dolphin.
Witzel says that Jahnavi is the name of a clan. He says RV passages only speak about an ancient clan or
deity. I have not come across any elaboration to justify this assertion, but since we have a reference to the
Gangetic dolphin in the previous verse and Puranic use of the term as another name of River Ganges, the burden
of proof falls on those making such assertion and Occams razor applies.
RV 10.75 The Nadistuti Sukta

5 Favour ye this my laud, O Ganga, Yamuna, O Sutudri, Parusni and Sarasvati: With Asikni, Vitasta,
O Marudvrdha, O Arjjikiya with Susoma hear my call.
6 First with Trstama thou art eager to flow forth, with Rasa, and Susartu, and with Svetya here, With
Kubha; and with these, Sindhu and Mehatnu, thou seekest in thy course Krumu and Gomati.

Here there can be no denying that what is mentioned is River Ganga, as the ancient names of all rivers in
North West is listed in more or less correct geographical order.
If the earliest composers of Rgveda were familiar with River Ganga, it will be very difficult to explain under
the steppe home land model.

3.3.5 Conclusion
Assuming Max Mullers chronology to be correct, one would have expected many references to the process of
migration in Vedas, particularly in the earlier parts, as these were assumed to have been composed during or
immediately after the arrival of IE speakers in Punjab. The route of migration across Hindukush Mountains must
have been extremely hazardous and must have taken years, if not decades, 3500 years Before Present (BP) and
as such would have been remembered for many generations by this society which remembered their songs in oral
37
Gangetic dolphins (Platanista gangetica) often called blind or side swimming dolphins may have been blind for the past 20 Million
years, though they appear to be conscious of light and dark. They navigate by echolocation, a form of sonar navigation. They
are found in Ganges, Brahmaputra and their tributaries and are facing extinction. Their fresh water cousins include those found in
Yangtze, Amazon, Irrawaddy and Indus.
102 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

tradition for millennia or more. Michael Witzel is of the view that Sage Vasishta was a first generation immigrant
from Central Asia on the basis of the language style of Mandala 7. If this was so, one would have expected many
references to the migration process in the 104 hymns in Mandala 7 of Rig Veda, all of which are attributed to
Sage Vasishta and his clan. In fact, this absence must be considered a serious weakness of Max Mullers chronology
and the migration/invasion models. Colin Renfrew, Prof. of Archaeology at Cambridge, in his famous work,
Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988, makes the
following comments

...When Wheeler speaks of the Aryan invasion of the Land of the Seven Rivers, the Punjab, he has
no warranty at all, so far as I can see. If one checks the dozen references in the Rig-Veda to the Seven
Rivers, there is nothing in any of them which to me implies an invasion: the land of the Seven Rivers
is the land of the Rig-Veda, the scene of the action. Nothing implies that the Aryas were strangers
there. Nor is it implied that the inhabitants of the walled cities (including the Dasyus) were any more
aboriginal than the Aryas themselves.

The basic premise of Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) and Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) is that Vedic Culture
and Kurgan culture are related. Kurgan culture was mostly a pastoral, nomadic, mobile culture. However there
is little textual evidence in RV even remotely supporting nomadic, mobile life style of the Vedic people. RV has
many references implying a settled, agriculture and domesticated cattle based culture with no memory what so
ever of a long, arduous migration. And most academic scholars are also agreed on the fact that it really cannot
be proved that the Vedic Aryans retained any memory of their extra-Indian associations, and no tradition, of an
early home beyond the frontier, survives in India. Many other ancient cultures do have such myths.

3.4 Rg-Veda and the Iranian Avesta

3.4.1 History of Avesta
Avesta is a large collection of texts that constitute the Sacred Books of the Zoroastrians. Avestan is the language
of Avesta and Zend is their translation and commentary in Pahlavi Scripture. A version of the extinct language,
Avestan, is also sometimes called Zend. These texts, like Vedic literature, are clearly from different periods and
in its present form, the Avesta38 is a compilation from various sources, and its different parts date from different
periods and vary widely in character. In this respect it has strong similarity with Vedic Literature, as the four
Vedas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas , Upanisads and the Sutra Texts are all from different periods, with different content
and even different language. The etymology and the exact meaning of the term, Avesta, cannot be considered
established. The word Avesta is written in Pahlavi as apistak or apastak. If the word is avistak, then it
might have been derived from Vedic term ved (to know) as many Avestan words seem to be. Thus Avesta
might mean wisdom, knowledge. Zoroastrianism is known by various names like dualism, according to its main
tenet; Mazdeism, from its supreme god; Magism, from its priestly order; Zoroastrianism, from its founder and
Fire-worship from its most apparent object of worship.
The Zend was first translated and published in the west in 1771 by the French scholar Anquetil Duperron. He
is also known for his trasalation of Upanisads from Persian Language to Latin.39
38
Avesta is the name the Mazdean religious tradition had given to the collection of its sacred texts. It is believed that these texts
contain laws of the Zoroastrian supreme god Ahura Mazda as propagated by Zoroaster
39
Dara Shukoh, the elder son and heir apparent of Emperor Shah Jahan, is said to have heard about Upanisads while staying
in Kashmir as a prince. Later he invited several Vedic/Sanskrit scholars from Benares to Delhi, who assisted him in the work of
translation of 50 Upanisads under the title of Sirr-i-Akbar (The Greatest Mystery). The translation was finished in 1657. Three
years after the accomplishment of this work, in 1659, the prince was put to death by his brother Aurangzib. Earlier under Akbars
reign (1556-1586) similar translations had been prepared, but neither those nor the translations of Dara Shukoh attracted the attention
of European scholars till the year 1775. In that year one M. Bernier brought a copy of the work to France. Anquetil Duperron got
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 103

The reason for the interest in the book of Avesta, apart from its religious significance to its followers, is two
fold; on the one hand, it contains the first Mazdean speculations and, on the other hand, it contains the only
evidence for Avestan, an Old Iranian language which together with Old Persian constitutes the Iranian sub-division
of the Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-European, since both Avestan and Old Persian are extinct now. Besides it
has contributed substantially to the theoretical, theological, ritual, moral, ethical and social underpinnings of the
three Semitic religions; Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as medieval Persia had easily the most technologically,
intellectually and culturally advanced society in the vast region between Europe and Central Asia from 6th century
BCE to 7th century CE, apart from politically dominating the area during that time. Stories of Zoroaster (or
Zarathushtra Spitama the name often mentioned in Pahalvi texts), particularly about his wisdom, were part of
common flock lore in most of the known lands from Atlantic coast of Western Europe to South East Asia for
almost 3000 years or more. Thus more people in this vast area were familiar with his name than any other for
almost three millennia, remarkably so on account of his wisdom and not for his military conquests or religious and
moral teachings.
The Yaz culture of Bactria-Margiana has been regarded as a likely archaeological remains of the early Eastern
Iranian culture described in the Avesta. It is associated with north-eastern Iran, but Old Persian was language of
the south west, the cultural heartland of ancient Persia. These two together constitute what is called Old Iranian.
The Avestan language is attested in roughly two forms, known as Old Avestan or Gathic Avestan and Younger
Avestan. But intriguingly Younger Avestan do not appear to have evolved from Old Avestan. The two differ
not only in time, but are also different dialects. Every Avestan text, regardless of whether originally composed
in Old or Younger Avestan, underwent several transformations. The script, in which they are available today,
consists of 14 (or 16) letters for vowels and 37 letters for consonants. The large number of letters used suggests
that their invention resulted from an attempt to record an orally recited text with all its phonetic nuances. The
Gathas are in verse which are extremely terse and in which grammatical constructs are an exception. Here again
there is noticeable similarity with Rgveda. A dependency on the medieval texts for deciphering Gathas is often
discouraged as the commentaries are frequently conjectural. Some scholars argue that an interpretation using
younger texts is inadvisable owing to the risks of mis-interpretation. But perhaps such dependencies might be
necessary as there are no independent alternate sources.
The difficulties in deciphering the texts is summed up in the following word by a leading scholar

No one who has ever read a stanza of [the Gathas] in the original will be under any illusions as to
the labour which underlies the effort [of translating the hymns]. The most abstract and perplexing
thought, veiled further by archaic language, only half understood by later students of the seers own
race and tongue, tends to make the Gathas the hardest problem to be attempted by those who would
investigate the literary monuments.

The indigenous history of the sacred books is told in several Pahlavi texts. In essence the traditional history
is as follows: The twenty-one nasks or books of the Avesta were conveyed by Ahura Mazda, the supreme god
of Zoroastrianism to Zarathustra or Zoroaster. He in turn brought it to king Vistaspa, believed to be the then
king of Bactria. The latter or, according to another tradition, Dara Darayan, had two copies of them written
down in golden letters in dried ox hide, one of which was deposited in the treasury, the other in the house of the
archives. Thus according to tradition, these texts were put in writing from very ancient times, though whether
the texts were available in written form in the beginning is not quite certain. These collection of the texts suffered
access to it and translated it into French and Latin. That Latin translation was published in 1801 and 1802. This translation, though
it attracted considerable interest among contemporary scholars, was written in so utterly unintelligible a style, that it required tenacity
and persistence to read and understand it. It is doubtful if Duperron himself had any understanding of what he was translating.
The well known philosopher, Schopenhauer, however, not only had these abilities, but had the courage to declare that the work
contained unparalleled treasures of Vedic wisdom. Schopenhauer not only read this translation carefully, but he made no secret of it
that his own philosophy was very close to the fundamental doctrines of the Upanishads. He dwells on it again and again in his writings
and was a lifelong admirer of it.
104 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

a disaster when Alexander of Macedonia invaded Iran. The invasion in 321 BCE put an end to the Achaemenian
Empire and devastated the royal treasuries in which the Avesta was reportedly kept. The Avesta was destroyed or
dispersed by the Greeks, who translated into their own language the scientific passages of which they could make
use. But this testimony of the Mazdean religious tradition is often incoherent and cannot be taken literally.
An effort was begun during the Parthian period, a hundred years after the invasion of Alexander, to collect
what remained in priestly memories and scattered records and this was known as Arsacid Avesta.40 The collection
was collated, screened, augmented, and canonized centuries later during the reign of the Sasanian King Chosroes
I or Kosrow 1 in about 560 CE, nearly nine hundred years after the originals were destroyed. These are known as
Pahlavi scriptures or Pahlavi texts.
The Sasanian dynasty (224 651 CE) established by Ardashir I made, Pahlavi, a now extinct member of
the Iranian language group, descended from a dialect of Parthian, the official language of the empire. He also
declared Zoroastrianism to be the state religion. As a result of these two events, Pahlavi became the language
of Zoroastrianism. In 652 CE the Sasanian empire was overrun by Islamic forces. But minority communities
continued to communicate in Pahlavi, which eventually became the foundation for Modern Persian languages such
as Persian and Dari.
The collapse of the theocratic Sasanian Empire in 652 CE, left the Zoroastrian church without its dominating
royal support, and the whole system, including the Avestan and Pahlavi scriptures, began to fall apart. Little is
known about the history of the Avestan texts from the collapse of the Sasanian Empire and the oldest manuscripts
now available. It is certain that the Muslim conquest and the dispersal of the Mazdean communities caused a
weakening of the religious tradition and a decline of the liturgical elocution, which disrupted the preservation and
transmission of the Avesta. Portions of the Pahlavi scriptures that survived these disasters were put in writing
after 10th century CE, and also probably revised to suit the times, in what might have been a haphazard salvage
operation. It is estimated that less than a third of the entire collection has been salvaged.
Thus the collection suffered at least two long periods of decline and destruction. The texts available today are
those that were put together, first in the first centuries of Common Era, and again sometime after 1200 CE.
Yet another uncertain factor is the probable mismatch between the original phonetics of a language and the
script used to write them down, particularly when the script is not created to represent the language. This is
because the script might not have the special symbols to represent the phonetic peculiarities of the language. The
Arsacid Avesta, if it really existed, might have been in Aramaic or a cuneiform script which was unsuitable for
Avesta and its phonetic peculiarities. The Pahlavi texts are in a phonetics based script. These probably might
have had profound effect on the fidelity of the texts. Once put in writing and accepted as official version, the
phonetics tent to conform to the official written version. This process makes etymological derivation of the words
impossible many centuries later. There are many scholars who suspect that Old Avesta might have suffered such
distortions.
Thus we have no way of knowing if the text now available is more or less the same as the original or there are
major deviations.
Similarly the original parts of the Avesta cannot be dated accurately, nor can their language be located
geographically. Its phonetic characteristics seem to suggest that this was not the dialect of Pars/Fars. 41 Avestan
is closely related to ancient Persian Language of Fars, as found in the cuneiform inscriptions of Achaemenid
Empire, from which modern Persian has evolved. But the differences are considerable as the phonetics, syntax
and semantics differs considerably. Thus Avestan is quite unlikely to have been a language of Persian heartland
or even of the greater Persian cultural horizon. The phonetic characteristics are so uncertain that it can be
located in any neighbouring area without having to face serious counter arguments. When these languages were
40
Parthian or Arsacid Empire (247 BCE to 224 CE) got its name from Arsaces 1 of Parthia, the first king of the dynasty. All later
monarchs of the Arsacid empire officially named themselves after this first king.
41
Fars, one of the thirty-one provinces of Iran, is known as the cultural capital of Iran. Its administrative center is Shiraz. It is the
original homeland of the ancient Persians. Persia and Persian both derive from the Hellenized form of the root word Pars. Thus Fars
was the heart land of Persian culture.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 105

first deciphered in the nineteenth century, scholars were mystified by these differences. Why would Zoroaster
and his followers compose the Gathas in a foreign language? One plausible explanation might be that Gathas
were composed in some geographical area outside, but close to Persian heart land and the followers of Zoroaster
migrated to the area after his life time.
Another intriguing aspect of Avesta is that it do not seem to contain any reference to any areas in the Persian
heart land or present day South West Iran, in spite of the fact that Avestan and Old Persian are believed to be
sister languages. The Vendidad, has a list of sixteen best lands created by Ahura Mazda for Aryas; but it do not
seem to include lands in Persian heartland. The reason for this is unclear. One possible reason could be that the
migration towards the west happened after the completion of the texts of Avesta.
Similarly the society that created Avesta also appear to have been unaware of lands to the north of them in
Central Asia. This was so even in the case of later Iranians. Iranians absence of any sure knowledge of the very
existence of the Aral Sea as a separate body of water with a name of its own, even as late as the time of Alexander
support such a conclusion. Even southern parts of Central Asia; including Bactria, was probably peripheral areas
in Avesta. This would be quite unlikely if the Indo-Iranians had migrated from the steppes through Urals and
North Western Central Asia.
Another view is that Bactria was the home land of Zoroaster. But this could be the result of later Bactrian
kings trying to appropriate the legacy of Zoroaster to themselves, as they became the most prominent political
power in the area later.
The date of Zoroaster, i.e., the date of composition of the Old Avestan Gathas, is also unknown. Classical
Greek writers such as Plutarch and Diogenes proposed dates of 6000 BCE. Dates proposed in scholarly literature
diverge widely, between the 18th and the 6th centuries BCE. Until the late 17th century, Zoroaster was generally
dated to about the 6th century BCE, which coincided with the Traditional date. However the issue is far from
settled.
The Traditional date originates in the period immediately following Alexanders conquest of the Achaemenid
Empire in 330 BCE. The Seleucid kings, who gained power following Alexanders death instituted an Age of
Alexander as the new calendrical epoch. This did not appeal to the Zoroastrian priesthood, who then attempted
to establish an Age of Zoroaster. To do so, they needed to establish when Zoroaster had lived, which they did by
counting back the length of successive generations until they concluded, rather randomly, that Zoroaster must have
lived 258 years before Alexander. This estimate then re-appeared in the 9th- to 12th-century texts of Zoroastrian
tradition, which in turn gave the date doctrinal legitimacy.
By the late 19th century, scholars such as Christian Bartholomae and Arthur Emanuel Christensen noted
problems with the Traditional date, namely in the linguistic difficulties that it presented. The Old Avestan
language of the Gathas, which are attributed to the founder himself, is very close to the language of the Rigveda.
Therefore, it seemed implausible that the Gathas and Rigveda could be more than a few centuries apart, suggesting
a date for the oldest surviving portions of the Avesta of roughly the 2nd millennium BCE. A date of 11th or 10th
century BCE is often assumed by many authors. Some believe that the social customs described in the Gathas
roughly coincide with what is known of other pre-historical peoples of that period. The Gathas describe a society
of priests, herdsmen/farmers and nomadic pastoralists with tribal social structures organized at most as small
kingdoms. But this is just speculative presumption at best.
As can be seen from above, all estimates of date of Avesta are at most speculative guesses. At best, we can
tentatively consider a date close to the period of composition of Vedas.

3.4.2 Contents of Avesta

The similarities between Avesta and Vedas as also between Avestan and Vedic language are striking. These are
conspicuous in respect of name elements, words and meters in which the verses are composed. The two cultures
had closely similar myths about a celestial river, about a mountain Meru in case of Hindus and Alborg in case of
Parsis. There were similarities in rituals too. Upanayana is the Vedic initiation ritual for the young. Zoroastrians
106 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

also have a similar ceremony called Navjot which is still practiced by Parsis. Similarly Zoroastrians wear a sacred
thread like the twice born among Hindus, but differently, around the waist. Agni or fire is of central importance
to Vedic religion, just as it is of central importance to Zoroastrians. The Rig- Veda refers to the soma. The
Avesta gives physical descriptions of the plant haoma. Zoroaster is said to have opposed the use of haoma. There
are other similar words in Avesta and Rig-Veda like daha(dasa), hepta (sapta), hindu (sindhu), hiranya (zaranya),
sena or army (haena), yajna (yasna), hotar or priest (zaotar) and many others. Sir William Jones said When I
perused the Zend glossary, I was surprised to find that six or seven out of ten words in them are pure Sanskrit.
Rig-Veda and Avesta have many common Gods and religious us symbols. Some of these include the most
important Vedic Devatas like Indra, Agni, Varuna and Soma, though some of the Vedic demigods like Indra are
evil in Avesta. Similarly Avestan has many words and linguistic forms and usages in common with Vedic and
Sanskrit. But while these as also many ancient myths have been retained in Indic languages and culture, they
have disappeared from Iranian languages and culture long ago.
The Avesta is a set of six books. They are: Yasna, Vispered, Yashts, Vendidad, Herbadistan and Miscellaneous
items. Out of these, Yasna is the most important, as it contains Gathas in older Avestan dialect, hymns thought
to have been composed by Zoroaster himself. Out of its 72 chapters, Y 28 to 34, Y43 to 51 and Y53 constitute
Gathas. The Yasna Haptanghaiti, Avestan for Worship in Seven Chapters, is a set of seven hymns, Yasna 35-41,
within the greater Yasna collection or within the primary liturgical texts of the Zoroastrian Avesta. The name
is from Yasna 42, a Younger Avestan text that follows the seven chapters. While the first two verses, Y. 35.1-2,
of the Yasna Haptanghaiti are in Younger Avestan, the rest of the seven hymns are in Gathic Avestan, the more
archaic form of the Avestan language. Except for the Gathas, which are in metrical verse, other parts of Avesta
are in prose. These Avestan texts are not only from different periods, but the language also differs considerably
within the books and between the books.
The Gathas seems to expound a version of monotheistic philosophy. But the Avesta as a whole is emphatically
dualistic. In the Gathas Angra Mainyu is not yet a proper name or a clearly specific entity. In the one instance
in these hymns where the two words appear together, the concept spoken of is that of a-mainyu(mind or spirit
) and angra, where the word could be in the sense of destructive or inhibitive, Thus the term might have meant
mind or spirit in a negative sense. Similarly, while in later Zoroastrianism, the daevas are demons, this is not
yet as clear in the Gathas. Zoroaster stated that the daevas and their leader Angra Mainyu are wrong gods or
false gods that are to be rejected, but they are not yet demons.
But the religious philosophy of Avesta as a whole is considered dualistic as there are persistent references
to good represented by Ahura Mazda and evil represented by Angra Mainyu and other evil beings created
by Angra Mainyu. It is a world of cosmic dualism, where both the earthly and heavenly worlds are gathered
into conflicting camps of Good and Evil. There is a whole universe of good and evil entities between human
beings and the transcendent God, Ahura Mazda. The Attributes of lesser Gods resembles archangels, and all
the evil concepts have been personified as demons. Influence of these Zoroastrian beliefs is clearly visible in the
three Semitic religions; Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Thus it is possible that Zoroastrianism evolved from a
monotheistic to dualistic philosophy over time.
Interestingly, this Angra (Angiras?)Mainyu or Manyu is mentioned as a godly character in Atharvaveda 4.31
and 4.32.
Atharvaveda 4.32.1 A hymn to Manyu, as translated by Griffith
He who hath reverenced thee, Manyu, destructive bolt! breeds. for himself forthwith all conquering
energy.
Arya and Dasa will we conquer with thine aid, with thee the conqueror, with conquest conquest-sped.
Meaning of the word Manyu in Sanskrit includes - Wrath, mind , mood , mettle ( as of horses ) ; high
spirit or temper , zeal , passion ; rage etc. In the above hymn these attributes appear to have been personified.
Some authors identify this Manyu or Mainyu with Indra in his aspect of fury and passion. This might be valid
considering the extreme contempt and hostility frequently expressed in Avestan towards Manyu as well as Indra.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 107

3.4.3 The Deva-Asura Rivalry in Rigveda, Puranas and Avesta

In Rigveda, most Devas were also Asuras. The word Asura is often used in the sense of some powerful destructive
natural forces or just in the sense of powerful or mighty. It is hardly ever used to designate a evil person or
demigods, as is done in later Purana-Ithihasas. Thus Agni, one of the most important of Vedic gods, was also an
Asura. Varuna, Mitra, Aryaman, the patron of marriages and Rudra also are described as Asura more than once
and also as Devas in other verses. For example, Mitra and Varuna are classified as Asuras in the Rigveda (e.g.
RV 5.63.3), although they are also addressed as Devas (e.g. RV 7.60.12). The word, Asura, including its variants,
asurya and asuratva, occurs 85 times in the Rigveda. In most of these the word, Asura, is used as an adjective,
meaning powerful or mighty. In the Rigveda, two generous kings, as well as some priests, have been described as
Asuras. One hymn prays for an Asura son. In nine hymns, Indra is described as Asura . Five times, he is said to
possess asurya, and once he is said to possess asuratva. Devas are often personification of natural phenomena like
morning as in the case of Ushas, which means dawn, or thunder as often the case with Indra, who often take
the form of thunder and lightning. However, by the time the Brahmana texts were written, the Devas are distinct
individual demigods and the character of the Asuras had become negative.
The translation of RV 5.63.3, RV 7.6.1 and RV 7.30.3 by Ralff Griffith is reproduced below

3 Imperial Kings, strong, Heroes, Lords of earth and heaven, Mitra and Varuna, ye ever active Ones,
Ye wait on thunder with the many-tinted clouds, and by the Asuras magic power cause Heaven to rain.

One hymn by Rshi Vasishta dedicated to Agni starts out as praise of the Asura
RV 7.6.1

1. PRAISE of the Asura, high imperial Ruler, the Manly One in whom the folk shall triumph-
I laud his deeds who is as strong as Indra, and lauding celebrate the Fort-destroyer

RV 7.30.3

3 When fair bright days shall dawn on us, O Indra, and thou shalt bring thy banner near in battle,
Agni the Asura shall sit as Herald, calling Gods hither for our great good fortune.

Another hymn which seem to treat Agni, Varuna and Soma as Asuras and seem to speak of a rivalry between
these and Indra is reproduced below.
RV 10.124

1. COME to this sacrifice of ours, O Agni, threefold, with seven threads and five divisions.
Be our oblation-bearer and preceder: thou hast lain long enough in during darkness.
2 I come a God foreseeing from the godless to immortality by secret pathways,
While I, ungracious one, desert the gracious, leave mine own friends and seek the kin of strangers.
3 1, looking to the guest of other lineage, have founded many a rule of Law and Order.
I bid farewell to the Great God, the Father, and, for neglect, obtain my share of worship.
4 I tarried many a year within this altar: I leave the Father, for my choice is Indra.
Away pass Agni, Varuna and Soma. Rule ever changes: this I come to favour.
5 These Asuras have lost their powers of magic. But thou, O Varuna, if thou dost love me,
O King, discerning truth and right from falsehood, come and be Lord and Ruler of my kingdom.
6 Here is the light of heaven, here allis lovely; here there is radiance, here is airs wide region.
108 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Let us two slaughter Vrtra. Forth, O Soma! Thou art oblation: we therewith will serve thee.
7 The Sage hath fixed his form by wisdom in the heavens: Varuna with no violence let the waters flow.
Like women-folk, the floods that bring prosperity have eau lit his hue and colour as they gleamed and
shone.
8 These wait upon his loftiest power and vigour: he dwells in these who triumph in their Godhead;
And they, like people who elect their ruler, have in abhorrence turned away from Vrtra.
9 They call him Swan, the abhorrent floods Companion, moving in friendship with celestial Waters.
The poets in their thought have looked on Indra swiftly approaching when Anustup calls him.

The hymn is mostly elliptical as Griffith would say and its import is unclear. But it seems to call Agni,
Varuna and Soma as Asuras and the poet seems to be changing his allegiance from them to Indra. It is also
possible that the poet is talking about natural forces throughout.
Unlike in Rgveda, in Itihasa-Puranas, Asuras become individuals. But they are rarely evil. The rivalry between
Devas and Asuras is a recurring theme in Itihasa- Puranas, many other Hindu texts as well as myths. According
to Puranas, Devas and Asuras were half brothers, both being descendants of Kashyapa, a Manasaputra or wish-
born-son of Brahma or as per Ramayana 1.70.20, the son of Marichi, a wish-born son of Brahma. The Puranic
story is somewhat like this : Kasyapa married 13 or 23 daughters of Daksha Prajapati; another wish-born son
of Brahma. Out of these sisters Aditi was the mother of Devas, Diti, the mother of Daityas, Danu, the mother of
Danavas, Arishta, the mother of Gandharvas, Khasa, the mother of Yakshas, Kadru, the mother of Nagas and so
on. Daityas and Danavas were Asuras.
According to the Vishnu Purana, during the Samudra manthan or churning of the ocean, the daityas came
to be known as Asuras because they rejected Varuni, the goddess of sura or wine, while the Devas accepted her
and came to be knownas suras. It is significant that it was not for their sins that the Asuras had to be destroyed
but because of their power, their virtue, their knowledge, which threatened that of the gods. The Asuras are often
depicted as good Brahmins (Maha Bali, Prahlada). Many Asura kings were devotees of later Aryan Gods like
Brahma and Siva. Also many of them were just rulers and men of spotless character. A particularly outstanding
example is of Maha Bali. Another is Ravana, whom Lord Ram himself at one point described as a Maha-
brahman. He had unmatched scholarship in the four Vedas and six Vedangas; each of his ten heads representing
one of these. Thus he was a Rakshasa, Asura and a scholarly Brahmin at the same time. In order to explain the
demonization of Asuras, mythology was created to show that though the asuras were originally just, good, and
virtuous, their nature had gradually changed. Another intriguing Puranic detail is that Indrani, the wife of Indra
was the daughter of a Daitya or Asura King. The Asuras were depicted to have become proud, vain, to have
stopped performing sacrifices, to violate sacred laws, not visit holy places, not cleanse themselves from sin, to be
envious of Devas, torturous of living beings, creating confusion in everything and to challenge the Devas.
But in the Avesta, Daevas or Devas are evil and Ahuras or Asuras are the gods. Daeva is an Avestan
language term for a particular sort of supernatural entity with disagreeable characteristics. In the Gathas, the
oldest texts of the Zoroastrian canon, the daevas are just wrong gods . In the Younger Avesta, the daevas
are noxious creatures that promote chaos and disorder. The characterization of Daevas becomes progressively
negative. The name, Vendidad or Videvdat, is a corruption of Avestan Vi Daevo Data, Given against the Daevas
or Demons. It has elaborate enumeration of various manifestations of evil spirits, and ways to confound them. In
the texts of the Younger Avesta there is a reference to Zoroaster wrestling with the daevas. Among Daevas, Indra
is a particularly evil ogre and is identified with fraud and treachery. This seem to agree with the character of Indra
as described in Itihasa-Puranas, particularly from a rivals view point and also points to the distinct possibility
that the Indra of Avesta and Indra of Veda-Itihasa-Purana had same origin. Another equally evil one is the demon
of deceit, Druj. In the Vendidad, Druj is a hideous demon of pollution associated with corpses. Druj cognates
with Druhyus, an Indo Aryan tribe.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 109

Ahura Mazda of Avesta has close similarity with Vedic Varuna. Mazda is cognates to Sanskrit medha, which
means intellect. Thus Ahura Mazda might stand for divine intellect. Ahura Mazda, the supreme God of Avesta,
was often invoked in a triad, with Mitra and Burz or Apam Napat.42 The literal meaning of the word Ahura is
light and Mazda is wisdom. Thus He is the lord of light and wisdom. He is the creator and upholder of Arta
(truth) and is the omniscient and omnipotent god who created the universe. It is possible that Devas like Varuna,
Agni, Mitra, Aryaman and Apamnapat are proto Indo-Iranian gods and Indra is a later one from Vedic times.
Similarly there are common concepts like Rta, Dharma and Manthra. It is possible that the split between Porto
Iranians and Porto IndoAryans occurred just as Indra was gaining importance among the later group or even
Indra was one of the reason for the split.

3.4.4 The Unusual Case of Bhargava clan in Rigveda, Puranas and Avesta
The descendants of Sage Bhrgu are called Bhargavas. Angiras, Atharvan43 and Bhrigu are among sages from the
past, mentioned in Rigveda. According to Puranas all three were manasputras(wish-born-son) of Lord Brahma
and also often included among the seven seers or Saptarishies. All three are associated with Fire and are treated
as demigods in RV as well as Puranas. But hymns attributed to Bhrgus are found mostly in late Mandalas of 8, 9
and 10; mostly in the Mandala 10. The Angirases are the Rshies of nearly a third of the Rigvedic hymns, and yet
they appear to have lost their importance after the period of composition of Rigveda. None of the RV hymns seem
to have Atravanas as Rshies; but Atravan is mentioned in three hymns. Bhrgus are mentioned as rshies of less
than 5% of the hymns and even these in the late Mandalas. This is excluding hymns of Mandala 2, which is mostly
by Grtamada clan. Grtsamada was only a Kevala Bhrgu and is described as the son of Sunahotra Bharadvaja of
Angiras clan and adopted by Saunaka, a Rshi of Bhrgu clan. Grtsamadas also have their own Apri Sukta, thus
clearly marking them as non-Bhrgu. Thus it appears that the Bhrgus were kept away during composition of family
books and returned to mainstream only during the composition of books 8, 9 and 10, all later Mandalas.
According to Manusmriti, Bhrigu lived during the time of Manu, the Hindu progenitor of humanity. Along with
Manu, Bhrigu had made important contributions to Manusmriti. Bhrigu had his hermitage near Drishadwati
River and thus lived within Brahmavarta. According toManusmriti The land created by the gods and lying
between the divine rivers Sarasvati and Drsadvati is called Brahmavarta - the region of Brahman. As per
Skanda Purana, Bhrigu later migrated to Bhrigukutch, modern Bharuch on the banks of Narmada River in
Gujarat. According to tradition, he was the first compiler of predictive astrology, and also the author of Bhrigu
Samhita, the astrological(Jyotish) text. The adjectival form of the name,Bhargava, is used to refer to the
descendants of Bhrigu.
Brgus were as ancient and important as Angirases, the dominant composer family of Rigveda. The eponymous
Bhrgu is referred to RV 8.3.9 as a recipient of the special favors of the Gods. Bhrgu is credited with introduction
of Fire and Soma rituals or even as the inventor of these. Some of the references in Rgveda connecting Bhrigus
42
Intriguingly this Apamnapat is the devata of at least one Rig- Vedic hymn (2.35) and find mention in others (7.47.2). Mandala
2 and 7 could be among the oldest in Rig-Veda. Thus it appears that Asura or Ahura Apam-napat was a Vedic Devata in the
initial stages. Rigveda 2.35 describes Apamnapat as a fire-god who originates in water. (RV 2.35.2 apam napada-suryasya mahna
visvanyaryo bhuvana jajana). Griffith has translated the term as The friendly Son of Waters. Similarly in Iranian Avesta the term
mean grandson of waters. Thus it is not a case of accidental similarity of the name.
43
Angiras along with sageAtharvan, is credited with having composed or heard Atharvaveda. Agni is sometimes referred to as
Angiras or as a descendant of Angiras. Brihaspati., the preceptor of Devas, was one among seven sons of Angiras. Bharadwaja, who
composed all hymns of RV Mandala 6,and Vamadeva of Mandala 4 were his descendants. In the Rigvedic myth about the bird messenger
of Indra, Sarama and Panis, Indra drives out cows from where they had been imprisoned by either a demon (Vala) or multiple demons
(the Panis) and gifts them to the Angirasas (RV 3.31, 10.108 and a reference in 8.14).8.14 mentions Vala, instead of Pani. Angirasa
seems part of the myth. Rishi Angiras came to be known as Angira meaning to shining like fire. It comes from the same root as Agni,
for which deity the name is used as an epithet.In some references, he is said to be the father of Agni or fire. Angiras is supposed
to have been associated with Bhrigu in introducing fire worship or Yagna. Buddhist texts refer to Lord Buddha to be the descendent
of Angiras. Sage Atharvans clan is known as the Atharvanas. Atharvan had a great sage Dadhichi as a son. Dadhichi is also often
referred to as a member of the Bhrigu clan. He is also said to have first instituted the fire-sacrifice or yagna.
110 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

to fire include
RV 3.2.4 by Rshi Visvamitra Agni was was a gift of Bhrigu
RV 2.4.2 by Rshi Somahuti of Bhrigu clan Bhrgus who served him (Agni)
in the home of waters set him of old in houses of the living or
The clan of Bhrigu kept Agni among people
RV 4.7.1 by Rshi Vamadeva of Goutama clan Agni was created by Bhrgu in the beginning
RV 1.143.4 by Rshi Dirkhatamas Bhrigu created Agni with his strength
Thus according to Vedas as well as Puranas, Bhrgu was at least as important as Angiras. But in spite of
this it appears that the establishment of Vedic Aryans treated Bhargavas as Persona non Grata. An American
scholar, Robert P. Goldman, in a detailed study of the history of the Bhrgus as it appears from the myths in the
Mahabharata, makes some significant observations.
The mythology clearly sets the Bhrgus apart from the other Brahmanical clans. The myths - unequivocally
mark the Bhrgus as a group set apart from their fellow brahmans. The motifs of hostility, violence and curses
between gods and sages are virtually definitive of the Bhargava cycle..
In the long and complex saga of Sukra and the Asuras, Sukra is twice said to have abandoned the demons to
their fate, and even to have cursed them. The first time he appears to have been motivated simply by a desire to
join the gods and assist at their sacrifice.
The association of the sage Sukra with the Asuras is one of the strangest peculiarities of the Bhargava corpus.
At the same time, the traditions record certain ambiguous moments in this hostility where it appears that the
Bhargava seems unable to decide between the Asuras and their foes on any consistent basis. That one of the
greatest Bhargava sages should regularly champion the Asuras, the forces of chaos and evil - in short, of adharma
- against the Gods or divine personifications of dharma, is perplexing and has no non-Bhargava parallel in the
literature. The origin of the relationship was evidently puzzling to the epic redactors themselves, for the question
is raised at least twice in the Mahabharata. In neither case is the answer given wholly satisfactory. Goldman,
therefore, arrives at two conclusions:
1. The identification of Sukra as the purohita and protector of the Asuras may shed some light on some of the
most basic problems of early Indian and even early Indo-Iranian religion. If, as has been suggested on the basis of
the Iranian evidence, the Asuras were the divinities of Aryans for whom, perhaps, the Devas were demons, then
Sukra and perhaps the Bhargavas were originally their priests.
2. The repeated theme of Sukra and his disciples ultimate disillusionment with the demons and their going
over to the side of the gods may also be viewed as suggestive of a process of absorption of this branch of the
Bhrgus into the ranks of the orthodox brahmins.
According to Puranas, sage Bhrigu not only fights demigods, but even fought all three of the Trinities of
Hinduism; the Brahma, Siva and Vishnu. He cursed Lord Brahma that no one will worship Brahma in Kaliyuga.
To this day, there are very few temples devoted to Lord Brahma (the notable exception being the Brahma Temple
at Pushkar). Bhrigu curses Lord Shiva that he will be worshipped only in Linga form. With Mahavishnu, his fight
ended with Lakmi Devi; the consort of Vishnu and the Goddess of wealth, cursing him that his decedents (Brahmin
castes) will never enjoy material prosperity. The Goddess was angry as Bhrgu had kicked the sleeping Lord with
his foot. Other Puranas have slightly different versions of this story, but the Goddesss curse is common. Puranas
also have stories about the battles fought by Brigus son Sukracarya with Lord Siva. The frequent instances of
Sukracaryas anger and violence towards Devas is strange as he was said to be of good nature and very gentle.
Puranas also have a story about a fight between another Bhargava; Chyavana and Indra. It is said that even
Indras use of his famous sword (Vajrayudha) could not subdue Chyavana. This Vajrayudha itself was made out
of the bones of another Bhargava Rshi; Dadhici, though different puranas narrate this story putting on lot of gloss
over it. There is also the story about the battle between Lord Ram and Bhargava or Parasu Rama in Ramayana.
Thus there seems to be a fundamental inconsistency in the Puranic stories about Bhargavas. How is it possible
that a revered Rshi clan, who have a demigod status, engage in endless battles with Devas and even the Trinities,
who, we are told are the upholders of Dharma ?
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 111

Later story tellers have tried to gloss over these inconsistencies with inane explanations. But the question
mark on the unusual conduct of Bhargavas sticks out like a sore thumb that cannot be hidden. It is clear that the
later composers of Puranas had no clue regarding the reasons for the unseemly anger of the Bhargavas.
A possible answer to the puzzle as to how a respected Rshi clan can side with Adharma, is available in the
Avesta, as pointed out by Goldman. Here the Asuras are the Gods, and Devas are the demons and the Bhrgus
or Atharvans (Athravan) are associated with the Asuras or gods, and the Angirases (Angra) with the Devas or
demons who are on the side of Adharma. The Avesta might also be suggesting a later movement of a group from
among the Bhrgus towards the side of the Deva-worshippers.
There are two groups of Athravan priests in the Avesta, the Kavis and the Spitamas, and the Kavis could have
moved over to the enemies. The Kavis as a class are regularly condemned throughout the Avesta, right from the
Gathas of Zarathustra onwards, though they were also very high in social hierarchy in many references to them.
The story about Kay Kavus is an example. Kavi Ushanas or Kay Kavus is mentioned in the Persian
legend Shahnameh by Ferdowsi which tells the tragic story of the heroes Rustam and his son, Sohrab. Kay
Kavus is an ancient mythical ancestral figure in the Avesta. He is of Kayanian dynasty44 . It is not clear if the
Kayanian Kings are mythical characters or historical; but many of them have name element Kavi. This dynasty
also included Vistaspa, contemporary and patron of Zoroaster. In the Persian legend, King Kay Kavus has great
magical powers, including that of reviving the dead, just as Sukracarya in Puranas. He is good and evil and is
with the gods and demons alternatively. His Persian connect was also explored by Dumezil in his famous book
Plight of the Sorcerer.
There are many things common to Kavi Ushanas or Puranic Sukracarya and Kay Kavus. One is the ability
of both to revive the dead. In Hindu mythology, Kavi Ushanas is the only charector with this power. This is also
the case with Kay Kavus in Persian mythology. Many authors believe that the myths of Kavi Ushanas in India
and Kay Kavus (Kavi+Usanus) in Persia have a common origin. Kavi Ushanas, hence, is not just important in
Hindu Mythology but also has an importance in Indo-Iranian history and myth. Interestingly the name element
Kavi and Kavu or Kao have survived in India to this day, as surnames.
But in the later parts of the Rigveda, Bhargavas are accepted into the Vedic mainstream; and later on, in
post-Rigvedic Hinduism, the Bhrgus actually go on to become the single most important family of Vedic rshis.
They were the dominant group of composers of later texts of Vedic literature. The Bhrgus are the only family to
have extant recessions of all the four Vedas. Some prominent ancient Bhrgus include Jaimini; author of Poorva
Mimamsa, Valmiki, Yaska and Panini. In the Puranas, Parasurama; a Bhrgu and son of Jamadagni, is accorded
the status of an avatar of Maha Vishnu.
Thus, it is clear that some of the most important composers of Rigvedic hymns held Bhrigus in high esteem.
But in some of the early Rgvedic hymns, the Bhrgus are depicted as enemies of Bharatas, the most important
vedic clan, as in RV 7.18.6. RV 7.18.6 seems to indicate that a Bhrgu was the priest of a tribe living in a far
away land, possibly, Parsa or Persia. Incidentally, Sukracarya, the principal priest and advisor of Asuras, was the
son of Bhrgu or was a Bhargava. This may be a pointer to the reason for their absence from the composers of
family books. Some authors have speculated on the possibility that, in the split between worshippers of Devas
and Asuras or between Indo-Aryans and Iranians, Bhrgus went with the Iranians, but one branch of the Bhrgus
might have returned to the ranks of vedic priests at some later time.

3.4.5 Asuras, Anus and Bhigus and Their Possible Counterparts in Avesta.
RV VII.18.14 refers to the Anus and Druhyus, while verse 6 refers to the Bhrgus and Druhyus, thus making it
clear that the terms Anus and Bhrgus are interchangeable. RV V.31 and VIII.74, and V.31.4 describes the Anus
as constructing a chariot for Indra. In IV.16.20, Bhrgus are described as doing the same, thus again pointing to
44
Kavi was a title often used by the kings of the most important dynasty in Avesta, the Kavyan or Kayanian dynasty. In later
times, the Parthian kings often claimed to being descendants of the Kayanians. And yet throughout Avesta one also comes across an
undercurrent of hostility towards Kavies.
112 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

the equivalence. In RV VIII.74.4, which refers to the sacrificial fire of the Anus, there is a reference to an Anu
king named Srutarvan Arksa (son of Rksa). Both the prefix Sruta and the name Rksa are found in the Avesta. In
RV 6.27.8, the Anu King Abhyavartin Chayamana is mentioned as a Parthav. Parthav cognates with Parthava
mentioned in the Bisitun rock edict of Darius 1. 45 Abhyavartin Chayamana had fought the Hariyupiya war on
the side of the Bharatas. These seems to point to a Persian connect of Anu clan and the priestly clan of Brgus.
In the early Books of the Rigveda, the Anus are depicted as inhabitants of the area of the Parusni river
in the centre of the Punjab . RV 7.18 mentions King Kavi Cayamana; persumably a descendant of the earlier
Abhyavartin, but by now living in a far away land as per RV 7.18.6. In the Battle of the Ten Kings described
in the Dasarajna hymns RV 7.18, 33 and 83, fought on the banks of the Parusni, the Anus form a coalition of
ten kings to fight the imperialist expansion of the Bharata King, Sudas. The land and possessions of the Anus in
the area on the banks of the Parusni river, are taken over by the Bharatas, after their victory in the battle (RV
VII.18.13). Indra is said to have given the possessions of the Anu king to the Trtsus, who fought on the side of
Bharatas, after the battle. But the area might have continued to be home to some remnants of the Anu tribe, as
they are again shown as inhabitants of the area in the Late Books. Even in later historical times, it was the area
of the Madras and the Kekeyas, who were said to be the descendent of Anus. But as their lands were taken over,
majority of Anus might have moved west to Iranian plateau, land probably inhabited by their kins.
The vedic priest clans Atharvans and Bhrgus are closely related and it is possible that Zoroastrian priests
Athravans are related to these. The term atharvan is derived from an obsolete stem athar, which means fire,
but it has been lost in later Vedic as well as Sanskrit or in the words of Monier Williams said to be from an obsolete
word ather. Atharvan, thus might literally means fire priests and Atharva Veda is the book of hymns of the
Fire Priests, the Atharvans. In Avestan too atar means fire. Vedic Atharvan is cognate with Avestan Athravan,
but the etymology of the term is not yet conclusively established, both in Vedic as well as Avestan. However when
the history, evolution, geographical area of use and original form of a language are uncertain, etymology of its
words and grammatical forms are difficult to establish and likely to be controversial. Zarathushtra, the founder
of Zoroastrianism, himself is often referred to as an athravan or Fire Priest in Zoroastrian religious texts. Thus
Atharvaveda is associated with Atharvan, while most important parts of Avesta was composed by an Athravan.
Zarathushtra is also said to be a descendant of someone called Spitama. But the identity as well as the etymology
of Spitama is uncertain, but seems to be a cognate of the Sanskrit term svetatama, meaning brightest. The
Avestan priests, Spitamas were probably a branch of the Athravans. In any event, Zarathushtra used fire as the
central symbol of his teachings.
Sage Jamadagni is often treated as the patriarch of Bhrgu clan. The name Jamadagni might be a proto-
Iranian name. It do not contain a name element found the Rigveda. It could be a name which is linguistically
Iranian, rather than Indo- Aryan. The suffix agni as a name-element occur in Avesta. The names of other Bhrgu
composers in the Rigveda shows that most of them contain name-elements in common with the Avesta. The
name of Jamadagnis son is Rama. He is called Rama Jamadagnya or son of Jamadagni, and is the composer
of RV X.110, a late hymn. Jamadagnis son is also known as Parsu Rama or Bhargava Rama in later times.
His image is that of a fearsome warrior, who used a battle axe as his weapon and single handedly annihilated all
Kshatriya Kings. Bhrgus or Bhargavas are often called Kshatra-Brahmins or Warrior Priests. The word Parsu is
45
Bisitun, also spelled Bisotun, or Behistun, mentioned above, was on the old road from Ecbatana, capital of ancient Media, to
Babylon. It was here that the Achaemenid king Darius I the Great (reigned 522-486 BCE) placed his famous trilingual inscription,
the decipherment of which provided an important key for the study of the cuneiform script. The inscription and the accompanying
basrelief were carved in a difficult, though not inaccessible rock face, at the foot of the Zagros Mountains in the Kermanshah region of
Iran. Written in Babylonian, Old Persian and Elamite, the inscription records the way in which Darius, after the death of Cambyses
II (reigned 529-522 bc), killed the usurper Gaumata, defeated the rebels, and assumed the throne. According to the narrative, after
Cambyses, son of Cyrus, ruling from Egypt, killed his brother Smerdis in secrecy, a Magi or priest called Gaumata seized the throne
in Persia. Cambyses died and Darius, taking the throne, deposed the impostor Magi Gaumata with the help of the Zoroastrian god
Ahura Mazda. Gautama is the name of an important Rshi clan of Rgveda. The organization of the Persian territories into satrapies
or provinces is also recorded in the inscription. Parthava is mentioned in it as one of the satrapy. It is believed that this refers to
Parthia. Thus it appears that Kavi Cayamana was a king, or priest-king combained, from Parthia.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 113

assumed to mean battle axe46 . But the word is not used in that sense anywhere in Rgveda. Also there is no other
character in Hindu mythology who uses this unusual weapon. The Parsus are usually identified as the Persians.
This is based on the evidence of an Assyrian inscription from 844 BC referring to the Persians as Parshu, and the
an Inscription of Darius I referring to Parsa as the home of the Persians. Thus Jamadagni, and his son Parsu
Rama, may have had some Iranian connection.
These references in Rigveda tell us that the Anus and Bhrgus are related probably in a ruling class-priests axis.
These references also suggest that Anus had a Persian connection. The Puranas tells us that a Bhrgu; Sucracarya,
was the priest and adviser of Asuras. A reasonable inference from these is that after the split in the Proto Indo
Iranian society, the Anus became Asura worshiping Zoroastrians and Bhrgus or Athervans or Athravans became
their main priests. Bhrigus were known as the Atharvanas; the high priests who worship fire. Fire is central in
Zoroastrian religious practices and their priests were known as fire priests.
Vendidad; one of the books of Avesta, starts with a list of sixteen lands said to have been created by Ahura
Mazda for Aryas. The first among these in Airyana Vaeje and the last is Haptehendu or Saptasindhu, which
is clearly North West India. Most scholars now believe that these sixteen lands were roughly in the area bounded
by River Indus in the south, Eastern Afghanistan in the east, Southern Central Asia in the north and Eastern
Iran in the west. From the evidence of geographical references contained in the extant Avesta, it appears that
the ancient Iranians were unaware of lands to the north of these. For example, as mentioned earlier, even at the
time of Alexanders Invasion of Persia, they did not know the existence of Aral Sea, a large fresh water lake in
the central part of Central Asia. Avestan and Old Persian languages are believed to have evolved from a common
dialect, which again had split from the Proto Indo Iranian. But the apparent ignorance of lands where they lived
earlier (Andronovo; North Western Central Asia), or where their immediate cousins settled (The Persian heartland
of South West Iran), could be a pointer to some serious shortcomings in our assumptions of the pre-history of
ancient Iranians. Similarly, it is believed that the Proto Indo Iranian dialect evolved into two variants; The Vedic
and Avestan. Avestan later evolved into Old Avestan and Old Persian. Old Avestan was mostly spoken in North
East Iran, Southern Central Asia and parts of Afghanistan, while Old Persian was the language of South West
Iran. Thus Avestan should be much closer to Old Persian than to Vedic. But we find that Avestan and Avesta are
much closer to Vedic and Vedas than to the languages and myths of Persian heart land, linguistically, culturally
or mythologically. In fact Avesta seems to be Ignorant of the existence of land to the west of them.
Thus, the available data and their realistic interpretation seems to suggest that Porto Zoroastrians had split
from a common Vedic religion and came from the same cultural milieu at some time in the pre-historic past. This
conclusion should follow from the following brief recap of what is discussed above.

In the earliest Vedic Society, devas and asuras were both demigods or nature gods. Gradually the society split
into Deva worshippers and Asura worshippers. The priestly rivalry based on such differing belief systems led
to political conflict. The conflict probably took place in the North West India. The Dasrajna Hymns might
be a record of this conflict.

The reason might be partly religious; Deva worship verses Asura worship, rituals (Yagnas) and use of Soma.
In RV 7:6:3, the enemies of Vedic Aryans are described as The foolish, faithless, rudely-speaking niggards,
without belief or sacrifice or worship. They are also accused of following different rites (RV 8:70). All
46
The Battle Axe culture or The Corded Ware culture is an enormous European archaeological horizon that begins in the late
Neolithic (Stone Age), flourishes through the Copper Age and culminates in the early Bronze Age (2900-2400 BCE). Because of their
supposed possession of both the horse and wheeled vehicles, apparent warlike propensities, wide area of distribution and rapid intrusive
expansion, at the assumed time of the dispersal of Indo-European languages, many linguists and historians believe that they were the
steppe origin nomads who brought IE languages to Europe. Archaeological data indicates that their main weapon was the battle axe
made of bronze. Some authors believe that they must have been fearsome warriors who conquered most of Europe within a short time
resulting in a near total language substitution in most of Europe.
It is interesting to speculate if there was any connection between the fearsome battle axe holding Parsu Rama or Bhargave Rama
and The Battle Axe culture which apparently appeared from nowhere and terrorised old Europe in the third millennium BCE.
114 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

these accusations pertain to differences in belief systems and social customs. And most of them are in the
later hymns and thus points to a split on account of difference of opinion on the correct religious practices
and customs, that happened at the time of composition of later Mandalas. Political and economic causes
might also be involved.

Proto Zoroastrianism seems to have born out of a rebellion against Vedic culture, as Zoroaster is said to have
opposed animal sacrifice and use of Soma or Haoma. Puranas tell us that Asuras were opposed by Vedic
religion mainly because they opposed Yajnas and other practices of Devas. The reference to the debate
between Zoroaster and Goutama, which Zoroaster is said to have won, might point to this conflict.

The rebellion may have been led by some important Vedic priestly clans like Atharvans and Brigus. Zoroater
himself may have been an Atharvan.

The resulting conflict ended with the defeat of Asuras worshippers. Their land and possessions may have been
annexed by their victorious enemies and this may have led to the migration of Asuras worshippers(Anus?)
to the west and North-West.47

This is only my opinion based on the present level of information we have on the subject; and not an aca-
demically rigorous conclusion and I shall not attempt a dogged defense of it if it is challenged on substantial
grounds.
The relevance of this to the subject of this book is that it leads to the inference that the split between Indo
Aryans and Iranians occurred in North West India and not somewhere in Central Asia and that the movement of
these Indo European language speakers was from east to west.
Such a migration from Northern India towards west and north-west appear quite plausible considering the
following arguments presented by Shrikant Talageri

3.4.6 Shrikant Talageris Arguments

Shrikant Talageri in his book The Rigveda and the Avesta: the Final Evidence, 2008, along with his earlier
books, advances a number of arguments in favour of Out of India theory, on the basis of Vedic and Zaorastrian
texts. Some of these are briefly stated below.
The Rigveda and the Avesta are alleged to be books composed by the Vedic Aryans and the Iranians well after
they allegedly separated from each other in Central Asia and migrated to their respective historic habitats. If this
were true, then common elements in their languages should have been found most prominently in the Early Books
of the Rigveda as well as Avesta, which would then still have retained remnants of the earlier common Indo-Iranian
47
the Asura or Ahura culture may have spread further west in ancient times, as Asura, as a name or name element was rather
common in many parts of West Asia. We also have the Assyrian example of the state, its main city, as well as their main god being
named as Asur or Asura. The ethnic name of the people, Assyrian, was a variant of it. Many Assyrian nobles had Asur as name
elements. But the Assyrian language itself was Semitic.
This migration may have taken these people still further west into Europe. One known case, that is usually thought of as Persian in
origin, but could just as well be Vedic, is that of the Mithraic cult.
The Mithraic cult was a mystery religion that was widely practised in the Roman Empire from at least the 1st to 4th centuries AD.
Modern historians refer to it as Mithraism. Numerous archaeological finds, including meeting places, monuments and artefacts, have
contributed to modern knowledge about Mithraism throughout the Roman Empire. The iconic scenes of Mithras show him being
born from a rock, slaughtering a bull, and sharing a banquet with the god Sol (the Sun). About 420 sites have yielded materials related
to the cult. Among the items found are about 1000 inscriptions, but these are not very informative of the cult and its core beliefs.
No text about the religion survive. Thus we are left with the limited information that can be derived from the inscriptions and brief
or passing references in Greek and Latin literature. The Romans regarded the mysteries as originating from Persian or Zoroastrian
sources. Since the early 1970s the scholars has noted dissimilarities between Persian Mithra-worship and the Roman Mithraic mysteries.
It could well be derived from Vedic Religion. One pointer to this may that the cults often secret practices gave great importance to
astronomy and heavenly bodies, as Hinduism does to this day.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 115

culture. Based on the discussion and analysis earlier in this book, the chronology of the ten Mandalas of Rigveda
should be

early -Mandalas 6, 3 and 7

middle -Mandalas 2, 4
late -parts of Mandalas 5 and 1 and Mandalas 8, 9
and 10.

The similarity between Vedic and Avestan is more pronounced in later Mandalas 5, 8, 9, 1 and 10 and some
post-Rigvedic texts, compared to earlier Mandalas 3, 6 and 7. There is no class or category of common name-
elements (names, prefixes in names, or suffixes in names) which is found in the Early Books of Rigveda and the
Avesta, but missing in the Late Books. But there are many name-elements common to the Avesta and the Late
Books, elements which are missing in the Early and the Middle Books. On the other hand, these elements are
early elements in the Avesta, present from the very earliest point of composition of the text.
Yasna 9.10 narrates a story of Zoroaster engaged in debate with one Naidhyasa or Nodhas Gautama which
Zoroaster wins. Nodhas Gautama is the composer of late hymns RV 1.58 to 64. The name seems to suggest
that he might be a descendant of Gautama, composer of most hymns of Book 4. If Nodhas Gautama of the late
Rigvedic Book 1 is a contemporary of Zoroaster, the ancestor Gautama, composer of most hymns of Book 4, must
obviously have been pre- Zoroastrian and pre-Avestan. Incidentally, the name Gautama do not occur in early
books 6, 3 and 7 of Rigveda at all.
That the common names and name-elements found in Vedic and Avestan are late elements in the Rigveda is
obvious. Not only are they found exclusively in the Late Books and hymns, but the names continue to be very
common in post-Rigvedic texts and mythology; and the name-elements are found in more and more new names.
A significant example is the suffix ayana. In the Rigveda, we have Gaupayana, Narayana and Kamayani; every
single one only in the Late Books. Later, post-Rigveda, it appears in many names like Sankhayana, Mahanarayana
Upanisad, the Asvalayana, Katyayana and Baudhayana and still later in Vatsyayana and Badarayana, apart from
Narayana, as a name for Lord Vishnu. The total absence of this suffix in the Early and Middle Books can only
be because the said names and name-elements did not exist at all in those earlier periods. On the other hand,
these elements are early elements in the Avesta, present from the very earliest point of composition of the text.
All the key words pertaining to the ethos of the earliest parts of the Avesta are found only in the late parts of the
Rigveda.
There are eight Rigvedic hymns containing various names and name-elements in common with the Avesta in
the early books of 6, 3, 7 and 4. All of them are later interpolations or late additions as per Aitareya Brahmana
VI.18 or Oldenbergs classification. These are found in as many as 380 hymns of late books; 5, 1, 8, 9 and 10.
The Early Books are characterized mainly by simple names (of single or fused character), and the name-elements
shared with the Avesta consist mainly of a few restricted types of compound names with a few prominent prefixes
of a basic nature (Su-,Deva-, Puru-, Visva-), which are found in the names of important historical personalities of
the Early Period. However, these name-elements are found in even greater profusion in the Late Books.
There are at least three words that are found in the Rigveda and the Avesta, which have no proper etymology
in either languages. These are name elements of the rshis, Kasyapa (tortoise) , Sunahsepa (suna - dog, Sepa tail)
and Parucchepa. These are found as names or name-elements in the Rigveda, but not in the Avesta. These are
listed by Lubotsky in a list of words which are peculiar to Indo-Aryan and Iranian, but are not found in any
other branch of Indo-European languages. Lubotsky believes them to be borrowings into Indo-Iranian from a
hypothetical BMAC language in Central Asia. But all 3 are found in many RV hymns of late Mandalas. If these
had entered Proto Indo Iranian dialects at BMAC, these should be present in early hymns.
Atharvan is another such with doubtful etymology in both language. It is found in 3 hymns of early book
6.15, 16, 47. All three of these hymns are placed by the western scholars (eg. in Oldenbergs classification of the
116 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

hymns) among the late or interpolated hymns which do not fit into the numerical principles of arrangement of the
hymns in the Family Books.
Thus the possibility exists that these words entered Vedic language at a later date. However it will then become
difficult to explain its presence in Avestan consistent with Steppe Home Land Model.
Apart from common names and name-elements, there are many words common to Avesta and late books of
Rigveda and not found in early books of Rigveda. Prof. Edward W. Hopkins, in his article published in the
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 1896 says;

to point to the list of words common to the Avesta and viii (RV Madala 8) with its group, and say
that here is proof positive that there is closer relationship with the Avesta, and that, therefore, viii
after all is older than the books which have not preserved these words, some of which are of great
significance, would be a first thought. But this explanation is barred out by the fact that most of
these Avestan words preserved in viii, with all those of the most importance, are common words in the
literature posterior to the Rik.

This again indicates that earliest part of Avesta and late books of Rigveda are from the same period.
the Rigveda is composed entirely in metrical verse, and compositions in prose start appearing only in later
Samhitas like the Yajurveda. However, the major part of the Avesta is in prose, and it is mainly the oldest portions,
the Gathas, which are in metrical verse. Interestingly, the meters in which the oldest Gathas are composed are
similar to those found in late mandalas of Rgveda and equivalent of all meters used in Avesta can be found in
later books of Rigveda. They contain a range of meters all of which existed only in the late books of Rigveda and
were absent in the earlier books. For example the third Gatha is composed in a meter consisting of four lines of
eight syllables each (11+11+11+11) equivalent to the oldest and commonest meter in the Rigveda: the tristubh,
which is found from the oldest Book 6 to the latest Book 10 and constitutes about 40% of the total verses in the
Rigveda as a whole. The second Gatha is composed in a meter (11+11+11+11+11) equivalent to the atijagati.
These meters are found only in 11 verses in the Rigveda; all in later books. In Yast 5, we find lines 23-32 in
metrical verse consisting of 8+8+8+8+8 syllables, equivalent to pankti meter found only in the Late mandalas
like book 5.
Shrikant Talageri has presented extensive data from Vedas and Avesta in support of his arguments and his
interpretations of many difficult issues of the IE homeland problem appear quite plausible. But his primary focus
is on linguistic evidences. This will need to be fully validated by clear empirical data from other disciplines like
genetics, archaeology etc. Also the model need to cover the entire question in totality, and not remain South Asia
specific.

3.4.7 Iranian Migrations into West Asia, Steppes and Central Asia in Pre-Historic Times
It is now generally accepted that the peopling of Europe occurred in at least three major phases. The first was
the hunter-gatherers who were living in Europe at least for the past 40000 years. Then came the farmers with
their domesticated animals from Anatolia and the Fertile Crescent in about 6000 BCE. The last major migration
was by the pastoralists from the steppes. There are differing opinions about these and there were probably other
as yet unknown migrations. There are now reasons to suspect that Iranians constituted a major part of the last
two migration events. Consider the following.
1 The farmers are believed to have arrived in Europe from Anatolia and Fertile Crescent. Ancient DNA
studies indicate that there were three genetically different populations of farmers living in West Asia in early
Neolithic. These three populations were located in Anatolia, Fertile Crescent and areas around Zagros Mountains
respectively.These farmers had Iranian DNAs in significant frequencies.
2 The worlds first farmers sprung from two distinct population cradles, according to new research in which
DNA was extracted and analyzed from ancient populations. These were in the Fertile Crescent and ancient Iran.
3.4. RG-VEDA AND THE IRANIAN AVESTA 117

The findings have just been published in the journal Science by an international team led by the researchers from
University of Mainz.
3 There may have been large Neolithic migration out of Iran into the Caucasus, the steppe and Central Asia
as a result of Irans population expansion from the Neolithic practices and possibly arrival of new migrants from
South Asia. This happened also because the great freeze of the 6200 BC (8.2 Kilo Event) could have decimated
the human population in these areas, and had left these regions with negligible and sparsely scattered human
populations. 48
4 It appears that, Iranians who had learned farming and had domesticated goat, migrated into the vacant
landscape as soon as the improved climate permitted the migration.At the dawn of history these areas were
largely peopled by ancient Scythians, also known as Scyth and Saka. The Scythian languages belonged to the
Eastern branch of the Iranian languages. The Scythians known to ancient Greek historians were located in the
northern Black Sea and Caucasus region. Other Scythian groups documented by Assyrian and Chinese sources
show that they also occupied parts of Central Asia, They are known to have occupied large areas in the central
Eurasian steppes from at least the 9th century BCE and also managed to create a powerful empire during first
millennium BCE. Except for stray references in Avestan and Akkadian texts, their pre-history in the area, before
the first millennium BCE, is hazy.
5 Ancient DNA studies have confirmed this migration into the steppe i.e. the region north of the Caspian
and the Black Seas and the area to the east in large numbers at least from third millennium BCE. One of the
routes of this migration was Caucasus, because ancient goat skeletons have been recovered from South Caucasus.
These goats were not domesticated locally. It is believed that goats were first domesticated in areas around Zagros
Mountains in Iran.
6 According to Lazaridis et al. (2016), a population related to the people of the Iran Chalcolithic contributed
43% of the ancestry of early Bronze Age populations of the steppe. Thus it is possible that many of the Yamnaya
herders from the steppes north of the Black Sea, who are believed to have brought Indo-European languages to
Europe about 4500 years ago, might have been ancient Iranians.
7 This migration of ancient Iranians through Caucasus during Neolithic could have been the source of the
Iranian language found in the steppe. Presence of Iranian language in the steppe in the remote antiquity has
been inferred from the presence of the Iranian (and also Indic) loanwords in modern Russian, Finno-Ugric etc.
The words were borrowed from Iranian into the steppe-languages, but not the vice-versa. The linguistic flow is
unidirectional.Many authors have speculated unconvincingly that this was probably due to the migration of steppe
nomads into ancient Iran. But the movement in the reverse direction seems to be far more logical, since the steppes
did not have the demographic surplus or any adverse climatic condition at that time to start a mass migration.
These pre-historic migration events may have included many individuals of South Asian origin. A comparison
of the DNAs of the present population of Iran and India appears to show that the Iranian gene pool shares a
large percentage of DNAs of Indian origin, particularly mtDNA haplogroup M and its branches like M5. These
DNAs which are shared between Iran and India are in fact India specific or Indian origin DNAs (Metspalu 2004).
The Indian mtDNA U7 is present in Iran in about 7% of population and the Indian mtDNA haplogroup M is
present in 5.3% of Iranian population (Metspalu 2004). There are also other Indian Y-DNAs like R-M780 present
in Iranian population. These relations are more pronounced in the eastern parts of Iran. Wells 2001, noted that
in the western part of the country, Iranians show low R1a1a levels, while males of eastern parts of Iran carried
up to 35% R1a1a. There is an inverse relationship of J2a, associated with Arabs and R1a, associated with South
Asia, in Iranian-speaking groups, with an excess of the latter among the eastern Iranian peoples, and of the former
among the Persians. Thus, the population of western parts of Iran appears to have substantial Arab ancestry,
while those in eastern parts have closer genetic relation with South Asia.
The migration of Indian mtDNA Haplogroups is significant, as it points to movement of large groups of people,
48
The 8.2 kilo year eventwas a sudden decrease in global temperatures that occurred in approximately 6200 BCE, which lasted for
the next two to four centuries. Another such event followed in about 4000 BCE and yet another in around 2200 BCE.
118 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

unlike that of the Y-dna or the trickling in movements, which might involve only small men only groups. If our
hypotheses of the exodus of Anus and Drhyus from North-West India are correct, these migrations could be part
of such exodus.

3.4.8 Conclusion
The popular model requires that Indo-Iranians were nomadic pastoralist migrants from Central Asia or Caspian
Steppes. But it is inconsistent with the following.
In the Avesta the Airyas or Aryas are described as a settled people, living on agriculture and stockbreeding,
opposed to the Tuiryas who were nomads (but also bearing Iranian names), presumably steppe pastoralists in
contact with the settled agriculturists. If the Aryans were the nomads from the steppe, the situation in the Avesta
should be completely opposite; that is, Airyas should be nomads and Tuiryas should be settled people, living on
agriculture and stockbreeding. So, by the evidence of Iranian texts and archaeology, the Aryans are actually the
heirs of the Central-South Asian Neolithic tradition, and not of the steppe nomads, who normally are absorbed
by the superior culture of the sedentary civilizations, like the Mongols in China or in Persia.
Taking together the above, it might be more logical to conclude that the Indo-Iranians were migrants from
North-West India or the two regions were part of a single cultural horizon at some time in the pre historic past
and that the split between them occurred probably during the time of composition of later books of Rigveda. But
the Kurgan model would require just the opposite, the Vedic Aryans being a splinter group of Indo-Iranians
in order to accommodate their migration from the steppes to South-Asia. But such a scenario has little support
now from archaeology, genetics or textual evidence. What is put forward as linguistic evidence is not entirely
convincing as alternate scenarios can be just as valid. Another plausible conclusion could be that the two cultures
are autochthonous at their respective present areas with close cultural and trade contacts or might have had a
common origin at some stage in the Neolithic or even earlier.

3.5 Evolution of Indic LanguagesSome Unresolved Issues

3.5.1 Retroflexion in Indo Aryan Languages
One defining feature of most South Asian languages is the presence of many retroflex vowels and consonants in
them. 49 These sounds are rare in other IndoEuropean languages, including Iranian, the dialect that is closest to
Vedic Language. The difficulty in explaining this feature in Indic languages, consistent with prevailing theories,
has led to many suggestions, most of them purely speculative.
Many linguists, who support the popular model, believes this to show that Vedic language came to India after
it split from IndoIranian. It is believed that it acquired this characteristic from ancient Dravidian languages as
it came into contact with it in India. But there are many problems with such a conclusion, and as a result it has
led to many unlikely assertions from various scholars.
For example, George Erdosy suggests that the majority of early old Indo Aryan speakers might have had a
Dravidian mother tongue, which they abandoned gradually, to change over to Indo Aryan dialects.
Professor in the Asian Studies department at University of Michigan, Madhav Deshpande, has gone into the
retroflexion of Indian Languages in detail. He says
my own conclusion regarding retroflexions in Rgveda is that the original compositions were either free
from retroflexion of fricatives, liquids and nasals or that these sounds had only marginal retroflexion.
The retroflexion we see in the available recension of Rgveda (Sakalya version) is the result of changes
which crept into the text during centuries of oral transmission.
49
Retroflex sounds are those produced by curving the tip of the tongue back to touch the roof of the mouth. In the matrix of
consonants in most Indian languages, both IndoEuropean and Dravidian, the middle letters ta, dta, da, ddha and na are articulated
as retroflex sounds
3.5. EVOLUTION OF INDIC LANGUAGESSOME UNRESOLVED ISSUES 119

He believes that the Rgveda we know today is what has survived extensive redaction and editing in later centuries,
which probably imposed homogenisation and changes in the text, in line with the dialect spoken by the redactors.
The way the family books are organised now points to the process of redaction. This is so, as the books were
composed by many generations of the different families, many of whom might have been separated from each other
in time and space. Some of the composers were openly hostile to each other. Yet we find a level of homogenisation
in the language, style and organisation of the texts, which could only have been the result of a meticulous process
of redaction and editing. He feels that the redaction and editing might have occurred after considerable time gap,
as the dialect of the redactors had undergone considerable changes by then. Hence he cautions that conclusions
based on linguistic features of Rgveda may be misleading.
Some authors have gone further to suggest that Vedic Language was an adopted language for most of the
composers of Rgveda; Porto Dravidian being their mother tongue. But these suggestions seem to be too far
fetched, with little empirical support. An interesting assertion by Prof. Fritz Staal is that the Sama Veda
melodies pre-existed Rgveda. The local elites and priests adapted the Vedic Verses to be sung in local musical
melodies. When RV Suktas were sung in these melodies, it often became necessary to change the words, to change
or add vowels, to repeat phrases , to break apart words and to use frequently what are called Stopas which are
meaningless sounds. He believes that the chanters who created these Sama Veda forms may not have understood
the language of RV. Johan Frederik (Frits) Staal (1930 2012) was a Professor of Philosophy and South South-east
Asian Studies at theUniversity of California, Berkeley.
If the retroflex sounds we see today in the Indo Aryan dialects of North India is due to the reason given
by George Erdosy that majority of early old Indo Aryan speakers might have had a Dravidian mother tongue,
which they abandoned gradually, to change over to Indo Aryan dialects or even that most of the composers of
Rgvedic hymns were speakers of Dravidian dialects, one would expect far more words of Dravidian origin in these
languages. It is inconceivable that these Dravidian speakers contributed retroflexion, but very few words to their
newly learned alien language. Besides, such a model can be credible only if we have some very good reasons for
the locals, totally and at such large scale, to opt for the difficult language of a few trickled in nomads.
There are now many Indo Aryan loan words in various Dravidian languages; but the reverse flow appear
to have been far less. Similarly Vedic Language also might have had a few loan words from ancient Dravidian
languages. These might have been the result of border contacts and trade as the loan words are limited. Adoption
and adaptation of linguistic features can be through social contacts or social convergence. While the effects of
the former are usually marginal, those from the latter can be far more wide spread; but can only occur rarely
under very special circumstances. Similarly, the borrowing of words from another language and borrowing of
phonetic features, like retroflexion, are very different processes, as the later probably requires more intimate social
convergence and not contacts. This should be particularly so between two totally different languages, as Vedic
Aryan and Porto Dravidian must have been. It seems that the Magadhi dialects or eastern Indo Aryan languages
or Prakrits had far more retroflex sounds than Vedic Language. Thus the possibility exists that the retroflexion
in Indian languages were acquired from some unknown language in South Asia in ancient times, possibly in use in
the North East.
We simply do not know how, when or from where the retroflex sounds entered Indian Languages. An unusual
aspect of this is presence of these sounds in two language families with very different origin, phonetic characteristics,
syntax and semantics. Partly because of this uncertainty, it is compatible with the Out of India model also. Indo
Aryan dialects could have acquired this feature from Porto Dravidian dialects, after the other proto Indo European
language families had migrated out of South Asia. However such suggestions will be speculative at best at the
present stage of our understanding of the circumstances and issues involved.

3.5.2 Substitution of r for l in Indo Iranian Languages

Another inexplicable aspect of the phonetic evolution of Indic languages is the r replacing l (l as in all,
fall, Tamil etc) in Vedic, the Porto-Iranian and Mitanni languages, whereas all other IE dialects, including other
120 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Satem dialects have retained the l. In Vedic Sanskrit, especially the Rig Veda, there is next to no l s, even
words that in Classical Sanskrit have an l, still have an r in Vedic. This has been noted and discussed by many
eminent scholars from 19T h century. Different authors have different explanations to account for this strange
feature. Hoernle (1880) suggests that there were two Aryan groups in North India, which he names as Magadhan
to the east of River Ganges and Sauraseni in the North West. I will use these terms for these dialects in this
discussion for want of better terms. Oldenberg says
Probably the first immigrants and therefore the furthest forward east, are the tribes Anga, the Mag-
adha, the Videha, the Kosala and the Kasi
. He further claims that it was the second wave or the Souraseni speakers that produced the Rgveda. Meillet
also holds the view that Vedic dialect, like Iranian, is a r only dialect, in which the PIE l merged with r. But
he believes that the dialect of the later redactors of Rgveda was was an l and r one.
Witzel believes that the tribes like Yadus, Turvasus, Anus and Druhyus mentioned in Rigveda were early waves
of Indo Aryans. Purus came last and they were the Vedic Aryans who created Rigveda.
But the Magadhi dialect, far to the east, was a pure l-only dialect, whereas the north-western dialects like Vedic,
were almost devoid of l. In the Asokan inscriptions we see laja instead of raja for king. The explanation
that the eastern Indo-Aryan dialects were brought by another earlier group of Indo-Aryans who preceded Vedic
Aryans into South Asia will make the model rather messy, assuming many different unconnected Indo-Aryans
speaking related dialects in pre-historic times, entering South Asia in separate waves at different periods. Besides,
a lot of Prakrit words have direct indo-European etymologies but no Sanskrit ones. This might be difficult to
explain under any IE homeland model other than OIT.
What is now certain is that many indo-European dialects, apart from Vedic, were in use in Central and Eastern
India in pre-historic times. Bangani is a language spoken in the Garhwal area in Uttarakhand in North India,
which is an even more stranger case. It has l only words, r only words as well as l and r words in it or have
linguistic markers in common with the other neighbouring Eastern Indo-Aryan languages (l only dialects), words
belonging to the level of Vedic Sanskrit (r only dialects), and finally words going back to the level of the centum
languages (l and r dialects). There may be yet others like the Burushaski language. Burushaski, a language
spoken by the Burusho people of northern Gilgit-Baltistan,Pakistan, is a language isolate. The total speakers of
the language are less than 100,000. It now has many loan words from neighboring language like Dardic, Pashto,
Turkic and Iranian. But the core vocabulary appears to be from a primary branch of Indo-European; possibly
Hittite.
Similarly the Sinhalese language may well represent another such form of early Indo-European speech. The
language appear to have a number of words in the Centum form. The origin of the earliest Sinhalese people and
their language is believed to be from either to the eastern parts of North India or to the western parts. But it is
possible that the immigrants who gave their name Sinhala to the composite people, their language and the island,
might have come from northwestern India, in what is now the borderland between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Sinhalese has many word forms and phonetic peculiarities that point to the possibility that it represents a remnant
of an archaic branch of an Indo-European language other than Indo-Aryan.
Isidore Dyen and others have established the similarities between many basic words reconstructed in the Proto-
Indo-European and Proto-Austronesian language. These include those for water, land, first four numerals and
many of the personal pronouns. If this is indeed true, it is difficult to see how it can be accommodated within the
popular model. The original home of Proto-Austronesian language could well have been somewhere in Central
India.
These well documented presence of at least four languages which appear to have features very close to the
original Proto Indo-European language, along with the l only languages in Eastern India is very significant and
will be difficult to explain under the Steppe Home Land model.
These dialects, like the parent Indo-European, had retained the original distinction between r and l, and not
just coincidentally created a new distinction between r and l, unrelated to the original distinction. They, therefore,
3.6. THE HORSE AND INDO-ARYANS 121

represent a linguistic stage, within Indo-European, earlier than the joint linguistic stage of the Indo-Aryan (Vedic),
Iranian and Mitanni combine before the three separated from each other. Yet they are otherwise very similar to
Vedic and almost as distant from Iranian as Vedic is.
As per the AIT, the proto dialect from which the Vedic, Iranian and Mitanni evolved, must have been spoken
well outside India, in Central Asia, or even further west. Any Indo-European forms of speech representing an
earlier linguistic stage (whether as part of this combine or as a separate branch of Indo-European) should be found
further to the west of Central Asia at a point of time earlier than the split of this combine into Porto-Indo-Aryan
and Porto-Iranian. But we find these forms well to the east of this combine. Again, if the eastern r and l or l
only dialects are earlier forms of Porto Indo-European language, they should have differentiated from Vedic far
more than Avestan or Mitannian. This is not so. The Vedic language would have been wholly incomprehensible
to the people of Mitani and ancient Persia, but was not very different from the Prakrit dialects like Pali and
Magadhi.
The putative model of IE homeland and expansion cannot explain the presence of these different dialects of
IndoAryan languages deep to the east of Satem language areas, except by resorting to mutually contradictory
interpretations and doubtful speculative conclusions.
The r and l and l only dialects, to the east of where early Vedic language flourished, is difficult to explain
under the popular model. Shrikant Talageri proposes that they

represent survivals of the speech forms of other groups (Yadus, Turvasus, Iksvakus, etc.) who lived to
the east and south of the Purus (the Vedic Aryans), and also include surviving remnants of varieties of
the Anu and Druhyu forms of speech of the north and west. They are not the remnants of mysterious
unconnected immigrant groups from Europe in the ancient past: they are the remnants of archaic
speech forms of local origin. The picture we get is not of a language family from a far-off land which
sent one or more isolated linguistic shoots into India, but of a language family with all its earliest roots
going deep into the Indian soil.

3.6 The Horse and Indo-Aryans

One of the most discussed aspects of Indo-European culture all over Eurasia is its association with Horses and
chariots.
It appears that there were many animal types belonging to the Equus species in pre historic times all over
the world. Most of these have now become extinct. Only those animals which could be domesticated by humans
survived in most places. It is not clear where the horses were first domesticated. There are reports that claim
archaeological evidence of horses that resemble modern Arabian horses dating back 4,500 years from Arabian
Peninsula. Ox carts; proto-chariots; were built by the Porto-Indo-Europeans and were also built in Mesopotamia
as early as 3000 BC. S. Piggott (1992) has established the presence of vehicles with one or two pairs of wheels
with their axles... from the Rhine to the Indus by around 3000 BCE. He found wheels marked with what appears
to be spokes in the Carpathian Basin from the Early Bronze Age. Historically, the spoked wheel and the chariot
seem to have sprung up in several places within a short period of time. Accurate carbon dating yet to give us
a definitive reading on which civilization was the first to develop the chariot. The earliest fully developed true
spoked wheel chariots known are from the chariot burials of the Andronovo (Timber-Grave) sites from around
2300 BC.
The chariot has been one of the great enabling technologies of history. It came into being with the invention
of the light and fast spoked wheel (as against heavy and clumsy solid wheels), which was largely enabled by the
metallurgical advances of the Bronze Age. Derivatives of the chariot served as the primary means of transport for
all civilizations from 2500 BC until motorized transport came along 100 years ago. From about the first half of
second millennium BC to the middle of first millennium BC, it became a fearsome and formidable war machine
122 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

and enhanced the geographic reach and military power of those who had access to the technology and expertise
to handle them effectively.
The Kurgan Model chronology for spread of IE language throughout Eurasia, in a comparatively short time,
was difficult to explain without the help of means of fast transport and enhanced geographical reach, like chariots
and horses. Thus horses were an important reason why Kurgan hypothesis came to be so successful. The mobility
of the Kurgan culture, attributed to the domestication of the horse and later the use of early chariots, facilitated
its rapid expansion. The vast steppes north of Black Sea and Caspian Sea had abundant supply of horses (Equus
ferus caballus) and archaeological finds in the area include many sites of chariot/horse burials, and places with
animal remains, where horse remains predominate. With this, it was easy to connect Vedic Aryans to Kurgan
Culture, as Vedas have many references to chariots and horses. It was also concluded that Indus Valley (IVC)
and Vedic culture are unrelated as very few horse remains have been found in the Indus Valley sites. But many
scholars are uneasy about such mixing of archaeological finds and literary references for evidences and conclusions.
Besides, there are now a number of arguments against such a conclusion. Some of these are

The rarity or absence of horse remains in IVC sites might be on account of the climatic conditions of South
Asia where these would have disintegrated in the course of time much faster than in the steppes.

IVC sites investigated so far are all urban settlements. Horse remains were unlikely to be found in such areas
in large quantity as these would be disposed off away from the well planned human settlements. Horses
might not have got the benefit of burial within the IVC urban areas as IVC culture might not have allowed
its burial with humans, unlike in the steppes.

The many references in Vedas to horses may be on account of its rarity in Indus Valley at the time and the
resultant awe and glamour. Most references in RV to chariots and horses are of their use by various gods
and demigods. Available indications of the style, size, materials and engineering of chariots in Vedas differs
substantially from those unearthed in Kurgan sites. Also these references speak of only chariots and not
horse riding as such.

Horse remains from the Harappan site Surkotada (dated to c. 2400-1700 BCE) have been identified by
A.K. Sharma as Equus ferus caballus. The horse specialist Sandor Bokonyi (1997) later confirmed these
conclusions and stated that the excavated tooth specimens could in all probability be considered remnants
of true horses [i.e. Equus ferus caballus]. Bknyi stated that The occurrence of true horse was evidenced by
the enamel pattern of the upper and lower cheek and teeth and by the size and form of incisors and phalanges
(toe bones). However, others like Meadow (1997) still disagree, because remains of the Equus ferus caballus
are difficult to distinguish even by specialists from other horse species like Equus asinus (donkeys) or Equus
hemionus (onagers). A clay model that looks like a horse has been found in Mohenjo-Daro and a horse
figurine in Periano Ghundai in the Indus Valley. Thus the argument that IVC had no horse needs to be
fully established.

Among the many Harappan script fragments recovered so far, one sign that repeatedly appear is that of a
Unicorn, a horned animal, which but for the horn and to a lesser extent the head, looks very much like a
horse. Its physical features and hind side appear so much like a horse that it seems certain that, whoever
first conceived the symbol, had the horse figure in mind. The unicorn symbol appears in Harappan artefacts
from 3000 BCE at least. It is often said that almost three forth of all Indus seals carry the Unicorn sign.
But a closer look appear to suggest that while about half of them are horse like figures, others are closer
to bulls and goats. Thus it is possible that these signs depict different animals. The elongated body and
slender arching neck is typical of unicorn figurines, as are the tail with bushy end. Some figures have a triple
incised line depicting a pipal leaf shaped blanket or halter, while most unicorn figures have only a double
incised line. These look very much like a halter and saddle.
3.6. THE HORSE AND INDO-ARYANS 123

After Indus valley, unicorn like figures appear a millennium later in Mesopotamia and after almost two
millennia later in Greece. Unicorns are not found in Greek mythology, but rather in accounts of natural
history, in which unicorns are stated to be an animal found only in India, a distant and fabulous realm for
them. The earliest description is from Ctesias who, in his book Indika (On India), described them as wild
asses. Other ancient Greeks who have described unicorn in accounts of natural history include Strabo, Pliny
the Younger and Aelian. Greek scholars actually believed that this creature was real, and that its home
was in India. At the time India was a little known distant land that seemed magical and mysterious to the
ancient Greeks and Romans. Fittingly, the unicorn was seen as a mystical and mysterious creature who
commanded great respect and power. The Bible describes an animal, the reem, which some translations
have rendered as unicorn.
Unlike almost every single other mythical creature, the unicorn does not appear anywhere in any cultures
actual mythology. That is to say, plenty of Greek scholars believed that unicorns existed, but the unicorn
itself does not come from Greek mythology. There are no tales of gods riding unicorns or legends of unicorns
fighting monsters. To put it simply, there is no such thing as unicorn mythology. One scholar pointed out
another interesting fact about unicorns - they are possibly the only mythical creature that do not evoke fear.
Unicorns are not monsters. Any time they are spoken of in ancient texts they are revered and respected.
They are strong, solitary animals who seek to do good for all around them. Never does a unicorn pose a
threat to humans, or any other creature that does not seek first to harm them.
Medieval European knowledge of unicorn comes from biblical and ancient sources, and the creature was
variously represented as a kind of wild ass, goat, or horse. In European folklore, the unicorn is often
depicted as a white horse-like animal with a long horn and cloven hooves (sometimes a goats beard). In
the Middle Ages and Renaissance, it was commonly described as an extremely wild woodland creature, a
symbol of purity and grace, which could only be captured by a virgin.
That this horselike figure first appeared in South Asia and later myths about it spread all over Eurasia
suggest the possibility that there was either strong cultural diffusion or waves of emigrations from the sub-
continent from ancient times. Secondly it also points to the strong possibility that there were horses in South
Asia in the pre-historic past.

More than half of the first 30 Suryavamsi or Sun Dynasty kings had Asva as a name element. More of
them had also Radha (Ex. Dashradha) or chariot as name element. It is logical to assume that the cultural
trait of having these name elements frequently had a common origin. Since these have clear etymology in
Vedic language and uncertain etymologies in other Indo European languages, the origin of this cultural trait
could be South Asia.

The Rock Shelters of Bhimbetaka (or Bhim Baithaka) in the Raisen District of Madhya Pradesh, 45 km
south of Bhopal, at the southern edge of the Vindhyachal hills, contains many drawings of horses, among
a large number of other painting and drawings. They were accidently discovered some fifty years ago and
is within impenetrable thick forest. These paintings appear in nearly 700 natural rock shelters spread over
ten kilometers. According to expert opinion these painting are from different periods spread over many
thousands of years. The earliest among them are at least 30000 years old and even the latest are from
pre-historic times. They are in red and white and with occasional green and yellow. The older paintings are
clearly cruder and fading and the newer more detailed and colourful. Interestingly one can see what looks
like horse figures from successive eras, the earliest of riders carrying blunt stone weapons, later ones with bow
and arrows and latest ones of massed figures engaged in battle. The earliest of riders carrying blunt stone
weapons strongly indicates that there were horses in India from prehistoric times and more importantly they
were domesticated.

Absence of horse remains cannot be treated as evidence of absence of horses in IVC, as not many horse
124 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

remains have been discovered in North-Western India dating to second millennium BCE. One would expect
abundance of such remains if Vedic Aryans had brought large number of horses into India in 1500 BCE.

One important element of the Invasion Theory is that Bactria Margiana Archaeological complex or BMAC
settlements were built by the Porto Indo Iranians or Porto Indo Aryans or that they stayed close it it for
some time, on their way to South Asia. But horse remains are also rare in Bactria Margiana Archaeological
complex, in an area where horses are native and where the locals were known for their horsemanship from
pre-historic times. If horse bones are rare in the urban centres of such an area, there nothing unusual in its
rarity in Harappan centres. Thus, clearly rarity of horse remains in urban centres proves nothing.

The references in Vedas may not be to steppe or Central Asian horses, but to Arabian horses or even of horses
of local origin. In RV 1.162.18(as per translation of the term Catur-srimsad-vajino by Ralph Griffith)
there is a reference to 34 ribbed horses. Steppe horses have 36 ribs whereas Arabian horses generally have
only 34 and South Asia appear to have had commercial relations with Mesopotamia from very ancient times
well before the putative date for IE entry into North Western India. Michael Witzel counters this by an
unconvincing argument that the horse referred in RV 1.162.18 might be one with a genetic deficiency of two
ribs. The verse is dedicated to Asvam or horse in general and not to a particular horse.

The invasion theory has been abandoned by most scholars as it became evident that archaeological evidences
do not support battle scenarios or sudden cultural discontinuity. Also many authors began to express doubt as to
how the invaders could have brought chariots, suitable for plains, across the difficult Hindukush mountain ranges.
The The horse evidence is an important element of Kurgan hypothesis. But so far as Vedic Culture is concerned,
horse evidence has more or less become irrelevant now, as horse remains are equally rare in Harappan sites as
well as second millennium North-West India. Besides it is not at all certain at this stage if this rarity is on account
of its absence in the area during that period. If it is possible to argue that the equine argument makes India
centric PIE homeland model invalid, then by the same logic any model, based on IE entry into South Asia in the
second millenium BCE, will also become invalid.

3.7 Anthropology and Aryan Invasion

Anthropology is the study of humankind on the basis of knowledge and data from disciplines like natural, social
and biological sciences, archaeology and linguistics. Systematic study of anthropology as an academic discipline
may be said to have started in the second half of eighteenth century. 50
Along with anthropology, there was also the development of some almost comic, semi-scientific to wholly un-
scientific disciplines in the nineteenth century, with profound sounding names such as anthropometry, craniometry
etc. It reported many outstanding breakthrough research in late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that
might now sound hilarious, albeit with the benefit of hindsight available to us today. Unquestioningly accepting
the prevalent concept of race, some scientists constructed facial and nasal indexes or measured the skulls volume
for every race, with the predictable result that the white races cranium was determined to be the biggest. From
this the conclusion followed that they are the most intelligent race on earth. Others went further, insisting that
amidst the white race, only the Germans were the pure descendants of the Aryan race and hence they alone
were destined the rule the earth.
In the wake of World War II, the concept of race collapsed in the West. Rather late in the day, anthropologists
realized that race cannot be scientifically defined, much less measured, thus setting at naught almost a hundred
50
Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (17521840) proposed one of the earliest classifications of the races of mankind, of which he
determined there to be five. His research in the measurement of craniums led him to divide mankind into five great human families-
Caucasian, Mongolian, Malayan, Ethiopian, and American. Blumenbachs work included his collection and description of sixty human
crania (skulls). This was a founding work for other scientists in the field of craniometry.
3.8. VEDIC RITUAL MATHEMATICS AND INDO-EUROPEAN CHRONOLOGY 125

years of scholarly researches on superior and inferior races. Fortunately these scholarly researches were
recognized as pseudo science in the last fifty years. Many distinguished researchers now argued strongly against
the fallacy of race. The concept of race was a political, sociological, emotional, attitude based or even mythical
construct; and is not based on evolutionary biology or genetics. It is only with the emergence of more reliable
techniques in biological anthropology that it got a new beginning. It now concentrated, not on trying to categorize
noses or spot races, but on tracing the evolution of a population, on signs of continuity or disruption, and on
possible kinships between neighbouring populations.
In India, from the latter half of nineteenth century, officials with the colonial government set about defining in all
seriousness, over two thousand castes belonging to over 40 races, all of it on the basis of a nasal index, and other
such then popular procedures. The main racial groups thus identified were Indo-Aryan, Turko-Iranian, Scytho-
Dravidian, Aryo-Dravidian, Mongoloid and Mongolo-Dravidian. Based on such prevailing wisdom, researchers
studied skeletons from Mohenjo-daro and submitted a detailed report that asserted that the remains belonged to
various races like the proto-Australoid, Mediterranean, Mongoloid and Alpine, all of whom non-Aryan. Long lists
of such fictitious races filled academic publications, and continue to be found in Indian textbooks even today. But
fortunately, later studies have firmly established that these results are on account of erroneous assumptions based
on spseudo science.

3.8 Vedic Ritual Mathematics and Indo-European Chronology

In the Shulba Sutra appended to Baudhayanas Shrauta Sutra, mathematical instructions are given for the con-
struction of Vedic altars. One of its remarkable contributions is the theorem for finding the area, first for the
special case of a square, and then for the general case of the rectangle: The diagonal of the rectangle produces the
combined surface which the length and the breadth produce separately. This is clearly the Pythagoras theorem
usually ascribed to the Greeks (Pythagoras). This and other instances of advanced mathematics presented by
Baudhayana had been shown by the American mathematician A. Seidenberg to be the origin or source of similar
mathematical techniques and discoveries in Greece and Babylonia. The later has been securely dated to 1700
BC. So Baudhayanas mathematics would have to pre-date 1700 BC, which would reasonably be dated to the later
part of the Harappan period which ended in 1900 BC.
However, Seidenberg was told by the some indologists, who are strong supporters of the prevailing IE chronol-
ogy, that these Sutras, or any Vedic text for that matter, were definitely written later than 1700 BC. But math-
ematical data from these three locations quite clearly point its origin as Shulba Sutra and Seidenberg remained
convinced of his case:

Whatever the difficulty there may be [concerning chronology], it is small in comparison with the
difficulty of deriving the mathematics of Vedic ritual application of the theorem from Babylonia. (The
reverse derivation is easy) the application involves geometric algebra, and there is no evidence of
geometric algebra from Babylonia. And the geometry of Babylonia is already secondary whereas in
India it is primary.

To satisfy the indologists, he said that, perhaps the Shulba Sutra might have borrowed from an older tradition,
and that it might be from this same source that the Babylonians had also had learned their mathematics. But
this require too many needlessly complex assumptions; a ritual, annex altar and mathematical theory, which were
exactly like the Vedic ritual, annex altar and mathematical theory, but all from an unknown civilization that
pre-existed Vedic culture by a thousand years or more. It would be far more simple, credible and logical to give
credit to Baudhayana for the invention well before the Babylonians or before 1700 BCE. The reason for denying it
is not any empirical argument, but a dump objection that anything against my theory or belief must be wrong;
not a particularly sound argument from a scientist. But more to the point, this will then undermine the presently
accepted IE chronology.
126 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

3.9 Genetic Evidences

More than the above linguistic, archaeological, archeo-cultural or anthropological evidences or lack of such evi-
dences; it is the emerging Hard genetic evidences that might give us a definite answer. There have been a number
of such studies, each successive study making use of better data sets, technology and techniques. The technology
that helped the new finding was perfected at about the beginning of the millennium and is often referred to as
Archaeogenetics.
It is based on the fact that human Y-DNA and Mychrocondrial or Mitochondrial DNA (Mt-DNA) preserves a
written record of their mutations for thousands of years because neither gets mixed up or randomized as they
are not involved in meiosis and gene crossover, as genes inside nucleus do except those in y-chromosome. Any
mutation to the Mt-DNA is passed on in strict maternal line and mutations in Y chromosome are passed down
in a direct paternal line of descent. Furthermore the historical sequence of these mutations can also be inferred.
Technology is now available to estimate the time when such mutation occurred.51 Thus it is now possible to
determine the present decedents of a person who lived in the very distant past, and as those decedents may be
found all over the world, it is possible to trace human migrations and its chronology since the time of the ancestor.
Further improvements in the technology now use data from autosomes also for such study. This technique has
now emerged as a very powerful tool in the study of Archaeogenetics or genetic genealogy.
Now, as a latest development, Ancient DNA or aDNA research is revealing patterns of ancient human migrations
far more clearly than was possible earlier and is beginning to throw light on ancient human history that seems
far more complex than that inferred from models based on modern DNA. The following is a quote from an article
in Nature Published online on 09 June 2015 by Ludovic Orlando, M. Thomas P. Gilbert Eske Willerslev titled
Reconstructing ancient genomes and epigenomes

Research involving ancient DNA (aDNA) has experienced a true technological revolution in recent
years through advances in the recovery of aDNA and, particularly, through applications of high-
throughput sequencing. Formerly restricted to the analysis of only limited amounts of genetic in-
formation, aDNA studies have now progressed to whole-genome sequencing for an increasing number
of ancient individuals and extinct species, as well as to epigenomic characterization. Such advances
have enabled the sequencing of specimens of up to 1 million years old, which, owing to their extensive
DNA damage and contamination, were previously not amenable to genetic analyses. In this Review, we
discuss these varied technical challenges and solutions for sequencing ancient genomes and epigenomes.

It is interesting to hear what aDNA studies have found about various aspects of pre-history. It appears that
DNA profile of the present day population of Europe consists of three elements. The first is of hunter gatherers who
have lived in the continent from 45000 years before present. The second is of the agriculturalists from near east
who entered Europe from the south, some 8000 years before present. And the last was the nomadic pastoralists
from the Caspian steppes, who reached Eastern and Central Europe in about 4500 years before present(YBP).
There might also have been a forth element, but that needs to be confirmed.
The findings about the defining physical characteristics of present day Europeans are some of the early results
from such studies. It appears that the blue eyes is something that was inherited from the early European hunter
gatherers, who were present in Europe at least from about 45000 years before present (YBP). All samples tested
from this period had the genes responsible for light eye colour often found in modern European populations.
Recently an approximately 7,000-year-old Mesolithic skeleton discovered in Spain provided a complete pre-
agricultural European human genome.Analysis of this genome in the context of other ancient samples suggests the
existence of a common ancient genomic signature across western and central Eurasia from the Upper Paleolithic to
51
Mitochondria are an organelle found in most cells outside the nucleus with its own DNA. It has important functions in assembly of
ATP, the most important energy source in most living organisms on earth. It also has some other very important biological functions.
It is passed on from mother to children as Mychrocondrial DNA in male sperm cells is self programmed to degrade at the time of
fertilization.
3.9. GENETIC EVIDENCES 127

the Mesolithic. The La Brana individual carried ancestral alleles of several skin pigmentation genes, suggesting
that he was dark in colour and the light skin of modern Europeans was acquired in post Mesolithic times.The
pigmentation traits are basically the same as those of another Mesolithic genome recovered from Luxembourg, So
it appears that Europeans only acquired their present fair skin colour relatively recently and the original hunter
gatherer population of Europe did not have these. It appears the early farmers from Anatolia, who migrated into
Europe in the Neolithic period, brought genes for lighter skin colour with them. Thus it appears that we may
have a profound irony here; the white man got his skin color from their Asian ancestors.
Men from Holland are among the tallest in the world, averaging 1.9 meters, closely followed by the Danish,
British and the Swedish. France and Italy, however, have some of the shortest men in Europe. It appears that
people from northern Europe owe their height to Bronze-age populations from the Eurasian steppes, who migrated
into the region. Southern Europeans, on the other hand, owe their short stature to Neolithic hunter gatherers and
later copper-age farmers living in Iberia.
One of The first studies based on Y-DNA mutations, widespread among men in East Europe, Central Asia and
among caste groups in North India, found that these coincided neatly with the geographic spread of IE languages.
It was immediately concluded as evidence for AIT or AMT. The Genographic Project conducted by the National
Geographic Society states that Haplogroup (HG) R1a-M17 (The genetic marker representing the particular set of
mutations) arose in the region of present-day Ukraine or southern Russia. Geneticist and anthropologist Spencer
Wells stated that The Aryans came from outside India. We actually have genetic evidence for that. Very clear
genetic evidence from a marker that arose on the southern steppes of Russia and the Ukraine around 5,000 to
10,000 years ago. And it subsequently spread to the east and south through Central Asia reaching India. M17
shows that there was a massive genetic influx into India from the steppes within the past 10,000 years. Taken with
the archaeological data, we can say that the old hypothesis of an invasion of people not merely their language
from the steppe appears to be true. But contrary to the assertion made by Spencer Wells, archaeological data
now offers no such support.
However subsequent studies using larger sample sets and better techniques suggest that the conclusion was
too hasty. Kivisild (2003) suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this Haplogroup. A
Y-DNA Haplogroup (HG) is a line of people with a common pre historic ancestor with the same set of mutations
in their Y-DNA. A recent study by S. Sharma et al., published in the American Journal of Human Genetics
Abstracts 2007, argued for Indian origin of HG named R1a1, represented by the marker M-17 by pointing out the
highest incidence of R1a* (ancestral clade to R1a1) among Kashmiri Pundits (Brahmins) and Saharias, a Central
Indian tribe. Similarly R1*, one of the topmost level Haplogroup R1 based SNP found anywhere in Eurasia now,
is found in some pockets in India and Pakistan. The highest levels of R1a and its subgroups (more than 50%)
found anywhere across the Eurasia include West Bengal Brahmins (72%), Uttar Pradesh Brahmins, (67%) and
in the central India among the Sahariai tribe in Madhya Pradesh (72%). Besides Iyers, Iyengars and surprisingly
many tribals of south India are found to have high concentration of HG R1a1.
Sengupta et al. in their 2006 paper in the American Journal of Human Genetics say that

Our overall inference is that an early Holocene expansion (about 10000 YBP) in north-western India
contributed R1a1-M17 both to the Central Asian and South Asian tribes. In other words, there is no
evidence whatsoever to conclude that Central Asia has been necessarily the recent donor and not the
receptor of the R1a lineages. The current absence of additional informative binary subdivision within
this HG obfuscates potential different histories hidden within this HG, making such interpretations as
the sole and recent source area overly simplistic. The same can be said in respect to HG R2-M124.
Our reappraisal indicates that pre-Holocene and Holocene era; not Indo-European expansions, have
shaped the distinctive South Asian Y-chromosome landscape.

Other studies have concluded that there is little evidence of large scale genetic input into India from outside
from early Holocene period or from 10000 YBP. Thus the logical interpretation of the available genetic data may
128 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

be that the origin of M17 was in western India-Eastern Iran; as we find the highest rates and greatest diversity of
the HG R1 and its sub groups in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not
only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia, but diversity characterizes its presence in isolated tribal
groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a male Aryan invasion of India.
According to Sanghamitra Sahoo et al (2006 National Academy of sciences, USA)

Even though more than one explanation could exist for genetic differentiation between castes and
tribes in India, the Indo-Aryan migration scenario rested on the suggestion that all Indian caste groups
are similar to each other while being significantly different from the tribes. Using a much more repre-
sentative data set, numerically, geographically, and definitively, it was not possible to confirm any of
the purported differentiations between the caste and tribal pools. Although differences could be found
to occur within particular regions, between particular caste and tribal groups, consistent and statis-
tically significant variations at the sub continental scale were not detected. Although it is arguable
that assimilation of tribal populations into the caste system could skew distributions in any particular
region, it cannot explain the persistence and prevalence of those lineages put forward as being typical
of incoming Indo Europeans (J2, R1a, R2, and L) among many of those populations who are still
designated as tribal.

An increasing number of studies have found South Asia to have the highest level of diversity of Y-STR haplotype
variation within R1a1a. On this basis, while several studies have concluded that the data is at least consistent
with South Asia as the likely original point of dispersal (for example, Kivisild et al. (2003), Mirabal et al. (2009)
and Underhill et al. (2009) a few have actively argued for this scenario (for example Sengupta et al. (2005), Sahoo
et al. (2006), Sharma et al. (2009). A survey study as of December 2009, including a collation of retested Y-DNA
from previous studies, makes a South Asian R1a1a origin the strongest proposal amongst the various possibilities.
Such studies suggest that there had been no major maternal genetic input into India for the past 30,000 years and
no major paternal genetic inputs for the past 10,000 years at least, ruling out a major migration in the second
millennium BCE. 52
Haplogroup R1a1-M198 is a major clade of Y chromosomal haplogroups that is distributed all across Eurasia.
The map of this Haplogroup shows unusual spread over a wide area in Eurasia. Distribution of R1a1-M198 is
surprisingly similar to that of the Indo-European languages. This should normally have made it easy to connect
these two, except that many studies have found its age well over 10000 years into the Palaeolithic. It is geo-
graphically enormously expansive with two distinct core areas in the Balkans and North-West India and a smaller
one roughly in Tajikistan in south-east Central Asia. Surprisingly the vast area between Don River and Central
Asia, west and north of Tajikistan, has low rates of R1a1-M198. Many efforts have been made to identify large
SNP-based subgroups and migration patterns of this haplogroup. The origin and spread of R1a1-M198 in Eurasia
has, however, remained opaque due to the lack of downstream SNPs within the haplogroup.
Three additional binary markers since discovered within R1a1-M198 present an effective tool because now
more than 98% of the samples analysed assign to one of the three sub-haplogroups. These are designated as M458,
Z280 and Z93. R1a1-M458 and R1a1-Z280 were typical for the Hungarian population groups, whereas R1a1-
Z93 was typical for Malaysian Indians (large enough samples from main land India are still difficult to obtain)
and the Hungarian Roma. Further sub clades like Z-94 and L-657 are also since identified. Marker M458 has a
significant frequency in Europe, exceeding 30% in its core area in Eastern Europe and comprising up to 70% of
all M17 chromosomes present there. The diversity and frequency profiles of M458 suggest its origin during the
early Holocene and a subsequent expansion likely related to a number of prehistoric cultural developments like
agriculture in the region. Its primary frequency and diversity distribution correlates well with some of the major
52
The method used for designating particular Haplogroups has undergone many changes over the last decade. Generally additional
characters indicate a sub group. Thus R1a1 is a sub group of R1a. The star characters indicate that no further sub groups have been
classified for that class of mutations
3.9. GENETIC EVIDENCES 129

Central and East European river basins where settled farming was established before its spread further eastward.
Importantly, the virtual absence of M458 chromosomes outside Europe speaks against substantial patrilineal gene
flow from East Europe to Asia, including to India, at least since the mid-Holocene. (European Journal of Human
Genetics advance online publication 4 November 2009; doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2009.194)
Central Asia is an overlap zone for the R1a1-Z280 and R1a1-Z93 lineages. This pattern might arguably imply
that an early differentiation zone of R1a1-M198 conceivably occurred somewhere within the Eurasian Steppes and
Caucasus region as they lie between South Asia and Eastern Europe. The detection of the Z93 paternal genetic
imprint in the Hungarian Roma gene pool is consistent with South Asian ancestry and amends the view that
H1a-M82 is their only discernible paternal lineage of Indian heritage.
Part of a report that appeared in a reputed journal recently is reproduced below to highlight the identification
of further subclades of Z93 and how it further increases the complexity of the issues involved. It also cautions us
not to attempt facile conclusions.
European Journal of Human Genetics (2015) 23, 124131; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.50; published online 26 March
2014 The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, Peter Underhill et. al.
Y-chromosome haplogroup R (hg R) is one of 20 that comprise the standardized global phylogeny.It
consists of two main components: R1-M173 and R2-M479. Within R1-M173, most variation extant
in Eurasia is confined to R1a-M420 and R1b-M343.In Europe, R1a is most frequent in the east, and
R1b predominates in the west.It has been suggested that this division reflects episodic population
expansions during the post-glacial period, including those associated with the establishment of agricul-
tural/pastoral economies Whole Y-chromosome sequence analysis of eight R1a and five R1b individuals
suggests a divergence time of 25000YBP
Owing to the prevalence of basal lineages and the high levels of haplogroup diversities in the region,
we find a compelling case for the Middle East, possibly near present-day Iran, as the geographic origin
of hg R1a. We conclude that the initial episodes of haplogroup R1a diversification likely occurred
in the vicinity of present-day Iran. To put our frequency distribution maps, PCA analyses, and
autocorrelation results in archaeological context, we note that the earliest R1a lineages (genotyped at
just SRY10381.2) found thus far in European ancient DNA date to 4600 years before present (YBP),
a time corresponding to the Corded Ware Culture.
Of the 1693 European R1a-M417 samples, more than 96%were assigned to R1a-Z282, whereas 98.4%of
the 490 Central and South Asian R1a lineages belonged to hg R1a-Z93, consistent with the previ-
ously proposed trend. Both of these haplogroups were found among Near/Middle East and Caucasus
populations comprising 560 samples.
The corresponding diversification in the Middle East and South Asia is more obscure. However, early
urbanization within the Indus Valley also occurred at this timeand the geographic distribution of
R1a-M780 may reflect this.
One study of seven Yamna samples found that it belonged to theR1b-M269subclade,but no R1a1a has
been found in these samples.This raises the question where the R1a1a in the Corded Ware culture
came from, if it was not from the Yamna culture. (It is believed that the Corded Ware Culture was
originated by Indo-European language speaking Yamna migrants. But this finding seems to put that
in doubt.)
The four subhaplogroups of Z93 (branches 9-M582, 10-M560, 12-Z2125, and 17-M780, L657) constitute
a multifurcation unresolved by 10Mb of sequencing; it is likely that no further resolution of this part
of the tree will be possible with current technology. Similarly, the shared European branch has just
three SNPs.
However, our data do not enable us to directly ascribe the patterns of R1a geographic spread to specific
prehistoric cultures or more recent demographic events. High-throughput sequencing studies of more
130 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

R1a lineages will lead to further insight into the structure of the underlying tree, and ancient DNA
specimens will help adjudicate the molecular clock calibration. Together these advancements will yield
more refined inferences about pre-historic dispersals of peoples, their material cultures, and languages.
The last para makes it clear that at this point any firm conclusions based on DNA data about pre-historic
dispersals of peoples, their material cultures, and languages will be unwarranted. They will have to remain
possibilities as of now.
According to Underhill (2014), the downstream R1a-M417 or R1a1a subclade diversified into Z282 and Z93
circa 5,800 years ago.
In the R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* is most common (30%) in the South Siberian Altai region
of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (18%). R1a-Z2125 occurs at highest
frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (40%). We also observed it at greater than 10% frequency in
other Afghan ethnic groups and in some populations in the Caucasus and Iran.
Notably, R1a-M780 occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas.
The group also occurs at 3% in some Iranian populations and is present at 30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary,
consistent with previous studies reporting the presence of R1a-Z93 in Roma
Studies show high percentages of R1a1a in regionally diverse groups such as Manipuris(50%)to the extreme
North East India and among Punjabis(47%)to the extreme North West India.
These studies suggest that M780 could have reached South Asia in the middle of second millennium BCE;
during the time of early or mature Harappan period. if this is so, the demographic size of the migration would
have to be quite large, considering the high level of the subclade in many parts of the sub-continent at present
and its prevalence in all caste groups even in South India.
This will also require the discard of the trickling-in or elite recruitment models and going back to the Aryan
Invasion model. But then the absence of any archaeological or anthropological evidence for such a large migration
event will need to be explained. Also a host of others like the absence of cultural and life style changes in the sub-
continent and wholesale adoption of new Indo-Aryan names for places, rivers, mountains will raise uncomfortable
questions.
The Indian population consists of numerous subgroups that are extensively diversified in their genetic consti-
tution, language, geography, and religious practices, socio-cultural identity, and ancestry. There are about 4700
different communities with many thousands of endogamous groups, 325 functioning languages, and 25 scripts
in the Indian subcontinent. Any credible capture of the genetic profile of such a varied population will require
hundreds of samples from the majority of such groups, and not a few hundred from a few readily available groups,
that studies so far have used. An example was one such study in which samples for representing Indian population
was collected from ethnic Indians from Malaysia and another yet recent one from mostly Gujarati men living in
United States and England. The authors have stated that this was done as collection of such samples from within
India was very difficult due to various reasons.
An interesting information is that the highest incidence of R1a-M780 is in West Bengal and Eastern Utter
Pradesh. It progressively decreases towards North West. If it is the Aryan haplogroup, one would expect it to
be in the reverse order. Also it is found in significant frequencies in the Deccan and Gujarat.
Many studies have concluded that R1a-Z282 arrived in Europe during the third millennium BCE, but a few
indicates an earlier time frame. In the case of R1a-Z93, both the place of origin as well as the chronology appears
uncertain.
The frequency of Z 93 and its subclades is very low in the South Russian Steppes. This would be surprising
if the Steppe Home Land model is correct.
A recent study published in American Journal of Human Genetics Volume 89, Issue 6, dated 9 December
2011, Pages 731-744 authored by Mait Metspalu et al makes a number further interesting points.
South Asia harbors one of the highest levels genetic diversity in Eurasia, which could be inter-
preted as a result of its long-term large effective population size and of admixture during its complex
3.9. GENETIC EVIDENCES 131

demographic history. Here we report data for more than 600,000 SNP markers genotyped in 142
samples from 30 ethnic groups in India. Combining our results with other available genome-wide data,
we show that Indian populations are characterized by two major ancestry components, one of which is
spread at comparable frequency and haplotype diversity in populations of South and West Asia and
the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50%
of the ancestry in Indian populations. Haplotype diversity associated with these South Asian ancestry
components is significantly higher than that of the components dominating the West Eurasian ancestry
palette. Modelling of the observed haplotype diversities suggests that both Indian ancestry components
are older than the purported Indo-Aryan invasion 3,500 YBP. Consistent with the results of pairwise
genetic distances among world regions, Indians share more ancestry signals with West than with East
Eurasians. The South Asian genetic make-up is dominated by largely autochthonous lineages testify-
ing for low levels of admixture with other parts of Eurasia because the peopling of the subcontinent
some 50,000 to 70,000 years ago. Notably, these genetic dates are earlier than the oldest confirmed
human fossil in the subcontinent, found in Sri Lanka and dated to 31,000 years before present (YBP),
but postdate the archaeological evidence below and above the layers of ash from the Mount Toba
volcanic super eruption associated with the Middle Palaeolithic tools that could have been produced
by anatomically modern humans
For example, it was first suggested by the German Orientalist Max Mller that ca. 3,500 years
ago a dramatic migration of Indo-European speakers from Central Asia (the putative Indo Aryan
migration) played a key role in shaping contemporary South Asian populations and was responsible for
the introduction of the Indo-European language family and the caste system in India. A few studies
on mt-DNA and Y-chromosome variation have interpreted their results in favour of the hypothesis,
whereas others have found no genetic evidence to support it. However, any non-marginal migration
from Central Asia to South Asia should have also introduced readily apparent signals of East Asian
ancestry into India. Because this ancestry component is absent from the region, we have to conclude
that if such a dispersal event nevertheless took place, it occurred before the East Asian ancestry
component reached Central Asia. The demographic history of Central Asia is, however, complex, and
although it has been shown that demic diffusion coupled with influx of Turkic speakers during historical
times has shaped the genetic make-up of Uzbeks, it is not clear what was the extent of East Asian
ancestry in Central Asian populations prior to these events.
Our simulations show that one can detect differences in haplotype diversity for a migration event
that occurred 500 generations ago, but chances to distinguish signals for older events will apparently
decrease with increasing age because of recombination. In terms of human population history, our
oldest simulated migration event occurred roughly 12,500 years ago and pre-dates or coincides with
the initial Neolithic expansion in the Near East. Knowing whether signals associated with the initial
peopling of Eurasia fall within our detection limits requires additional extensive simulations, but our
current results indicate that the often debated episode of South Asian prehistory, the putative Indo-
Aryan migration 3,500 years ago falls well within the limits of our haplotype-based approach. We found
no regional diversity differences associated with k5 at K = 8. Thus, regardless of where this component
was from (the Caucasus, Near East, Indus Valley, or Central Asia), its spread to other regions must
have occurred well before our detection limits at 12,500 years. Accordingly, the introduction of k5 to
South Asia cannot be explained by recent gene flow, such as the hypothetical Indo-Aryan migration.
The admixture of the k5 and k6 components within India, however, could have happened more recently.
Our haplotype diversity estimates are not informative about the timing of local admixture.
Did genetic variation in West Eurasia and South Asia accumulate separately after the out-of-
Africa migration; do the observed instances of shared ancestry component and selection signals reflect
secondary gene flow between two regions, or do the populations living in these two regions have a
common population history, in which case it is likely that West Eurasian diversity is derived from the
132 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

more diverse South Asian gene pool.

Summing up, our results confirm both ancestry and temporal complexity shaping the still on-going
process of genetic structuring of South Asian populations. This intricacy cannot be readily explained
by the putative recent influx of Indo-Aryans alone but suggests multiple gene flows to the South Asian
gene pool, both from the west and east, over a much longer time span.

Thus the above paper makes the following points.

South Asia is home to two distinctive genetic types termed Ancestral South Indian (ASI-k6) and Ancestral
North Indian (ANI-k5). ASI appears to be completely autochthonous as it is not found anywhere else in the world.
But ANI is genetically similar to ancestry components found in East Europe and Caucus. The age of ANI in India
is much greater than Max Mullers estimate of 3500 years for Aryan entry into India. It could be 12500 years
or older and it is likely that West Eurasian diversity is derived from the more diverse South Asian gene pool. A
further difficulty with the theory that IE language entered India with a large migration of people in about 3500
YBP is that by this time India was a densely populated region with widespread agriculture, so the number of
migrants of West Eurasian ancestry would need to be extraordinarily large to explain the fact that today about
half the ancestry in India derives from the ANI.
A recent paper in The American Journal of Human Genetics 93, 422-438, September 5, 2013 by Priya Moorjani
et al reports the following findings.

Our analysis documents major mixture between populations in India that occurred 1,900-4,200
years BP, well after the establishment of agriculture in the subcontinent. We have further shown
that groups with unmixed ANI and ASI ancestry were plausibly living in India until this time. 53 This
contrasts with the situation today in which all groups in mainland India are admixed. These results are
striking in light of the endogamy that has characterized many groups in India since the time of mixture.
For example, genetic analysis suggests that the Vysya from Andhra Pradesh have experienced negligible
gene flow from neighbouring groups in India for an estimated 3,000 years. Thus, India experienced
a demographic transformation during this time, shifting from a region where major mixture between
groups was common and affected even isolated tribes such as the Palliyar and Bhil to a region in
which mixture was rare. Our estimated dates of mixture correlate to geography and language, with
northern groups that speak Indo- European languages having significantly younger admixture dates
than southern groups that speak Dravidian languages. This shows that at least some of the history
of population mixture in India is related to the spread of languages in the subcontinent. One possible
explanation for the generally younger dates (of the admixture event) in northern Indians is that after
an original mixture event of ANI and ASI that contributed to all present day Indians, some northern
groups received additional gene flow from groups with high proportions of West Eurasian ancestry,
53
Later studies have shown that this process was far more complex. Quote from a Paper by Analabha Basu et. of National Institute
of Biomedical Genomics, Netaji Subhas Sanatorium , Kalyani 741251, West Bengal, India; and Human Genetics Unit, Indian Statistical
Institute, Kolkata, titled Genomic reconstruction of the history of extant populations of India reveals five distinct ancestral components
and a complex structure dated December 17, 2015
The extant population of India is a result of admixture between four ancestral populations - Ancestral North Indian (ANI), Ancestral
South Indian (ASI), the Tibeto-Burman (TB) and Austro-Asiatic (AA). Detailed tables given in the paper make it clear that almost
all communities in India today have elements from these four ethnicities, albeit in differing proportions.
TB is a language family with about 400 living dialects at present spoken throughout the highlands of South-east Asia as well as
certain parts of East Asia and South Asia. It includes languages like Bodo, Naga and Kukish spoken in the Indian North east.
The Tibetan and Burmese are the two prominent languages in this group and hence the name. AA languages are a large language
family of continental South-east Asia, also scattered throughoutIndia,Bangladesh,Nepaland the southern border of China, which have
traditionally been grouped into two, as MonKhmer andMunda.Vietnamese and Khmer of Cambodia are the two major languages of
this family, as well as the Mon-Khmer group. Munda dialects are spoken by mostly by tribals in the Indian states of Bihar, Jharkhand
and Orissa.
There is a distinctive fifth component; which accounts for the ancestry of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands population, that could
be the ancestral language of Oceanic populations.
3.9. GENETIC EVIDENCES 133

bringing down their average mixture date. Although we have not been able to test this hypothesis, it
may become possible to do so in future by developing a method to infer the ancestry at each locus in
the genome of Indians that can provide accurate estimates even in the absence of data from ancestral
populations.
It is also important to emphasize what our study has not shown. Although we have documented
evidence for mixture in India between about 1,900 and 4,200 years BP, this does not imply migration
from West Eurasia into India during this time. On the contrary, a recent study that searched for West
Eurasian groups most closely related to the ANI ancestors of Indians failed to find any evidence for
shared ancestry between the ANI and groups in West Eurasia within the past 12,500 years (although
it is possible that with further sampling and new methods such relatedness might be detected). An
alternative possibility that is also consistent with our data is that the ANI and ASI were both living in
or near South Asia for a substantial period prior to their mixture. Such a pattern has been documented
elsewhere; for example, ancient DNA studies of northern Europeans have shown that Neolithic farmers
originating in Western Asia migrated to Europe about 7,500 years BP but did not mix with local hunter
gatherers until thousands of years later to form the present- day populations of northern Europe. The
most remarkable aspect of the ANI-ASI mixture is how pervasive it was, in the sense that it has left
its mark on nearly every group in India. It has affected not just traditionally upper-caste groups,
but also traditionally lower-caste and isolated tribal groups, all of whom are united in their history of
mixture in the past few thousand years. It may be possible to gain further insight into the history that
brought the ANI and ASI together by studying DNA from ancient human remains (such studies need
to overcome the challenge of a tropical environment not conducive to DNA preservation). Ancient
DNA studies could be particularly revealing about Indian history because they have the potential to
directly reveal the geographic distribution of the ANI and ASI prior to their admixture.
The conclusion that there was an admixture of ASI and ANI in India at some period between 1900 and 4000
YBP appear to offer some support the putative IE influx into South Asia in the second millennium BC though
the studies are clear that ANI was present in India long before that. Thus genetic evidence as of now appears to
rule out either AIT or AMT in the suggested time frame. Only possibility is arrival of small batches of IE people
without leaving significant mark on the genetic makeup or culture of South Asia.
The above studies bring out a very interesting aspect of demographic history of South Asia. It had two
distinctive racial groups living here for thousands of years without much contact between them. Then during the
period 4100 YBP to 1900 YBP for some unknown reason these two groups began to mix together. This admixture
affected almost everyone living in the subcontinent. Then just as mysteriously the genetic admixture stopped and
all groups began to practice strict endogamy. It should be interesting to go into the social, cultural, political and
historical reasons for this. But it might need more research to confirm the above and it might be premature to
treat it as a given fact.
Y-DNA haplotype diversity in South Asia is much greater than Europe and the Near East, thus pointing to
an older age of the component. This could also be on account of long-term higher effective population size. These
studies use the Evolutionary Effective Mutation Rate, which could have the effect of increasing the age of the
mutation. The use of this method has been criticized as, such use with haplogroup populations which clearly show
evidence of high population expansion, could artificially increase the actual age of R-M17 considerably. Some of
the recent research into it has suggested lower age for it offering alternate interpretations for the greater diversity
in the core areas. Authors using the alternate germline mutation rate arrive at more recent age estimates. Thus
the greater genetic diversity in the two core areas might have an alternate explanation other than its age; frequent
migrations from the east in the case of Balkans and large demographic size for the last 10000 years and multiple
genetic inputs over a long time span in the case of South Asia. In this context, a brief quote from an article that
appeared in Journal of Human Genetics is given below.
Journal of Human Genetics 59, 61-63 (February 2014) doi:10.1038/jhg.2013.122
134 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

South Asia is the home to more than a fifth of the worlds population, and is thought, on genetic
grounds, to have been the first main reservoir in the dispersal of modern humans Out of Africa.
Additionally, high level of endogamy within and between various castes, along with the influence of
several evolutionary forces and long-term effective population size, facilitate the formation of complex
demographic history of the subcontinent. Therefore, the ancestry of peopling of the South Asia is a
question of fundamental importance in archaeogenetics, linguistics and historical disciplines, and it is
not surprising that the number and timing of migrations in and out of South Asia is still vigorously
debated. Researches from various disciplines focused on testing the hypothesis that several separate
migrations entered to the subcontinent with each migration being associated with different tool tech-
nology, linguistic and genetic characteristics. The mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) data suggest deep
autochthonous diversity with minor sharing with East and West Eurasians, whereas, in contrast with
this, the recent autosomal data showed substantial similarities of their genome with Caucasus and
West Asians. However, at the current resolution, it is unclear that this sharing is extremely ancient or
arisen with the arrival of new languages and farming.
But the probability of higher age of South Asian genetic stock is suggested by a number of circumstances.
Some of these are
There is high concentration of top level Haplogroup R1a based SNP individuals in Pakistan and NW India.
These markers are not as frequent in other parts of Eurasia. Haplogroup R1a and its successor clade R1a1
have the highest frequency and time depth in South Asia, making it a possible locus of origin, and by
extension, its higher age.
R1a based SNPs are found among even tribal populations which do not exhibit Indo-Aryan influence sug-
gesting that they acquired it in pre Indo-Aryan times.
Today almost 50% of South Asian population carry Ancestral North Indian SNPs that include every popu-
lation segments even in remote areas of the sub-continent. If this is on account of genetic input from Central
Asia in around 3500 years BP, the number of immigrants must have been incredibly large. This is because
of the strict endogamy that has characterized most groups in India since at least the beginning of Common
Era gives not enough time for such extensive admixture as the time available would be less than 1000 years
or about 40 generations allowing the newcomers time to start mixing with the natives. Besides, the immi-
grants would have to match the very large population size of South Asia at the time in order to have any
demographic impact. As mentioned in the Priya Moorjani et al 2013 paper quoted above, there are groups
in South Asia which have practised strict endogamy for the past 3000 years who also show mixed ancestry.
Thus it seems logical to assume that R1a was present in South Asia at significant frequencies before 3500
YBP.
As mentioned above, almost 50% of South Asian population carry Ancestral North Indian SNPs. But the
upper castes constitute only 20% of the total population. Thus, numerically the lower castes and tribals
having ANI DNA exceeds upper castes. This level of admixture is unlikely in a short time span.
A number of R1a based SNPs commonly found in Europe and Central Asia are not found in South Asia.
This again makes large genetic inputs from these areas in second millennium BC unlikely.
We know that all humans beings are descended from a relatively small African population because Africa
contains almost all the genetic markers found in other parts of the world, but the reverse is not true. It is
a basic law of population genetics that older a population group, more genetically diverse it is. Africa is
genetically the most diverse continent because it contains the oldest humans. In contrast, Native Americans
are the least diverse because they are more recent comers to the region. Thus the unusually high genetic
diversity in South Asia should mean heigher age of the population groups.
3.10. THE SARASVATI RIVER 135

Based on these, various peer reviewed papers that appeared in leading journals support South Asia as the core
of R1a basal diversity and that Y-DNA Haplogroup R1a1 (M17) is of autochthonous Indian origin. Similarly many
researchers like Oppenheimer considers it highly probable that nearly all human maternal lineages in Central Asia,
the Middle East and Europe descended from only four mtDNA lines that originated in South Asia 50,000-100,000
years ago.
One unfortunate circumstance in respect of these studies is that the populations of the Indian subcontinent
have been under-represented relative to East and West Eurasia in genome-wide data sets that have been compiled
so far.
The importance of genetic studies for Kurgan Hypotheses is that if it could be conclusively shown that Hap-
logroup R1a1-M198 originated about 5000 -7000 BP in the steppes, it could offer major support to it. On the
other hand if it is far older it would be neutral so far as the model is concerned. The IE expansion could still be
explained in terms of trickle in and elite dominance, though such explanation might not be quite satisfactory. But
then the riddle of IE expansion selectively in areas with high incidence of Haplogroup R1a and its sub groups will
remain. Thus if the view that the age of R1a is indeed very high and that it is an SNP associated with Porto Indo
Europeans prevails, a serious relook at Palaeolithic Continuity Theory or a suitable variant will become necessary.
These genetic studies at present are based on a large data sets collected during the past decade from multiple
sources, from different geographical areas and from populations with complex demographic histories, a large part
of which is still unclear. Any interpretation of such data is bound to be controversial, as alternate interpretations
also can be just as valid. Thus conclusion at the moment is that genetic evidence has not so far resolved the issue,
but there is strong possibility that Haplogroup R1a was present in South Asia before second millennium BC.

3.10 The Sarasvati River

There are many references to the Sarasvati River in Vedas. Its importance to Vedic culture is clear from the fact
that it is mentioned 72 times in the Rig-Veda, appearing in all mandalas except in mandala 4. It is mentioned
as the chief river among the Sapta Sindhu, the seven major rivers of the early Rig-Vedic period. These are
Saraswati, Satadru or Shutudri (Sutlej), Vipasa (Beas), Parosni (Ravi), Asikni (Chenab), Vitasta (Jhelum) and
Sindhu (Indus), that is, the five rivers of Punjab with Sarasvati in the east and Sindhu on the west. There are
some differing views on the identification of these rivers. The term also often refers the geographical area between
these rivers where the early Vedic culture flourished. It is the only river with hymns entirely dedicated to it, RV
6.61, 7.95 and 7.96.The Rig-Veda describes the Sarasvati as the best of all the rivers (RV 2.41.16-18; also 6.61.8-13;
7.95.2). Rig-Veda 7.36.6 calls it the Seventh, Mother of Floods. RV 2.41.16 calls it the best mother, best river
and best goddess and states that all life spans abide on the Sarasvati. Other hymns that praise the Sarasvati
River include RV 6.61; 7.96 and 10.17. Rig-Veda 7.95.2 and other verses (e.g. 8.21.18) also tell that the Sarasvati
poured milk and ghee. Such expressions show the importance and reverence of the Vedic religion for the Sarasvati
River. Some Rig Vedic verses (6.61.2-13) indicate that the Sarasvati River originated in the hills or mountains,
where she burst with her strong waves the ridges of the hills. It is described as a river swollen by the rivers (RV
6.52.6). Incidentally, Mandala 6 and 7, along with Mandala 3 are considered the oldest part of Rigveda.
Another reference to the Sarasvati is in the geographical enumeration of rivers in the late Nadistuti sukta
(10.75.5). This verse enumerates all important rivers from the Ganges in the east up to the Indus in the west in a
strict geographical order as Ganga, Yamuna, Sarasvati, Shutudri.54 Sarasvati is placed between the Yamuna and
54
RV 10.75.5
imam me ghanghe yamune sarasvati sutudri stema sacata parusnya
asiknya marudvrdhe vitastayarjikiye srnuhyasusomaya
Translation by Griffith
5 Favour ye this my laud, O Gan!ga, Yamuna, O Sutudri, Parusni and Sarasvati:
With Asikni, Vitasta, O Marudvrdha, O Arjikiya with Susoma hear my call.
136 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

the Sutlej just as the paleo canal of an ancient river seen now between these two rivers. This sukta is of particular
significance as there is nothing ambiguous about it and it leaves little room to suspect that it is merely a poetic
expression without any factual content.
Many references in Vedas to Sarasvati are often ambiguous and it is not always clear if the reference is to
the river, except those in Mandalas 6, 3 and 7. Often it is to Goddess Sarasvati. In Mandalas 1 and 10 of the
Rig-Veda, the last two to be composed, the Sarasvati is mentioned in 13 hymns (1.3, 13, 89, 164; 10.17, 30, 64,
65, 66, 75, 110, 131, 141). Only two of these references are unambiguously to the river, 10.64.9 calling for the
aid of three great rivers, Sindhu, Sarasvati and Sarayu, and the geographical Nadistuti list (10.75.5) discussed
above. The others invoke Sarasvati as a goddess and connection to a specific river is not unambiguous, arguably
indicating that the river was drying up by the time these last Mandalas were composed. Nadistuti is dedicated
to the Sindhu River and Sarasvati is mentioned just as one of the rivers indicating that by then it had lost its
pre-eminence it had earlier, but continued to be an important river. Thus it seems clear that Sarasvati River was
of central importance to the Vedic people till it began to dry up towards the end of Vedic period. Please refer to
page 90 for a more detailed discussion on this aspect.
The first reference to drying up of the Sarasvati is from the Brahmanas, texts that were composed in Vedic
Sanskrit, but dating to a later period than the Veda Samhitas. The Jaiminiya Brahmana (2.297) speaks of the
diving under of the Sarasvati, and the Tandya Brahmana calls this the disappearance. The same text (25.10.11-
16) records that the Sarasvati is so to say meandering as it could not sustain heaven which it had earlier propped
up. In the Satapadha Brahmana (1.4.1.10) there is a description of the god Agni burning out rivers, which may
be a reference to the drying up of rivers. The Mahabharata says that the Sarasvati dried up in a desert (at a place
named Vinasana or Adarsana) and the river dried up in order that the Nishadas and Abhiras might not see her.
The Mahabharata also states that Vasishta committed suicide by throwing himself into the Sarasvati and that
the river then broke up into 100 channels. In Salya parva there is a description of Balarama making a pilgrimage
to the river. It is said the river changed its course first to the east and then to the west and there were seven
Sarasvati Rivers. In another part of the same Parva it is said, because of the curse of a sage, flesh and blood flowed
in the river, instead of water for some years. All these could be references to a river system in gradual decline.
Mahabharata also mentions that River Sarasvati flowed north of Kurushetra. The lake in which Duryodhana hid
to escape from Pandavas at the end of the war was said to have formed with water from Sarasvati. According
to many scholars the original text of Bharata may have been composed just before the time of Panini, but the
incident based on which it was composed might have occurred around tenth century BCE or even earlier.
It is now generally accepted that mandalas 2 to 7, all family books, are the oldest part of Rig-Veda and
mandalas 1 and 10 the latest. These are known as Family Books as most of the hymns in these Mandalas have
members of the same family as Rishies or poets. The Brahmanas came later and the epics much later. If this
is true, the reference to Sarasvati River in Vedic Literature noted above, fully agrees with the putative relative
chronology of composition of Hindu religious texts: the order of the Vedas first, followed by Brahmanas and then
the epics agrees with order of the references to the great river weakening into a ordinary river by the time of
the composition of mandalas 10 and 1 and beginning to dry up at the time of the battle of Kuru tribe and its
drying up by the time of the composition of Sathapadha Brahmana and becoming an old myth by the time of
the composition of Mahabharatha. This consistency should be considered strong evidence against the suggestion
that most or all references to the river in Vedic Literature are to an imaginary spiritual entity. Such an argument
could have been considered seriously if there had been references in early Vedas to a week drying up Sarasvati and
to a great river in Satapadha Brahmana.
Apart from the references noted above various texts of Vedic Literature, the epics, puranas etc have many
descriptions of the Sarasvati River. The name itself suggests that it had many lakes in its course. At least two
major tribes including Purus and many minor tribes lived on the banks of the river. While RV 6.61.12 associates

As can be seen from above, in the original verse, the rivers are listed strictly in the geographical order. But in Griffths translation
the order is changed a bit.
3.10. THE SARASVATI RIVER 137

the Sarasvati River with the five tribes; and RV 7.95-6 associates it with the Paravatas and the Purus; in RV
8.21.18, a number of petty kings are said to dwell along the course of Sarasvati. Besides, many Vedic sages had
their abodes on its bank. The association of Sarasvati with letters and knowledge might be on account of the many
abodes (Asrams) of Rshies and sages on its banks. There are numerous references in ancient texts that point to
the role played by the banks of Sarasvati as the centre of learning and enlightenment in Vedic India. Large parts
of the banks of the river were covered in thick jungle. It is difficult to accept that all these references are to a
mythical or imaginary river as some scholars have asserted.
Another river which was close to Sarasvati or was a tributary of it was Drishadvati. It is often mentioned
in Rigveda as well as various other Sanskrit texts. These references are not adequate to identify it clearly. The
river was identified by Oldham as the Chautang River while Talageri identified it with the Hariyupiya River
andYavyavati River. Hariyupiya and Yavyavati River, mentioned in RV, also remain unidentified. In 1871,
SirAlexander Cunningham identified the Rakshi River as the old Drishadvati River. Rakshi is another small
seasonal river that drains into the Chautang in the Kurukshetra district.
Thus the majority view now is that River Chautang is the ancient Drishadvati. The Chautang originating in
Siwalik Hills, is a tributary of Sarsuti river, which in turn is tributary of Ghaggar river in Haryana.
It is possible that the past few millennia have caused a great upheaval of the landscape where the Chautang
River presently flows. As late as 2000 B.C, the river could have been a major river. The Yamuna then might have
been a tributary of the Chautang, contributing significantly to its discharge. However, the geological phenomenon
of river capture probably rendered this large perennial river to be reduced to a mere rivulet.
A hotly debated geo-archaeological issue is whether River Sarasvati, most respected river of the Vedic culture,
ever existed as a physical entity or it was just a mythical concept. The debate covers different domains and issues;
(1) whether the river existed at all, (2) if existed during which period, (3) which were its tributaries, (4) where
was it flowing, (5) was it draining into the sea/gulf or was it a tributary of some other major river, (6) if it was
draining into the sea/gulf where and near which geographic location, (7) when and why did it disappear?
At present there is a small seasonal river called Ghaggar that originates in the Shivalik Hills of Himachal
Pradesh. It then flows west through Punjab and Haryana. There is another still smaller one called Sarsuti (Note
the similarity of the name to Sarasvati) flowing south of Ghaggar passing through Kurukhetra. It now originates in
a submontane region of Ambala district and joins the Ghaggar near Shatrana in Punjab. From Shatrana the paleo
canal widens considerably. Near Sadulgarh (Hanumangarh) the Naiwal channel, a dried out channel of the Sutlej,
joins the Ghaggar. Near Suratgarh further west the Ghaggar is joined by the dried up Drishadvati (Chautang)
river. The river is called Ghagger in the area prior to the Ottu barrage in South-Western Haryana. The bed after
Ottu barrage is called Hakra or Nara in Cholistan in Pakistan Punjab and Sind. Hakra is mostly a dried out
canal. It may also have been locally called Hakra in Kutch.
Satellite pictures and remote sensing data show the dry bed of a large river system from the foot hills of
Himalayas going south west through Punjab and Haryana. The course is mostly the same as Ghaggar-Hakra
system. It then crosses the border into Cholistan in Pakistan. The system then appears to have flowed south
parallel to Indus River which flowed about 500 kilometers to the west. The dry bed is discernible up to the Rann of
Kutch. Satellite pictures show several palaeo-channels of rivers in the region of Rajasthan, Haryana Uttar Pradesh
and adjacent areas indicating that the system might have shifted course more than once in pre-historic times and
appear to have to have migrated from east to west. It is 4 to often 10 kilometre wide in most places which is more
than the present width of Indus River. For comparison, before Sardar Sarovar Dam was completed, the mighty
River Narmada had a width of 1.5 kilometer at Barouche, where it falls into Arabian Sea. There is also a 300 to
500 KM wide band rich in fossil remains, on either side of the dry bed, which points presence of adequate moisture
in the soil at some time in the past to support the life forms. The soil in the bed is mostly clay and it becomes
very hard in the dry season and slippery in rainy season. Fresh potable water is available all through the year in
the wells dug at many places in the bed. Radio isotope tests conducted by BARC scientists on the water indicate
that it may be 11000 to 5000 years old. On either side on the banks the soil is mostly sandy and water is salty
where available. According to some archaeologists, over 2000 Harappan sites (which include more than half the
138 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

mature sites identified so far) have been discovered along the dried up beds of the paleo canal and Ghaggar-Hakra
River out of the more than 3500 sites identified so far. Discovery of these large settlements points to availability of
enough water not only for sustenance, but also for agriculture and transportation as these Harappan settlements
appear to have been centres of manufacture of various artefacts and trade in these goods and easy transportation
was essential for the survival of Harappan towns. Local people who live in the arid, mostly desertified areas still
narrate myths about a very prosperous and wet past. Another interesting detail is that many place names in
the area, which is mostly desertified, end with Sar local version of the Sanskrit term Saras or lake. The word
Sarasvati means rich in pools or lakes
Experts from different disciplines have studied the paleo canal and Ghaggar-Hakra system. These are based
on modern surveys, archaeology, geological studies, satellite photography, remote sensing and such other modern
investigative techniques. Conclusions of some of them are given below.
The chronology of the drying up of the system and its cause suggested by Gregory Possehl (who was a Professor
Emeritus of Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania and was involved in excavations of the Indus Valley
Civilization in India and Pakistan since 1964 and is an author of many books and articles on the Indus Civilization
and related topics) is as follows.
Before 3000 BCE both Yamuna and Sutlej were flowing into Ghagger and it was a large river system fed by
melting Himalayan glaciers and well as monsoon. Sometime before 2700 BCE just as the mature phase of IVC
was beginning, Yamuna changed course and joined Ganga to the east and Sutlej started to move west in stages
(Possibly because of earthquakes/tectonic shifts/accumulation of silt) . This led to reduced water flow in the
upper portion of Ghagger in Haryana and East Punjab. Sutlej gradually moved west and met Hakra in present
day Cholistan lower and lower south. Sometime around 2000 BCE Sutlej finally completely moved over to Indus.
This resulted in Southern Haryana, Rajasthan, Cholistan and Kutch/Sourastra becoming very arid or deserts.
A recent paper published in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) of the
USA, compiled from data collected by an international team of geologists, archaeologists and botanists led by
Liviu Giosan, geologist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, came to a somewhat different conclusion.
The paper states that for the past 10,000 years, the Ghaggar-Hakra was a monsoon-fed river system and had no
connection with any river originating in the Himalayas, including the Yamuna and the Sutlej.
Our study suggests that the decline in monsoon rains led to weakened river dynamics, and played
a key role both in development and the fall of Harappan culture, he said. The research, which was
conducted between 2003 and 2008, also claimed that the mythical Saraswati River was actually not
fed by glaciers in the Himalayas as believed. Rather, it was a perennial monsoon-supported watercourse
and aridification reduced it to short seasonal flows.
Scientists from the University of Cambridge have demonstrated that an abrupt weakening of the summer
monsoon affected northwest India 4,100 years ago. The research involved the collection of snail shells preserved in
the sediments of an ancient lake bed. From 4,500 BCE to 3,800 BCEs, a deep fresh-water lake existed at Kotla
Dahar. The deep lake became a shallow one after 3,800 BCE, indicating a weakening of the monsoon. Further,
a drastic monsoon weakening occurred at about 2,100 BCE that lasted for 200 years and the lake became more
or less dry during this time. By analyzing the oxygen isotopes in the shells, the scientists were able to tell how
much rain fell in the lake where the snails lived thousands of years ago. The new data show a decreased summer
monsoon rainfall, at the same time that archaeological records and radiocarbon dates suggest the beginning of the
Indus de-urbanization.
Many experts now hold the view that the area became arid by 2000 BCE. These include Enzel et al.1999,
Staubwasser et al.2003, Wunneman et al.2010, Srivastava 2011, Meadow & Patel 2011, Clift et al.2012. Their
findings briefly is that around 2200 BC Ghaggar-Hakra river started to reduce its flow due to monsoons reduction
and by 1900 BC due to a 300 years of gradual monsoons weakening resulting in poor crop production, Harappan
people were forced to start migration from Ghaggar-Hakra banks towards better watered regions. Later, the river
continued to flow as a little brook in Iron Age, ceasing to flow completely in post Iron Age, and covered by desert
3.10. THE SARASVATI RIVER 139

sands before 600 CE. There are strong evidences now to believe that there was a worldwide period of draught from
2200 to 1900 BCE. It appears to have affected Egypt, Mesopotamia (Sumerian Third Dynasty of Ur), Central
Asia, China, The Americas and South Asia. Many civilizations disappeared in these areas during this period.
Most scholars hold the view that the ancient river flowed to the north of the state of Gujarat in western India
(viz. Oldham, 1886; Wilhelmy, 1968; Sridhar et al., 1999; Malik et al., 1999), draining into Arabian Sea/Rann of
Kuch. Whereas a few others placed the river in the eastern part of Kuch and Saurashtra, emptying itself into the
Gulf of Kuch/Little Rann at Prabhas Patan near Mehsana (Iyengar and Radhakrishna, 2005). There is the view
that the river flowed through central Saurashtra and entered Arabian Sea near Prabhas Patan, Somnath-Veraval
(Thakker, 2002).
Thus though the experts differ on specific aspects, consensus seem to have emerged that it was a full flowing
large river till about 3000 BCE and started drying up by about 2000 BCE. Many scholars believed in the initial
stages (till it became clear that the system had dried up by about 2000 BCE) that the paleo-channel was the old
course of Vedic Saraswati. They include Christian Lassen, Max Muller, Marc Aurel Stein, C.F. Oldham, R D
Oldham and Jane Macintosh among others. Many recent papers/publications (J.M.Kenoyer-1998) also hold this
opinion. On the face of it, this identification of the Saraswati with the Ghaggar is logical. Rg Vedic descriptions
of the river place it between the Yamuna and Sutlej and talk of its course extending from the hills to the sea. In
later Puranic literature, the river is often described as vanishing. This provides a surprisingly good match with
the modern scientific evidence. It seems clear that at the time the hymn was composed a large river known as
Sarasvati was flowing between Yamuna and Sutlej. Hard evidence has established that a large river system existed
between these two rivers in the beginning of forth millennium BCE. The straightforward conclusion then is that
the river system was the Vedic Sarasvati and it was a full flowing river till about 3000 BCE and it dried up by
2000 BCE.
But the identification of Ghaggar or the paleo-canal with Sarasvati came into direct conflict with the putative
chronology of IE expansion into South Asia once hard data pointed to its drying up around 2000 BCE. If the
composers of RV had seen Sarasvati in full flow and as the chief among Sapta sindhu, then RV will have to be
dated before 3000 BCE. The chronology of IE expansion in its present formulation cannot have its entry into
South Asia and Vedic civilization much before 1500 BCE.
This has led to various explanations from scholars who are strong votaries of prevailing IE chronology. These
include the suggestion that references to Sarasvati in the older parts of RV is to Helmand River of southern
Afghanistan mainly as its old name in Avestan cognates with Sarasvati. But Helmand is a small, mostly seasonal
river that hardly fits the Rg-Vedic description of Sarasvati. The argument is that as the Vedic people migrated
from Afghanistan to Punjab they began calling the river they encountered by a name familiar to them. The
well-known Rg Vedic scholar Michael Witzel and R.Kochhar (1999) hold this view. Kochhar has in fact listed a
number of arguments in support of this view. He has gone to the extent of arguing that the other rivers mentioned
in conjunction with Sarasvati in Vedas might also be in Afghanistan. It is difficult to believe that the Vedic people,
out of love for a river in a distant land where they lived for some time in the course of migration into South Asia,
would go to the extent of using the familiar name for a dried up river near their new home and describe it as a
very large river, when there were many other rivers in Punjab in full flow. Also this argument hardly explains
the very systematic description in Nadistuti Sukta which places Sarasvati between Yamuna and Sutlej and talks
of it as a large river. In fact the description in the sukta of the seven rivers, in an area almost 1000 km wide, is
amazingly accurate geographically considering the limitations of the times.
Steve Farmer, a comparative historian says,

I find all attempts to identify the Sarasvati with a single historical river quite off base. The Rg Veda is
a heavily stratified document, as weve known since the 19th century, meaning it is a compilation from
different times and to some extent different geographical regions as well. To speak of the Sarasvati to
me seems quite naive philologically, since there are many different kinds of references to the river in
different layers of the text. Some may be based on one historical river or other. Others are clearly
140 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

mythological references. Writers who try to identify the Sarasvati to my mind demonstrate above all
that they are at best amateur philologists and dont know much about how ancient texts were put
together.

Similarly, Infran Habib, the noted historian has concluded that all references in RV to the river are to a mythological
or mystical concept and not to an actual, physical river.
But to an uncommitted observer all these seem to be laboured attempts to get around the obvious, simple,
straightforward conclusion and appear to be a fit case where Ockhams razor, an expression frequently used by
Michael Witzel, could be applied. 55 Consider the follwing

The many references in Rgveda make it clear that there was a large river system in the area, other than the
Indus, where these hymns were composed. Many vedic tribes lived on the banks of this river, including the
most important vedic tribe; The Purus. It was very important for these tribes as it nourished the Aryas.

The land of Purus was the area around Kurukshetra, on the banks of Ghagger River. Composers of the
hymns were subjects or dependents of Puru or more correctly; Bharata kings.

The vedas were composed by people living in the area.

We now know that there was a large river system flowing from the Himalayas, through present day Pujab,
Haryana, Sind, Rajastan and draining into the sea along the Gujarat coast. It was a large river system
before 3000 BCE.

Thus the straightforward conclusion should be that the ancient palio canal visible in the area could be that of
the Vedic Sarasvati. The only objection to such a conclusion is that it will be in conflict with the chronology of
the popular model. These surely calls for a hard re-look at this chronology.
However marrying hard data from physical sciences and evidence from a text like Rgveda must be considered
an uncertain procedure as data from two different domains may not be isomorphic. Thus it is best to await further
evidences in the matter before coming to a definite conclusion. But as of now the evidence of Sarasvati poses
major questions to the putative chronology of IE expansion into South Asia. Till such adverse data is satisfactorily
explained, the hypothesis that Ghaggar-Hakra is the paleo canal of the Vedic Sarasvati will have to be considered
the more logical one. But such a conclusion will destabilize the foundations of Aryan Invasion/Migration/Trickling
in Theories as they are formulated now.

3.11 Astronomical Evidence

Apart from the evidence of Sarasvati River, evidences available from the many references in Vedic Literature to
positions of astronomical bodies like stars, also point to a very high chronology of these texts. I will attemt a brief
discussion of these references and their interpretations below.
The phenomenon of the axial precession is a slow and continuous change in the orientation of an astronomical
bodys rotational axis. In particular, it refers to the gradual shift in the orientation of Earths axis of rotation,
which like a wobbling top, traces out a pair of cones joined at their centre. Earths precession was historically
called precession of the equinoxes because the equinoxes appear to move along the ecliptic relative to the fixed
stars, opposite to the apparent motion of the Sun along the ecliptic. The precession of the Earths axis has a
55
Occams or Ockhams razor is a principle attributed to the 14th century logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. Ockham
was the village in the English county of Surrey where he was born. Briefly it holds that if you have two theories that both explain the
observed facts, then you should accept the simplest until more evidence comes along. The simplest explanation for a phenomenon is
more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations. The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be
correct and the burden of proof falls on the later. The razor is to be applied to cut off the complicated theories. In the present case
a number of subjective assumptions are required to argue that Vedic Sarasvati was never an actual river.
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 141

number of observable effects. First, the positions of the south and north celestial poles appear to move in circles
against the space-fixed backdrop of stars. Secondly, the position of stars, asterisms and constellations close to the
sun on the days of solstices, equinoxes or any other time defined relative to the seasons slowly appear to changes
over the years. Asterisms or stars that are seen as close to the sun gradually move away and the next star is seen
close to the sun at the defined time of the year after a few centuries. The ring of asterisms close to the ecliptic
around earth called sidereal zodiac appear to slowly rotate in the opposite direction to suns movement. Thus,
the tropical year, measuring the cycle of seasons (for example, the time from one winter solstice to next solstice,
or one spring equinox to the next), is about 20 minutes shorter than the sidereal year, which is measured by the
Suns apparent position relative to the stars. This cycle is completed once every 25,772 years, or the equinoxes
precesses one cycle in those many years or one degree in 71 years. This apparent movement of the stars relative to
the sun is a very useful tool in determining the dates of ancient events if we have reliable records of astronomical
observations. Apart from precession of the equinoxes,56 such determination can also be done on the basis of records
of positions of planets and moon and astronomical events like eclipses.
Since the 1780s, Western researchers (Playfair, Bailly and Jacobi among others) have reported data in both
Hindu astronomical tables and stray astronomical references in religious and epic texts, which indicate a sur-
prisingly high chronology for Vedic civilization. In a paper of John Playfair (1748-1819) (FRS and Professor of
Mathematics at the University of Edinburgh), which is a detailed review published in 1790 of the book Traite de
astronomie Indienne et Orientale, by J. S. Bailly (Paris 1787), the famous French historian of astronomy, states
that the oldest astronomical observation recorded in the tables still in use among Hindu astrologers (of which
three copies had reached Europe between 1687 and 1787) had to be 4300 BC. The copies, obtained from Thai-
land, Karnataka and Tamilnadu by different people from different sources during a period of hundred years had
remarkably similar data of star/planetary positions/corrections and of solar eclipses. The origin of these tables
is uncertain, but clearly the actual observations based on which these data has been compiled are very ancient.
Playfairs main conclusions are the following:

The observations on which the astronomy of India is founded, were made more than three thousand years
before the Christian era; and in particular, the places of the sun and the moon, at the beginning of the
Kali-yoga (i.e., 17/18 February 3102 B.C.), were determined by actual observation.

Though the astronomy which is now in the hands of the Brahmins is so ancient in its origin, yet it contains
many rules and tables that are of later construction.

The basis of the four systems of astronomical tables of Hindus which we have examined is evidently the
same.

The construction of these tables implies a great knowledge of geometry, arithmetic, and even of the theoretical
part of astronomy.

Playfair argues that communication (of astronomical knowledge) is more likely to have gone from India to
Greece, than in the opposite direction.

3.11.1 Bal Gangadhar Tilaks Hypothesis

Bal Gangadhar Tilak in his scholarly book titled The Orion points to many references and obscure allusions in
Rgveda as well as some later texts of Vedic Literature that points to the possibility that the sun was close to the
Orion or asterism Mrigashira was close to the sun on vernal equinox during the time Rgveda was being composed.
56
Equinoxes are the two points in the elliptical path of the earth when the axial tilt of the earth neither point away nor towards the
sun and the night and day have approximately equal length. The equinoxes are the only times when the Sun is exactly overhead on
the Equator.
142 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Asterism Mrigashira was close to the sun on vernal equinox in around 4000 BCE. He has analysed RV 10.61.5-9
and RV 10.86 in great detail to establish his hypothesis. I will attempt a short review of his arguments in respect
of RV 5.40 and RV 10.86 below.
Astronomical references appear in the earliest parts of Rig Veda, in other Vedas and other later Vedic Literature
texts. One such is RV 5.40.5-9, which appear to record a solar eclipse.
The translation by Ralph T.H. Griffith of verses 5 to 9 of the hymn is reproduced below for clarity.
(RV 5.40.5-9 Rshi Atri Devata Indra Agni)

5 O Surya, when the Asuras descendant Svarbhanu, pierced thee through and through with darkness,
All creatures looked like one who is bewildered, who knoweth not the place where he is standing.
6 What time thou smotest down Svarbhanus magic that spread itself beneath the sky, O Indra, By
his fourth sacred prayer Atri discovered Surya concealed in gloom that stayed his function.
7 Let not the oppressor with this dread, through anger swallow me up, for I am thine, O Atri. Mitra
art thou, the sender of true blessings: thou and King Varua be both my helpers.
8 The Brahman Atri, as he set the press-stones, serving the Gods with praise and adoration, Established
in the heaven the eye of Surya, and caused Svarbhanus magic arts to vanish.
9 The Atris found the Sun again, him whom Svarbhanu of the brood

Another translation of verse 5 above that I have come across runs like thisO Sun! when you were blocked by
one whom you gifted your own light, the earth gets scared by the sudden darkness. This interpretation seems
to be far more logical and well in tune with the context, but will imply that the composers of these hymns were
well aware of the reason for the sudden darkness or that the actual cause of solar eclipse is the moon coming in
between the sun and earth. The expression Svarbhanu, etymologically means a powerful phenomenon which
takes away the splendour of the heavens. Thus the term could just mean a Solar Eclipse and may have nothing
to do with any evil Asura. Turiyena brahmana in verse 6 is rendered as forth sacred prayer by Griffith, which
make little sense. In fact it is true of many other ancient/medieval interpretations of the term, verse and hymn.
Bal Gangadhar Tilak feels it could be a crude instrument or even knowledge of astronomy. The word Brahma
is often used to denote a mantra, but it may also mean knowledge or the tool or means of the acquiring such
knowledge. Thus the phrase could mean by the action of turiya or, in other words, by means of turiya and
thus give to the whole hymn a simple and natural appearance, rather than endeavour to interpret it after the
manner of the Red Indians, who believed that Columbus averted the calamity of the eclipse by prayers. Tilaks
interpretation sounds far more logical. Turiya is mentioned in Sidhanta Shiromani 11.15 as a name for quadrant;
an instrument of observation .
From the description it is clear that it was a annular or hybrid eclipse or a near total eclipse, since it says
that darkness spread beneath the sky. A number of Brahmanas says the eclipse occurred three days before the
autumnal equinox and it took place in the afternoon. Assuming that Sage Atri observed it from a place close
to Kurukshetra meridian, P. C. Sengupta found only one date with the occurrence of such a solar eclipse, that
satisfies all these conditions, which he has calculated as 26 July 3928 BC. However such a conclusion might not be
acceptable to many and one objection usually mentioned against it that the meridian of the place of observation
could have been far to the north; somewhere in Afghanistan. But it is almost certain that Rgveda was composed in
places close to the legendary River Sarasvati. Also the date and time assumed is too speculative, as they are based
on some vague statements in different texts. Yet the date is consistent with those based on other astronomical
references mentioned below.

Tilaks Hypothesis on Orions Position During Vedic Times

Orion is a prominent constellation located on the celestial equator and visible throughout the world. It is one of
the most conspicuous and recognizable constellations in the night sky. Its visibility is better in the winter. It
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 143

was named after Orion, a hunter in Greek mythology. Orions Belt or The Belt of Orion is an asterism within
the constellation. It consists of the three bright stars Zeta (Alnitak), Epsilon (Alnilam), and Delta (Mintaka) and
many others. Alnitak is around 800 light years away from earth and is 100,000 times more luminous than the Sun;
much of its radiation is in the ultraviolet range, which the human eye cannot see.The formation resembles that of
a hunter.
In artistic renderings, the surrounding constellations are sometimes related to Orion: he is depicted standing
next to the river Eridanus with his two hunting dogs Canis Major and Canis Minor, fighting Taurus. He is
sometimes depicted hunting Lepus the hare. He also sometimes is depicted to have a lions hide in his hand. Orion
is bordered by Taurus to the north-west, Eridanus to the south-West, Lepus to the south, Monoceros to the east,
and Gemini to the north-East. Another constellation, Canis Major also is close to it.
An interesting fact about The Orion or The Hunter or The antelopes head is that many Indo-European
language speaking societies like Parsies, Germans apart from Vedic Aryans and The Greeks had closely similar
myths about it.
Mrigasira or Makeera in Malayalam is the name of an important Nakshatra in Indian astronomy/astrology.
It is in Orion constellation and is usually identified as Lamda Orioni. Its position is described in the Surya
Siddhanta. The term Mrgasira a composite of two Sanskrit words, mrga meaning animal/beast and sira meaning
head or precisely, the top of the head. Taking the three stars in the belt of Orion as the top of the head, the figure
of Mrigas head can be perceived or imagined in the sky. In Indian myths, mrigasira is the head of Prajapati, a
wish born son of Brahma. According to Satapadha Brahmana 2.2.2.8-9, Aitareya Brahmana 3.33 as well as many
other Itihasa-Purana texts, Prajapati (Orion) commits incest with his daughter, Rohini (Aldebaran), both taking
the form of antelopes. Angered by the incest, Rudra (Sirius) cuts off the head of Prajapati with an arrow. The
story goes that the head became the asterism Mrgasira. One can perceive, with some inventive imagination, the
antelope head with the arrow pierced through the top of its head in the Orion constellation.
Reproduced below is the translation of RV 10.86 by Ralph T.H. Griffith.
RV 10.86 Rshi Indra Putra Vrshakapi, Indrani and Indra; Devata Indra.
1. MEN have abstained from pouring juice they count not Indra as a God. Where at the votarys store
my friend Vrsakapi hath drunk his fill. Supreme is Indra over all.
2 Thou, Indra, heedless passest by the ill Vrsakapi hath wrought; Yet nowhere else thou findest place
wherein to drink the Soma juice. Supreme is Indra over all.
3 What hath he done to injure thee, this tawny beast Vrsakapi, With whom thou art so angry now?
What is the votarys foodful store? Supreme is Indra over all.
4 Soon may the hound who hunts the boar seize him and bite him in the car, O Indra, that Vrsakapi
whom thou protectest as a friend, Supreme is Indra over all.
5 Kapi hath marred the beauteous things, all deftly wrought, that were my joy. In pieces will I rend
his head; the sinners portion shall be woo. Supreme is Indra over all.
6 No Dame hath ampler charms than 1, or greater wealth of loves delights. None with more ardour
offers all her beauty to her lords embrace. Supreme is Indra over all.
7 Mother whose love is quickly wibn, I say what verily will be. My,breast, O Mother, and my head
and both my hips seem quivering. Supreme is Indra over all.
8 Dame with the lovely hands and arms, with broad hair-plaits add ample hips, Why, O thou Heros
wife, art thou angry with our Vrsakapi? Supreme is Indra over all.
9 This noxious creature looks on me as one bereft of heros love, Yet Heroes for my sons have I, the
Maruts Friend and Indras Queen. Supreme is Indra over all.
10 From olden time the matron goes to feast and general sacrifice. Mother of Heroes, Indras Queen,
the rites ordainer is extolled. Supreme is Indra over all.
144 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

11 So have I heard Indrani called most fortunate among these Dames, For never shall her Consort die
in future time through length of days. Supreme is Indra overall.
12 Never, Indralni, have I joyed without my friend Vrsakapi, Whose welcome offering here, made pure
with water, goeth to the Gods. Supreme is Indra over all.
13 Wealthy Vrsakapi, blest with sons and consorts of thy sons, Indra will eat thy bulls, thy dear oblation
that effecteth much. Supreme is Indra over all.
14 Fifteen in number, then, for me a score of bullocks they prepare, And I devour the fat thereof: they
fill my belly full with food. Supreme is Indra over all.
15 Like as a bull with pointed horn, loud bellowing amid the herds, Sweet to thine heart, O Indra, is
the brew which she who tends thee pours. Supreme is Indra over all.
18 O Indra this Vrsakapi hath found a slain wild animal, Dresser, and new-made pan, and knife, and
wagon with a load of wood. Supreme is Indra over all.
19 Distinguishing the Dasa and the Arya, viewing all, I go. I look upon the wise, and drink the simple
votarys Soma juice. Supreme is Indra over all.
20 The desert plains and steep descents, how many leagues in length they spread! Go to the nearest
houses, go unto thine home, Vrsakapi. Supreme is Indra over all.
21 Turn thee again Vrsakapi: we twain will bring thee happiness. Thou goest homeward on thy way
along this path which leads to sleep. Supreme is Indra over all.
22 When, Indra and Vrsakapi, ye travelled upward to your home, Where was that noisome beast, to
whom went it, the beast that troubles man? Supreme is Indra over all.
23 Daughter of Manu, Parsu bare a score of children at a birth. Her portion verily was bliss although
her burthen caused her grief.

All verses end with Visvasmadindra Uthara rendered as Supreme is Indra over all by Griffith, except the
last. As can be seen, it reads like a series of disconnected, mutually inconsistent bits of some obscure myths. Most
ancient/medieval interpretations are also just as opaque. Some scholars have expressed the opinion that it may be
narrating some ancient legend or even a record of history. It is believed that it can be understood as a dialogue
between the three rishies of the hymn; namely Indra Putra (son of Indra) Vrshakapi, Indrani, the wife of Indra
and Indra himself; the last two verses being the concluding remarks by the composer.
In the first verse, Indra seems to say that due to his friend Vrshakapis action, people have stopped offering
sacrifices. In verse 3 Indrani, the wife of Indra, says that Vrishakapi has the form of a yellow antelope. In verse
5 Indrani is about to cut off Vrshakapis head, because he offended her, and in the preceding verse (4) a dog is
said to be let loose upon him to bite off his ear. Svanasya jamdishadapi karne. Indrani cuts off the head of
Vrshakapi as he had stopped sacrifices and thus denied Indrani her share of the sacrificial offerings as the wife of
Indra. Verse 21 and 22 might be saying that when Vrishkapi appears again, sacrifices would commence again. It
is difficult to make any consistent sense of the remaining verses. Tilak has given his interpretation of these verses
in detail.
None of the ancient/medieval/modern interpretors have any clue as to who or what this Vrshakapi is or the
logic, context or etymology of the various unexplained expressions, words and allusions in the hymn. Yaska and
Sayana have treated Vrshakapi as The Sun. Amarasimha thought it may be either Visnu or Shiva. There is a
reference in Mahabharata to one Vrshakapi as the author of Nighandu. But why would a close friend or son of
Indra want to stop sacrifices? Even more mystifying is the role of the dog in all this.
Tilak argues that Vrshakapi might be the sun at the time of the two equinoxes. In vedic times the Ayanas
or two half years were calculated from the time of each equinox. Six months from vernal equinox to autumnal
equinox (the warm season from March 21-23 to September 21-23) was known as Deva Ayana and the other half or
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 145

cold season was known as Pitri Ayana. Some centuries later the period of ayanas was changed to the present one
of solstice to solstice. Traditionally no sacrifice or yajna was conducted during Pitri or Dakshina ayana. These
were conducted only during Deva Ayanas or later during Utharayanas. Now if sacrifices are stopped on autumnal
equinox, it could be said that Vrshakapi did it as he is the equinox, only to recommence it after next vernal
equinox, as verse 21 says.
This still do not explain where the dog comes in in this process. Tilak thinks that the dog refered in this hymn
is the constallation Canis Major to the north of Orion. Had Yaska, Sayana and various other ancient/medieval
commentators known that there was a constellation called dog in the heavens by the side of Mrigashiras, it
is possible that they would have recognized Vrishakapi as the sun during equinoxes. There is no reference to
the Dog Star in any text of Vedic Literature after the Rgveda. This might be so as it was lost from the
collective memory of Indian astronomers due to passage of time and hence neither Yaska nor Sayana could
find any clue to the true meaning of the hymn. One possible explanation for the loss may that there was a
large time gap between Rgveda and later texts. Also Hindu Astronomers were probably more focussed on the ce-
lestial bodies in the ecliptic; the 27 asterisms and planets. The Dog Star is far from the ecliptic. Ecliptic is the
plane of earthe revolution around the sun.
Tilak argues that this hymn is clear evidence that during vedic times the sun was in Orion or that the sun was
close to Mrigashiras Asterism at vernal equinox. The antelope head is Mrigashiras and the dog is Canis Major.
The identification of the yellow antelopes head mentioned in this hymn with Mrgasira Asterism is supported by
the myth about the Prajapatis head mentioned above. Canis Major is close to the right ear of the antelope head
and may be perceieved with some imagination as about to bite it. If the Orion is close to the sun on vernal
equinox, the dog or Canis Major would be seen as following the Orion and dip below western horizon on autumnal
equinox or as the dog chasing the antelope out of the sky, as sun raises in the east. At present constellation Pisces
or Hindu asterism Uttara-bhadrapada can be seen close to the sun at sunrise as well as sunset on vernal equinox
day and can be seen as raising in the east at sunset and setting in the west at sunrise on autumn equinox day or
the sequence is reverse of the one on vernal equinox. Similarly, in the middle of third millennium BCE, Krittika
and in the beginning of Common era, Ashvini would have been visible likewise. The sun was close to the Orion
or the asterism Mrgasira on vernal equinox in 4000 BCE.
A related argument put forward by Tilak is based on the time Pitri Paksha is celebrated by Hindus to this day.
It is now celebrated in the dark half of the Bhadrapada month. Tilak says this is because Pitri Ayana started at
that time in ancient times or that the autumnal equinox was about that time then or the Orion was close to the
sun on vernal equinox. Incidentally Zoroastrians also have such ceremonies for departed ancestors at about the
same time.
There are many grey areas in our understanding of how the composers of Rgveda and later texts calculated
moon phases, months, seasons and the year; and how advanced was their knowledge of astronomy. This is
important, as an error of a few days in what is recorded in these texts, can result in an error of many centuries in
our calculation of period of composition of these texts based on these references. Some of these are listed below.

Whether their calender was lunar, solar or sidereal; based on the phases of the moon, the changes of seasons
or star positions.

Whether the commencement of the year was from winter solstice or from vernal equinox or what was called
Vishuvan. Vishuvan literally means the time when day and night are of equal length.

How they solved the problem involved in balancing the solar with the lunar year?

How accurate was their astronomical observations? While determining phases of moon is very simple,
identifying various planets and stars and calculating the exact time of vernal equinox or winter solstice
might require some astronomical knowledge.
146 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Many Western indologists were of the view that one cannot suppose the primitive Aryans to be so far advanced
in civilization as to correctly comprehend such problems.
Tilak has gone into these aspects in detail. I quote some of his observations below.

the ancient Aryas originally commenced their year, which was luni-solar and sidereal, with the vernal
equinox, and that when the beginning of the year was changed to the winter solstice, both the reckonings
were kept up; the one for sacrificial and the other for civil purposes. How they solved the problem
involved in balancing the solar with the lunar year is not quite clear. There may be some doubt as to
whether the concurrence of the two years was at first secured by intercalating twelve days at the end
of every lunar year, or whether the days were allowed to accumulate until an intercalary month could
be inserted. The former appears to have been the older method, especially as it has been utilised and
retained in the performance of yearly sacrifices. But one thing is certain; that the primitive Aryas had
contrived means for adjusting the lunar with the solar year
He has quoted from Shatapatha Brahmana 1.3.1-3 wherein it says that the seasons Vasanta, Grishma
and Varsha are of the Devas and Sharad, Hemanta and Shishira are of the Pitris; the day is of the
Devas; the night of the Pitris: again the first part of the day is of the Devas ; the latter of the Pitris
...... When he (the sun) turns to the north, he is amongst the Devas and protects them ; when he turns
to the south he amongst the is Pitris and protects them.
The path of the Devas and the path of the Pitris are several times referred to in the Rigveda. Thus the
north is equated with devas. This should remove doubts as to what we are to understand by devayana,
devapadha, or devaloka and uttarayana as connected with it. Vasanta constitutes the two months
following the vernal equinox. the word uttarayana or dakshinayana do not occur in the Rigveda.

It appears that the beginning of the year in the Hindu calenders was changed from vernal equinox to winter
solstice at some time, probably in the first centuries of Common Era. In the Vedanga Jyotisha the year commence
with the winter solstice.
When these texts talk about the Ayanas and six different seasons, one will have to conclude that the composers
had reasonable knowledge and means to know the time and period of these. Any assumption to the contrary will
require many unconvincing special pleadings, as the assumption will then have to be that they did not know what
they were talking about. Thus it seems clear that the Vedic Aryans had adequate astronomical knowledge to
identify various planets and asterisms and correctly calculate the beginning of the year, the change of seasons
and the north south movement of the sun. It also seems clear that Devayana meant the six months from vernal
equinox or when the sun was in the northern hemisphere and Pitriayana meant six months when it was south of
the equator.
The test of a good hypothesis is that it should be able to explain most of if not all the observed or known
data without any serious adverse or unexplained data. By this yardstick Tilaks model should be considered quite
strong. It certainly has logical consistency, far more than any other interpretation of these hymns attempted so
far. Yet it might still require a more substantial empirical frame-work to be acceptable to many, particularly as it
contradicts the accepted wisdom.

3.11.2 Other Astronomic Evidences From Vedic Literature

At present, the sun rises in the background of Pisces on the vernal equinox or sun is close to the line between
Pisces and the earth on that day. We will transition to Aquarius from Pisces in the year 2,150 AD. In the Vedic
period it used to rise in the background of Gemini (Margasira/Orion - Messier 42 - is close to Gemini) according
to Tilaks hypothesis. There are 3 constellations (Taurus, Aries, and Pisces) that the sun has travelled through
from the time of composition the Vedas and our own time. There are twelve constellations in the zodiac and thus
each covers an arc of 30 degrees. It takes 71 years for 10 precession. Multiplying these numbers (3*30*71) we
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 147

get 6,450 years or 4450 BCE. Or in terms of the Hindu asterisms, sun has moved from Mrgasira through Rohini,
Kritika, Bharani, Ashvani, Revati and now is close to Uttara Bhadrapada on vernal equinox. As each asterism
covers an arc of 13.330 , we get (7*13.33*71) about 6610 years with a maximum possible boundary error of around
700 years. Thus the approximate date when the Vedas were composed must be around 4500 BCE.
Apart from those references pointed out above, there are a number of others spread across many other texts
of Vedic Literature. I have mentioned a few of them below and their significance.
Krishna Yajur Veda versions available today, Taittiriya Samhita 4:4:10, Maitrayan Samhita 2:13 :20, Kathaka
Samhita 39:13 as also Atharva Veda, Taittiriya Brahmana and Satapadha Brahmana have lists of 27 or 28 ecliptical
asterisms opening with Krttika. Starting the list with Krttika (Krttika is in Pleiades -Messier 45- star cluster within
Taurus) implies that it was close to the sun at the start of the year whereas it was close to Margasira/Orion at
the time of composition of early Vedas. Incidentally Hindu calenders at present start with Ashvani. These are still
prepared based on astronomical tables created at some time at the beginning of Common Era. The change from
Krttika to to Ashvani is possible if the sun had moved two asterisms (Kritika, Bharani, Ashvani) or if there was
a time gap of about 2000 years from the time of composition of Krisna Yajur Veda texts and the preparation of
the astronomical tables now in use. Again sun is now close to Uttara Bhadrapada on Vernal Equinox as another
2000 years have elapsed and the sun has moved another two asterisms due to precession.
The year started with spring equinox in India from ancient times. Spring equinox and winter solstice are two
days used as the beginning of the year by all cultures of all times as they are the most logical. The reference
cannot be to the winter solstice as the period then will be around 9000 BCE. Other season defined points of
autumn equinox and summer solstice also fails for the same reason. Krttika was close to the sun on vernal equinox
from 3000BCE to 2000BCE. This implies that the texts mentioned above must have been composed in the third
millennium BCE.
Adharvaveda 19.7 by Rshi Gargya, apart from the list of twenty eight Nakshatras starting with Krittika, also
refers to Ayana occurring in Maghaa during his time. Ayana refers to apparent direction of Suns North-South
motion. The day of direction reversal is called an Ayana day (Uttara and Dakshina Ayana). When Rishi Gargya
refers to Ayana in Maghaa, he is clearly referring to a Summer Solstice day, as Maghaa is the seventh Nakshatra
after Krittika. Since the list starts with Krittika, it must have been the starting point of new year or the vernal
equinox day. Sun was at Maghaa on summer Solstice day during the middle of third millennium BC. It could be
either Dakshina Ayana (Summer Solstice) or Uttara Ayana (Winter Solstice). But the former fails because the
date would then be 22000 BC. The relevant part of the suktam by Rshi Gargya is as follows.

suhavamagne krittika rohini chaastu bhadram mrigashirah Sham aardhrah

punarvasu soonruta chaaru pushyo Bhaanur aslesha ayanam magha mey

Some of the names are different from the presently followed list and Bhanu or the sun is included as the
eighth asterism. However the order and most of the names are the same. The reason for the presence of the 28th
Abhigit in some of these lists is not quite clear. One explanation is that it was used to accommodate the part of
a day in excess of 27 days that constitute a sidereal lunar cycle.
Vedic astronomy or astrology divides ecliptic circle into 27 sectors or segments and each segment is recognized
with unique name. The number of these segments or nakshatras reflects the number of days in a sidereal month
(modern value: 27.32 days). Thus Nakshatra should be understood as an arc segment of approximately of 13.33
degrees or 13 degree 20 minutes, along the ecliptic and not any particular star or constellation. The nakshatras
are referred to as the lunar mansions because the Moon stays in one arc segment for one day. Their names are
related to the most prominent star or asterism in the respective arc segment. The apparent movement of the
sun also is along the same lunar mansions, but sun stays in one lunar mansions for 13 to 14 days; the variation
being the result of the elliptical path of the sun. The Surya Siddhantha concisely specifies the coordinates of
the twenty seven Nakshatras, though it is in very cryptic and often symbolic language, making it very difficult to
comprehend.
148 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Other data revealing the precessional phases include the constellational positions of the solstices or of solar
and lunar positions at the beginning of the monsoon and at solstitial and other datable festivals, and these too
point to the high chronology of these texts. Thus, the Kaushitak Brhmana puts the Mahashivaratri festival just
after the winter solstice, which now falls 65-70 days later. It is now celebrated in the month of Phalguna on the
last day of lunar waning phase or in the later part of February in most parts of the country. This might mean
that Kaushitak Brhmana was composed in the middle of the 3rd millennium BC.
The Maha Shivaratri is mentioned in several Puranas, particularly the Skanda Purana, Linga Purana and
Padma Purana narrates different mythologies associated with this festival. According to one legend of the Shaivic
tradition, this is the night when Shiva performs Tandava Nirta; the heavenly dance of creation, preservation and
destruction. According to another legend, this is the night when Shiva and Parvati got married. Today the story
differs from region to region. Thus, it appears that from the time the Itihasa/Puranas were being composed,
nobody had any notion as to why Sivaratri was being celebrated on that particular day of the year.
In most older Hindu texts the word Siva is used in the sense of auspicious. It is often used as a quality of
Rudra in Rgveda. Thus instead of Night of Siva the God, the original meaning could have been the auspicious
night, as it heralded Deva Ayana days when rituals can be conducted; the return of warmer days. Thus Sivaratri
could have been a new year celebration. If so, the day might have been fixed in around 3000 BCE. In the vedic
times, Deva Ayana started from vernal equinox and ended with autumn equinox and it was the period of the
year when rituals and sacrifices were conducted.
Surya Sidhanta, 14.9, an ancient text on astronomy of unknown authorship and of uncertain period says
that Uthara Ayana was from Makara Sankranti (winter solstice) to Karkitaka Sankranti (summer solstice) and
Dakshina Ayana was from Karkitaka Sankranti to Makara Sankranti. The relevant part of Surya Sidhanta, 14.9
as translated by Pandit Bapu Deva Sastri in his work published in 1861 is reproduced below.

From (the time of) the suns entrance into Capricorn (Makara), the six solar months are Uttarayana.
In the same manner from the time of the entrance of sun into Cancer (Karkitaka), the six solar months
are Dakshinayana.

Makara Sankranti now falls about 25 days after winter solstice in the middle of January. While the asterism
Makara is visible at sunset in the horizon close to the sun on the Makara Sankranti day, winter solstice occurs
between December 21 and 23, some 25 days earlier. This indicates that the observation in Surya Sidhanta was
recorded about 1800 years ago or in about second century AD.57
Kaushitaki Brahmana 19.3 says
On new moon of Magha he rests; being about to turn northwards. Having gone south for six months, he stands
still, about to turn north; these also rest, being about to celebrate Mahavrata day
Mahavrata was celebrated on the day of winter solstice or at the begging of solar New Year. It followed the
solar calendar, unlike most other Vedic rituals, which followed lunar calendar. Aithereya Brahmana and Satapadha
Brahmana puts it on the last day of the year.
The above reference seems to say that the new year day came after the month of Magha and that Magha fell
before winter solstice. Winter solstice this year (2017) is on 21 Dec, 2017. If this is so, Kaushitaki Brahmana will
have to be dated to the middle of third millennium BCE. But the whole reference is vague.
Taitiriya Brahmana 1.5.2.7 lists 13.5 nakshatras ending with Visakha in the Northern Hemisphere called
Devenakshatras and the other 13.5 nakshatras in Southern Hemisphere called Yama Nakshatras. These statements
points to a period of around 2300 BCE.
57
Surya Sidhanta is traditionally mentioned as the first among 18 very ancient Sidhantic (astronomical) texts. Most of these texts
are not available today, but there are references to some of them in extant texts like Varahamihiras work, Panchasiddhantika. These
18 texts, if they existed, could be older than Vedanga Jyothisha of Sage Lagadha as Vedanga Jyothisha is not among the 18. This
means that Surya Sidhanta available today might have undergone revision or redaction sometimes in the first centuries of Common
Era. Surya Sidhanta is narrated in the form of explanations regarding astronomy, time, seasons and related subjects given indirectly
by Sun God or Surya Deva for the benefit of the Asura Sage, Maya.
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 149

Satapadha Brahmana 2:1:2:3 (known as Nakshatra Brahmana) has another such interesting reference. Krttika
never swerving from the east (eta ha vai pracyai dizo na cyavante). Except for Krttika (the Pleiades), there
were also other constellations on the equator, likewise rising due east. But only two were also on the ecliptic, one
at the vernal (Pleiades) and the other at the autumnal end. This was the case around 2900- 2400 BC, not in 800
BC when conventional scholarship assumes the Shatapatha Brahmana was written.
Maitrayani Upanisad (6.14) states that the winter solstice occurred in the middle of Dhanista (Sravistha) and
the summer solstice at the beginning of Magha Nakshatra. This would place the period of the Upanishad in
2400-1800 BCE. The Vedanga Jyotisha (VJ) states that winter solstice occurred in the beginning of Dhanista.
Thus the solstice point had moved by half a naksatra between Maitrayani Upanisad and VJ. This means that
about 450-500 years elapsed between Maitrayani Upanisad and VJ.
Vedanga Jyothisha (VJ) by sage Lagadha is the oldest text on Vedic astronomy available today. It is a very
short and cryptic Sutra type work very difficult to interpret probably used as a guide or hand book. It now has
two versions; assigned to Ric Veda and Yajur Veda. Yajur VJ Verses 6,7and 8 observes that at the time of its
composition the winter solstice was at the beginning of Sravistha and summer solstice was at the midpoint of
Aslesa. Varahamihira has stated that in his own time these were at Punarvasu and Uttarasadha which means
that there was a precession of 23.330 from the time of Lagadha to that of Varahamihira. We know Varahamihira
lived in about 550 AD. This gives Lagadhas time as 23 1/3*72=1700 years before that or about 1150-1300 BCE.
Western scholars give a much later date for VJ. Usually mentioned period is 200 BCE.

Dhruva or Alpha Draconis as Pole Star During Vedic Times

Another observable shift due to the precession pertains to the Pole Star, a very important one as it was always
an aid to ocean navigation. The position was occupied by different northerly stars by virtue of the precession of
the polar axis, and frequently left unoccupied for thousands of years. Thuban or Alpha Draconis is a star (or star
system) in the constellation of Draco. Due to the precession of Earths rotational axis, Thuban was the naked-eye
star closest to the North Pole from 3942 BC, until the position was taken by Kappa Draconis. It was closest to
the pole in 2787 BC, when it was less than two and a half arc-minutes away from the pole. It remained within
one degree of true north for nearly 200 years afterwards, and even 900 years after its closest approach, was just
five degrees off the pole. Thuban was considered the pole star until about 1900 BC. At present the term Pole Star
usually refers to Polaris, which is the current northern pole star, also known as the North Star. During the 1st
millennium BC, Ursae Minoris was the bright star closest to the celestial pole, but it was never close enough to
be taken as marking the pole, and the Greek navigator Pytheas in 320 BC described the celestial pole as devoid
of stars. Thus the star Yama or Thuban or Alpha Draconis was very close to the North Pole in the early 3rd
millennium BC and passably close in the preceding and subsequent centuries, but certainly not in the later part
of first millenium BC where the dominant school wants to place these texts.
Taitiriya Aranyaka (2-9-1) is the first Vedic text to mention the constellation Draco (Thuban) as the pole-
star (Dhruva). The pole-star is mentioned in several Sutra texts.58 The married couple was required to have a
darsana of the pole-star. Ekagni Kanda (1.9), part of Taitiriya Samhita of Krisna Yajur Veda mentions the
pole-star (Dhruva) and Great Bear (Saptarsis). Asvalayana Grhya Sutra (1.7.22) mentions that the bride shall
have a darsana of Dhruva, Arundhati and Saptarsi.

When she sees the polar-star, the star Arundhati, and the seven Rishis (ursa major), let her break
the silence (and say), May my husband live and I get offspring..

Sankhayana Grhya Sutra (1.17.2-4) says

58
Knowing the correct direction could have been very important for the ancients who had to undertake long journeys through thinly
populated areas
150 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

2 Let them sit silent, when the sun has set, until the polar-star appears.
3. He shows her the polar-star with the words, Firm be thou, thriving with me!
4. Let her say, I see the polar-star; may I obtain offspring.

Sukla Yajurvedic Paraskara Grhya Sutra (1.8.19), Kathaka Grhya Sutra (3.25.45), Samavedic Drahyayana
Grhya Sutra (1.4.4), Gobhila Grhya Sutra (2.3.8-9), Jaimini Grhya Sutra (1.21.24), Krsna Yajurvedic Apastambha
Grhya Sutra (2.6.12), Baudhayana Grhya Sutra (1.5.12-13), Bharadvaja Grhya Sutra (1.19.1), Manava Grhya Sutra
(1.14.9), Vaikhanasa Grhya Sutra (3.5) also mention the pole-star in connection with marriage rituals.
During 3300 - 2300 BCE, Thuban was very close to North Celestial Pole (NCP). It was closest to NCP around
2800 BCE. This was one of the arguments introduced by Hermann Jacobi (1894) in favour of a high chronology of
Vedic texts. Abhayankar (1993:7) sums up: Taking Alpha Draconis as the pole star, Jacobi calculated that these
verses were composed in 2780 BC +/- 500 years.. The majority view now is that the Grhya Sutra texts were
composed at some time in the later half of first millennium BCE. But, as Greek navigator Pytheas said, north
pole had no star that could qualify as pole star during that period.

3.11.3 Evidence of Kali Yuga

Hindu tradition as well as Aryabhatiyam makes mention of the conjunction of the seven planets (Saturn,
Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Sun and Moon) and Ketu (southern lunar node, the northern node/ Rahu being
by definition in the opposite location) near the fixed star Revati (Zeta Piscium) on the day Kali-Yuga began (18
February 3102 BC). It is believed that Lord Krishna breathed his last on this day and is also conventionally the
start of the so-called Kali-Yuga, the age of strife, the low point in a declining sequence of four ages. An intriguing
aspect of this date is its closeness to the beginning of Mayan Calendar which happens to be from August 10, 3113
BCE. However, modern scholars have claimed that the Kali-Yuga system of time-reckoning was a much younger
invention, not attested before the 6th century AD, just as we have no record of Mayan Civilization before 5th
century BCE. Against this modernist opinion, Bailly and Playfair had shown that the position of the moon (the
fastest-moving planet, hence the hardest to back-calculate with precision) at the beginning of Kali-Yuga, on 18
February 3102 as given by Hindu tradition and Aryabhatta, was accurate to 37. Count Magnus Fredrik Ferdinand
Bjornstjerna (1779-1847) has stated: According to the astronomical calculations of the Hindus, the present period
of the world, Kaliyug, commenced 3,102 years before the birth of Christ, on the 20th of February, at 2 hours 27
minutes and 30 seconds, the time being thus calculated of the planets that took place, and their tables show this
conjunction. Bailly states that Jupiter and Mercury were then in the same degree of the ecliptic, Mars at a distance
of only eight, and Saturn of seven degrees; whence it follows, that at the point of time given by the Brahmins as
the commencement of Kaliyug, the four planets above-mentioned must have been successively concealed by the
rays of the sun (first Saturn, then Mars, afterwards Jupiter and lastly Mercury)....The calculation of the Brahmins
is so exactly confirmed by our own astronomical tables, that nothing but an actual observation could have given so
correspondent a result. The planetary conjunction was not perfect; but would have been unusual for naked eye
observers, as at least four of the planets would have been quite close to each other. It would have been impossible
for Indian astronomers, in the beginning of common era, to back calculate and arrive at the time of conjunction of
the seven planets in 3102 BCE. Thus, the only possibility seems to be that is was actually observed and recorded
on Kali Yuga day itself. Richard L. Thompson claims that in Indian literature and inscriptions, there are a number
of datelines expressed in Kali-Yuga which are older than the Christian era. More importantly, Thompson argues
that the Jyotisha-Sastra (treatises on astronomy that in course of time evolved into astrology, starting with the
Vedanga Jyotisha by Lagadha which as per its own astronomical data was composed in 14th century BC) are
correct in mentioning this remarkable conjunction, for there was indeed a conjunction of these heavenly bodies on
that date. If Hindu astronomers had simply been going over their astronomical tables looking for an exceptional
conjunction; they could have found more spectacular ones than the one on 18 February 3102 BC. And why would
they have calculated tables for such a remote period, sixteen centuries before the Aryan invasion, nineteen before
3.11. ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE 151

the composition of the Rg-Vedic hymns as per AIT chronology, a time of which they had no recollection? Unlike
other astronomic references mentioned above, there is nothing vague about the date of start of Kali Yuga and
the unusual planetary conjunction. Vagueness if any is only on account of the cultural differences most western
Indologists experience when dealing with ancient Hindu texts.

3.11.4 Conclusion
Thus astronomical references in Vedic texts point to their chronology roughly as follows; composition of RV before
4000 BCE; battle of Kurushetra in around 3150 BCE, other Vedas, Brahmanas and Aranyakas in the first half of
third millennium BCE, main Upanisads, Vedangas, Sutras etc between 2500 to 1500 BCE and Vedanga Jyothisha
in around 1300 BCE. This more or less agrees with the evidence of Sarsvati River mentioned above.
Such astronomical dating, like other forms of historical interpretation, needs to be done with care, using records
which are written or otherwise secure. John Steele has proposed three questions that must be asked when dating
an event: Does the record refer to an actual astronomical event, or is this merely a modern assumption? If it
does refer to an actual astronomical event, is the source reliable? Can the record provide an unambiguous date
without making unwarranted assumptions about ancient astronomical observational methods? Since the success
of this method depends on the reliability of the written sources and the precision of their accounts of astronomical
phenomena, attempts to date literary texts, which may describe astronomical events loosely or even as metaphors,
have to be done with utmost care.
A good example of such reliable reference is that of available records which provide detailed and unambiguous
accounts of the positions of all the visible planets, often in relation to specific stars, that provide precise dates of
events like the defeat of Darius by Alexander at the Battle of Gaugamela in 331 BCE or of Alexanders death on
11 June 323.
Though Hindu religious and epic texts contain many references and data, many scholars are sceptic about
their reliability because of their general vagueness, even when they tend to accept those from Egyptian, Semitic or
Greek sources. An example is an inscription from the tenth year of Assyrian king Ashur-Dan III, which refers to an
eclipse of the sun, and calculations among the range of possible dates identify the eclipse as having occurred on 15
June 763 BCE. While western historians accept these as secure references, they are reluctant to treat those in Vedic
Literature texts similarly. This is also the case of Kings Lists. While historians treat the Sumerian, Babylonian
and Assyrian King Lists59 with great respect, Puranic King lists are rubbished as fanciful manipulations of story
tellers.
Two main arguments of those who do not agree with the chronology indicated by the astronomical references in
Vedic texts are, first that these references are too vague. It is true that astronomical references in Vedic literature
are generally vague. One example is the Satapadha Brhmana statement that Krttika never swerving from the
east. Obviously the same asterism cannot rise in the east at sun rise throughout the year. Thus we will have to
make the unstated assumption that what is meant is that Krttika never swerving from the east on the vernal
equinox day or on the day New Year begins. But in spite of this vagueness of particular references, they
together display remarkable consistency. These references form a consistent set of data pointing to
a chronology in full agreement with the putative relative chronology of these texts. That is, Rig-Veda
Samhita first followed by other Vedas, Brahmanas, Vedanga Sutras, Vedanga Jyotisha and the epics more or
less in that order. Inconsistency in the relative chronology could have been justifiable ground for treating these
individual astronomical references as just poetic expressions without any reliable data or scientific content. These
59
These Mesopotamian kings list often fits together internally as a relative chronology but it has not been possible to relate it
with any other event, so as to arrive at an absolute chronology. This should cast doubt on their reliability. In Sumerian list,just
as in the case of Puranic lists, many early rulers are credited with fantastically long reigns. Some of these go back to times which
cannot be taken seriously. Parts of these Mesopotamian lists, beginning at around the 14th century BCE, are now considered reliable.
Historians attribute these possible errors to the effect of the base 60 arithmetic of the Sumerians and the decimal-based system of the
later Akkadians.
152 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

references would have little value if any of the Brahmana or Vedanga text pointed to a date earlier than the period
of composition of the Rig Veda Samhita. However the fact is that there is no such inconsistency. Significantly
not one of the dozens of astronomical data in Vedic literature is in agreement with the Aryan Invasion Theory
chronology. Thus while the vagueness is a serious shortcoming of these references, their overall consistency greatly
make up for the shortcoming. These references may not be of the rigorous standard of twenty first century science.
But then so is the case with most ancient texts including Egyptian and Greek. Thus these can hardly be dismissed
as too vague and unreliable.
Second argument against high chronology of these texts based on these references is that there is the possibility
of large error in these observations. In the Hindu system, the ecliptic is divided into 27 or by some earlier tradition
28 segments and the segments are identified by an asterism within that segment. These asterisms are neither a
star nor a constellation, but what is seen as a group from earth. Thus the different stars in it may be actually
far apart belonging to different constellations. Thus each asterism occupies an arc of roughly 13.3 degrees. These
segments are unlike western type zodiac which is independent of the constellation after which it is named. Thus
what is observed is the asterism close to the sun on any given date. A person observing an asterism 0 to 6 or 7
degree away from the sun would say that the particular asterism is close to the sun. There can thus be an error
up to roughly half of the segment or about 7 degrees. Since the asterisms might not be in the exact centre of
the segments there could be further error of say another 2-3 degrees. The earth precesses by one degree in about
71 years. In view of this there is a possibility of error of 10*71=710 or say 700 years, but not more, as the next
asterism then will be closer to the sun than the earlier one. An error of more than 1000 years is impossible in this
process. Besides, if the difference between Max Mllers chronology and the one based on astronomical references
found in Vedic texts is on account of observational errors in the constellations boundaries, one would expect to
find the difference shifting erratically to either side of the Max Mllers chronology. Thus if Shatapatha Brahmana
is dated to 2500 BCE and Baudhayana Sroutasutra to first millennium CE such an error can be suspected. Such
is not the case. The odds on such an error happening consistently to the same side (older dates in this case), in
the case of nine or more different astronomical references found in Vedic texts, should be considered unacceptable.
Another objection is that the higher chronology is impossible as it will then conflict with accepted theories.
Some scholars have expressed the opinion that these references were fraudulently incorporated into the texts much
later by Brahmin astrologers so as to give their texts the authority and aura of antiquity. Fabricating astronomical
data going back thousands of years calls for knowledge of Newtons Law of Gravitation and the ability to solve
differential equations. If the data includes that for planets and particularly the moon it is simply impossible
without modern computers and advanced planetary software or at least 19th century astronomical knowledge.
In the absence of this advanced knowledge and tools, the data in the Brahminical tables must have been based
on actual observation. There are suggestions that the actual observational data might have been passed down
orally and incorporated into the texts when they were actually composed. Romila Thapar (1992) affirms her belief
that when references to what have been interpreted as configurations of stars have been used to suggest dates
of about 4000 BC for these hymns (RV). These planetary positions could have been observed in earlier times and
such observations been handed down as part of an oral tradition. It is incredible to suggest that all those Vedic
seers and astronomers were incorporating the old data into their texts just to fool posterity, being consistent in
their antedating and coordinating with one another across vast distances for many centuries. This would require
a system to keep track of which data has been used and which is to be used next for thousands of years by a
society of nomadic barbarians. it would also require the nomadic barbarian tribes, in the fifth millennium BCE
onwards, to recognize correctly some 27 different asterisms or star patterns that appear at different parts of the
sky, the ability to recognize different planets and solar and lunar eclipses, besides having a system to maintain
these observations in oral tradition for thousands of years and its incorporation in different texts in the correct
sequence; all these without any error. Such a suggestion also implies existence of another now lost oral tradition
which contained these data and its preservation for thousands of years, mostly by nomads, before these texts
were composed. One only needs to reflect briefly on how such a task could actually be accomplished to realize its
impossibility. Besides Hindu time scales were incredibly large. For example Kali Yuga is for a period of 4,32,000
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 153

years and a day of Brahma consists of an incredible 4.32 billion years and the Maha-Manvantara of 311.04 trillion
years. The composers of these texts or the Brahmin astronomers or astrologers would have considered a period
of few thousand years a ridiculously short period. The general public whom they would thus have wanted to fool
would also hardly be impressed by a claim of antiquity of a few thousand years. These references are in different
context and clearly not intended as time markers. Thus the fact that they are vague as time markers should be
taken as an argument against the possibility that they were incorporated later to make them appear older than
they actually were.
As AIT/AMT is an extension of the Kurgan Hypothesis, this model also will need to contend with these data.
The evidence of Sarasvati River is now supported by hard data which has gained a critical mass that it cannot be
ignored any more. Astronomical evidences are admittedly vague and require too many assumptions and thus still
cannot be accepted as primary proof for high chronology for these texts. But their consistency makes them useful
as strong secondary evidence. Thus these cannot be simply ignored or rubbished as worthless and the burden of
proof falls on those who deny the validity of these data and oppose the high chronology.
Summing up, the evidence of Sarasvati River discussed above and astronomical references in Hindu scriptures
together poses serious questions to the putative model of IE arrival in South Asia. These have now a critical
mass that cannot be simply rubbished away as based on vague references and myths. Since the invasion and
large scale migration models have become untenable in view of the Hard evidence from genetics and archaeology,
Elite dominance and trickle in model was thought to explain the IE entry into South Asia. But the evidence of
Sarasvati River and astronomical references could seriously question the revised model as well as its chronology
and by extension that of Kurgan Hypothesis. The chronology is quite integral to the Kurgan model and the entire
model can fall if the chronology is seriously undermined.

3.12 Meaning and Contents of Rig-Veda

3.12.1 Structure and Organisation of Rgveda
The Rig Veda contains 10,552 mantras or rcs or verses; grouped into 1,028 Suktas, spread over ten Mandalas
(Books). Another less popular method of division of rgveda is known as Ashtaka method. This method was
probably designed to facilitate easy memorization by apportioning more or less equal number of mantras to each
section.60
The number of suktas is often stated as 1017, as 11 suktas are considered as Vaalakhilya or of doubtful
authenticity. All suktas of Rgveda are stand alone poems, in the sense that they do not appear to have any
relation with each other in their contents, context or subject matter. Often verses in the same hymn also seem
to have little relation with each other. This could be a pointer to the possibility that the rcs were the basic unit
of rgveda and the later redactors created the hymns as we know today by putting together the stand alone rcs
that they were able to collect together during their time. The fact that many of these hymns have rcs in different
meters might again point to such a possibility.
These mantras were authored (or heard) by about 400 Rishis of whom about 30 were women. According to
tradition, all Rshies of Rgveda belong to ten major clans or families. The Rishi is usually identified by names
with two parts; his/her personal name and the name of his/her father or teacher or lineage. For instance, the rshi
of the first Suktha of Rig Veda is Madhuchchanda Visvamitrah, meaning that he was Madhuchchanda; the son
or the disciple of Vishwamitra or that he belonged to the Visvamitra clan. The Gayatri mantra has Vishwamitra
Gathin as rshi, meaning that he was Visvamitra, the son of Gatha. It also indicates whether the Rishi was a man
or a woman; for instance, Ghosha Kakshivali (RV 10.39-40) was the wife of kakshivan; another Rishi. Some of the
other female Rishis (Rishikas) include Sraddha Kamayani RV 10.153, Sasa Bharadvaja - 10.154, Yami Vaivasvati
60
Each Astaka consists of eight Adhyayas and each Adhyaya consists of several Vargas; a Varga being usually made up of five mantras,
sometimes more and sometimes less. This is the division popular with the Vaidikas (priests who teach Rgveda orally). In this tradition,
a Varga is the measure of a lesson. This division is purely mechanical.
154 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

- 10.156, Indrani - 10.147 and Vena Bhargava - 10.124. Some other woman composers are Dakshina Prajapathya,
Vishvavara Atreyi, Godha, Apala Atreyi, Lopamudra, Romasha Svanya, Aditi Dakshayeni, Ratri Bharadwaja,
Vasukra Pathni, Surya Savitri, Sarma Devasuni, Urvashi, Sasvati Angirasi, Sri Laksha. Many of them may have
been close relatives of some of the male composers.
According to tradition, these rcs are the phonetic equivalent of Brahman or the ultimate Cosmic Consciousness
and were heard by the rshies when in deep meditation, who in turn orally taught their disciples what they thus
heard. Sri Aurobindo calls Vedasinspired knowledge . This is how he puts it

it is an inspired knowledge as yet insufficiently equipped with intellectual and philosophical terms.
We find a language of poets and illuminates to whom all experience is real, vivid, sensible, even
concrete, not yet of thinkers and systematisers to whom the realities of the mind and soul have become
abstractions.

RV Mandalas, hymns and Rshies

Of the ten Mandalas, Mandalas 2 to 7 are homogeneous in character and are considered the oldest parts of the Rig
Veda. They are arranged in a uniform pattern. Hymns addressed to Agni or Fire always come first. A frequent
epithet of Agni in the Rigveda is puro-hita or placed in front. An amusing detail is that Rgveda begins and ends
with hymns to Agni. The first hymn in mandala 1 and RV 10.191, the last hymn of Rgveda, are both dedicated
to it. The Agni hymns are followed by hymns to Indra. Within these two groups the hymns are arranged in order
of diminishing length. hymns addressed to other Devas form the third group of each of these Mandalas.
Each of these six mandalas was composed by a Rishi or by members of his family / disciples or those belonging
to the same clan. These Mandalas are therefore often called Family Books. A table showing the family Mandalas
and associated Rshi clan is given below.

Mandala Rshi clan

2 Grtsamada
3 Visvamitra
4 Vamadeva Gautama
5 Atri
6 Brahaspatya family of Angirasas
7 Vasista

According to Katyayana, Rgveda contains 4,32,000 letters, 1,52,826 words, 10,580 mantras and 1017 Suktas.
There are 11 additional Suktas called Valakilya. Seven hundred and four Sukthas have single composers, while
three hundred and twenty four Sukthas have two or more sages as composers.
The Rgvedic Suktas are not homogenous in nature and content. They deal with a variety of subjects. Based
on the nature of the of the suktas, they are sometimes classified as the following types.
Deity Suktas These are prayers to deities such as Indra, Agni, Varun, Surya, Savita, Vayu, Ashwin, Rudra,
Bhaga, Vishnu, Marut and Vishvedeva etc. calling the deities to help the poets, or to accept the oblations, or to
favor the poets with generous gifts.
Druvpada Sukta These are hymns in which a single line or part of a line of a verse, is repeated in all verse of
the sukta. There are about 100 Suktas are of this type in the Rigveda. Some of these are Marutwantam sakhyay
havamahe (1.101), Sajanas Indraha (2.12), Mahadadevanamasuratvamekam (3.55), Bhadra Indrasya Ratayaha
(8.62), Visvasmadindra Uthara (10.86).
Katha Sukta There are a number of vague references to mythical stories from earlier times in Rigveda, Many
imaginative stories are presented in the Brahmanas, based on these strands. For instance, in RV 10.95, there is a
short dialogue between Pururavas and Urvasi. This has been woven into a beautiful tale in Shatapath Brahmana
(11.5. 5) and later in Vikramorvasiyam by Kalidasa. Nabha Nedishta Sukta (10.68) is also one such story written
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 155

in Aitareya Brahmana (5.14). The Vishnu Sukta, RV 1.154 61 has provided the subject of the Vamana Avatar
story in Shatapath Brahmana (1.2.5.1, 7). There are 16 such Katha Suktas in Rigveda. The hymns comprising
dialogues between the River and Visvamitra (III-33), Sarama and Panis (X-108), Indra and Apala (VIII-91), Yama
and Yami (X-10), Urvasi and Pururavas (X-95) etc. are beautiful poems and are interesting even from a literary
view-point.
Samvada Sukta Some Rigvedic Suktas are also composed in the form of poetry and drama. These are known as
Samvada Suktas. There are 20 such Suktas in Rigveda like Agasthya Lopmudra, Yama Yami, Indra Indrani Vrusha
Kapi in RV 10.86, Urvashi Pururavas mentioned above and Sarama Pani etc. Accordingly to Prof Oldenburg,
initially these were in the form of Prose and Poetry. In course of time, the Prose was omitted and only the poetic
parts was retained in Rgveda. These Suktas contain the remaining portion of the ancient tales. Some other authors
have opinioned that these Suktas are the remaining portions of ancient dramas, which were performed by actors
during sacrifices along with music.
Tattvadnyan Suktas The roots of later Hindu philosophy as explained in the Upanishads can be traced in these
Suktas.
Aapri Suktas- These are discussed elsewhere in this book.
Hymns of Rgveda can be divided into two classes based on another criteria; as spiritual and secular. Majority
of the hymns are spiritual, as they are invocations addressed to deities like Agni and Indra, requesting for help
and protection.
Among the secular hymns, there are famous Aksa-Sukta (X-34) recalling the ruin brought by dice; the Bhiksu-
Sukta (X- 117) glorifying the gift of food; the Bhoja-Sukta (X-11) singing the glory of the prosperity
61
RV 1.154 Visnu Sukta
I WILL declare the mighty deeds of Visnu, of him who measured out the earthly regions,
Who propped the highest place of congregation, thrice setting down his footstep, widely striding.
2 For this his mighty deed is Visnu lauded, like some wild beast, dread, prowling, mountain-roaming;
He within whose three wide-extended paces all living creatures have their habitation.
3 Let the hymn lift itself as strength to Visnu, the Bull far-striding, dwelling on the mountains,
Him who alone with triple step hath measured this common dwelling-place, long, far extended.
4 Him whose three places that are filled with sweetness, imperishable, joy as it may list them,
Who verily alone upholds the threefold, the earth, the heaven, and all living creatures.
5 May I attain to that his well-loved mansion where men devoted to the Gods are happy.
For there springs, close akin to the Wide-Strider, the well of meath in Visnus highest footstep.
6 Fain would we go unto your dwelling-places where there are many-horned and nimble oxen,
For mightily, there, shineth down upon us the widely-striding Bulls sublimest mansion.
RV 1.22
16 The Gods be gracious unto us even from the place whence Visnu strode
Through the seven regions of the earth!
17 Through all this world strode Visnu; thrice his foot he planted, and the whole
Was gathered in his footsteps dust.
18 Visnu, the Guardian, he whom none deceiveth, made three steps; thenceforth
Establishing his high decrees.
19 Look ye on Visnus works, whereby the Friend of Indra, close-allied,
Hath let his holy ways be seen.
RV 1.90.9
Visnu of the mighty stride.
It is generally believed that these hymns are the basis of the Vamana story in Puranas. But it does not say anything about a dwarf
named Vamana or Asura King Mahabali. And Puranas do not say anything about the Visnu, the Bull far-striding, dwelling on the
mountains. It is also possible that the reference in the above hymn and the puranic story are both derived from some very ancient
common myth.
156 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Almost 95% of the verses in Rigveda are attributed to ten families of Rshies. Out of this two families; the
Angirases and Bhrgus appear to be the most prominent even from the pre-Rigvedic times. But though the Bhrgus
were extolled in many rics, they also appear to have often sided with Bharatas enemies. As a result Angirases
dominated during the early Rigvedic period.
Vamadevas and Bharadvajas (Barhaspatya family ofAngirasas) of RV 4 and 6, both belong to Angiras clan. In
RV 8, 55 hymns are by Kanvas and 25 by Angirases. The remaining by all major families except Visvamitras and
Bharatas. Angirases also have dominant presence in the four non-family Mandalas of 1, 8, 9 and 10. In Indian
mythology, Angirases are a race of higher beings between Gods and men according to Griffth. The Iranian
Angra and Greek Angelos are names for classes of celestial beings, although evil ones in the Avesta. Christian
Angels is a derivative of this. Angirasas are composers of 3619 or 34% rics of Rigveda. Thus they were easily
the most important Rshi family as far as the composers of Rigveda are concerned.
Bhrgus have no family Mandala of their own in Rigveda and have only limited presence in these Mansalas.
They together have only 473 rics in Rigveda. Srikant Talageri says The situation is particularly ironic since not
only are both the families equally old and hoary, but it is the Bhrgus, and not the Angirases, who are the real
initiators of the two main ritual systems which dominate the Rigveda: the fire ritual and the Soma ritual. It
appears that Bhrgus were kept out of the Vedic mainstream during the composition of the early books and part of
the middle books. Part of the reason might be that they were with the enemies of Bharatas during the Dasarajna
wars, mentioned elsewhere in this book. But after Rigvedic times, they became the most important priestly clan
in India. Post Rigvedic times persons from Bhrgu gotras or Bhargavas appear to have given shape to the most
distinctive and prominent positions of Hindu thought on all aspects of life. Most recensions of Vedas and related
texts available today are attributed to them. Their contributions touch all aspects of Hindu religious practices as
well as the intellectual output of ancient/medieval India.
Hymns in mandalas 1, 8 and 10 were not composed by a distinct family of Rshis but by different individual
Rshis. But hymns by some important Rshies are grouped together. Dirghatamas62 is the Rshi of RV 1:140 to 164,
while Agastya is of RV 1:165 to 191. In fact, Mandala 1 can be considered as containing a number of mini-family
mandalas. Some of the mini-family mandalas are hymns 1-10 by Madhuchanda Visvamitra, 58-64 by Nodhas
Gotama, 65-73 by Parasara, 74-93 by Gotama, 94-98 by Kutsa, 101-115 by Kutsa Angiras, 116-126 by Kaksivan
son of Dairghatamas, 127-139 by Parucchepa Daivodasi or son of Diodasa, 140-164 by DIrghatamas Aucathya and
165-191 by Agastya Maitravaruni. Among these a few appear to be among the earliest layers of Rigveda, some
others of middle period and others among the latest.
Mandala VIII might contain some hymns from early Rigvedic period. Eleven hymns in this mandala, 8.49 to
8.59 are the apocryphal vaalakhilya or of doubtful authenticity. These are not recognized by older writers, nor
commented on by Sayana, though mentioned in Katyayanas Sarvanukramani. It seems quite clear that these do
not naturally belong to the place, where they are found now, .
Mandala I and X appear to have been added later to the core collection. It is a collection of various earlier
and later hymns, frequently in linguistically later versions of the dialect.
The Mandalas are of uneven size. The Books 1 and 10 are the longest Books; both having 191 hymns each.
Thus they together account for about 40 percent of the bulk of the Rig Veda. Next is book 9 with 114 hymns,
book 7 with 104, book 8 with 103, book 5 with 87, book 6 with 75, book 3 with 62, book 4 with 58 and the
smallest book 2 with 43 hymns. According to the number of verses, Mandala 1 is again the biggest with 2006 rcs,
Mandala 10 with 1754 rcs, 8 with 1716 rcs, 9 with 1108 rcs, 7 with 841 rcs, 6 with 765 rcs, 5 with 727 rcs, 3 with
617 rcs, 4 with 589 and 2 with 429 rcs.
A brief note on important composer families Mandala wise is given below.
62
Meaning of the name elements in Dirghatamas is Long Darkness. Some scholars have speculated that he could have been blind
from childhood; and hence the name. Puranas also tells a story about a Rshi Dirghatamas who was blind by birth. But this seems
unlikely, as many of his hymns probably deal with astronomy or cosmogony. It will be difficult for a blind man to appreciate the
intricacies of astronomy. But his hymns could be described as dark, as they seem to make little sense to us at present and might
require entirely new interpretations. These could also be among the oldest of Rgvedic hymns.
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 157

Mandala 1 has 191 hymns - 96 hymns by Angirases, 27 each by Kanvas and Agastyas, 18 by Vsvamitras, 13
by Bharatas, 9 by Vasistas and 1 by Kasyapas.
Mandala 2 has 43 hymns; 39 by GRTSAMADAS and 4 by Brgus. Grtsamadases are described as Kevala
Brugus. But these two clans have different Apri Suktas. Thus they belong to different clans.
Mandala 3 has 62 Hymns; 60 by Visvamitras and 2 joint hymns with Brgus (Jamadagni) and Angirases.
Incidentally, according to Puranas, Jamadagni was the son of Visvamitras sister.
Mandala 4 has 58 hymns; all except 2 by Vamadeva Gotamas. The remaining two are by Angirases. Gotamas
belong to Angiras clan as they share an Apri Sukta.
Mandala 5 has 87 hymns; 79 by Atries and rest by Angirases, Agastyas, Visvamitrs, Vasishtas, Kasypas and
few joint verses.
Mandala 6 has 75 hymns; all by Bharadvaja clan. Bhradvajas are part of Angirases clan.
Mandala 7 has 104 hymns; 102 by Vasishtas 2 joint with Angirases and Vasishtas
Mandala 8 has 103 hymns; 55 by Kanvas and 25 by Angirases. The rest by all major families except Visvamitras
and Bharatas. Vasishtas have only a joint hymn.
Mandala 9 has 114 hymns; 36 by Kasyapas, 30 by Angirases and 14 by Brgus. Rest by remaining 7 major
families. Nearly 8 Hymns by uncertain Rshies.
Mandala 10 has 191 hymns; 58 by Angirases, 26 by Vasishtas, 24 by Brgus and 12 by Visvamitras. All major
families have hymns. A few are joint verses and hymns. 44 hymns are by Rshies of uncertain families or the names
that are found in the Anukramanies cannot be clearly assigned to any of the ten families.
Some interesting facts that emerge from the above are
Angirases have 2 books entirely to themselves, more than half of book 1 and major share in 8, 9 and 10.
The eponymous Angiras is treated as a semi-divine, participating in Indras celestial activities. Other Angirases,
like Navagvas and Dasagvas are also described as sharing in Indras battles. Thus the ancient pre-Rigvedic
Angirases were a class of demigods.
Brgus do not have a family book. Their presence is mostly restricted to books 8, 9 and 10, all later Mandalas.
Grtsmadas of book 2, though Kevala Brgus, are also Angirases.
Grtsmadas presence outside book2 is restricted to just 3 verses in book 9
Book 6 is a pure one family book. Books 3 and 7 also are almost pure, as visamitras and Vasistas are rshies of
all hymns, either completely or as joint Rshi. book 4 has 2 hymns by Angirases. Gotamas belong to Angiras clan
as they share an Apri Sukta. Book 2 is slightly less pure, but still can be treated as almost pure as Grtsmadas
are Kevala Brgus. But these clans have seperate Apri Suktas. But book 5, though classified as a family book, has
hymns by many major families. Some authors are of the opinion that the level of purity might be an indicator of
the comparative position of the Mandala in the chronology of RV Madalas. Thus the chronology will be as 6, 3,
7, 4, 2 and 5.
Books 1 and 8 have hymns or verses or joint verses by various families, but all from major clans
Books 9 and 10 have hymns by 9 major families and also many by Rshies of uncertain family connections.
On the basis of references in Rigveda, sages Angiras, Navagvas, Dasagvas, Bhrgu, Atharvana and Usana
should be from pre-Rigvedic period and Gotama, Visvamitra, Vamadeva, Bharadvaja and Vasistha from period of
composition of different Mandalas. Macdonell, in his Vedic Mythology, classifies Mythical Priests and Heroes
like Manu, Bhrgu, Atharvana, Dadhyanc, Angiras, Navagvas, Dasagvas and Usana, along with Atri and Kutsa, as
historical figures or as figures from pre-Rigvedic period. He distinguishes these Rshies from several other ancient
seers of a historical or semi-historical character... such (as) Gotama, Visvamitra, Vamadeva, Bharadvaja and
Vasistha.
The number of verses in the six Family Mandalas is, respectively: 429, 617, 589, 727, 765, 841. If the six
hymns (RV 3.21, 30, 34, 36, 38-39) with a total of 68 verses, which Aithereya Brahmana lists as interpolations,
are excluded from the verse count of Mandala 3, we get the number of verses in the six Family Mandalas as 429,
549, 589, 737, 765, 841. Thus, it is possible that the logic of the order of family Mandalas was size in terms of
number of verses.
158 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Many hymns of Rgveda relates to creation, each differing in essentials. Most of them are found in Mandala
10. Some of these are 10.5 to 7 by Rshi Trita Aptya, 10.31 of Kavasha Ailusa, 10.72 of Brahaspati Angirasa and
Brahaspati Laukya or Aditi Dakshayani, 10.81/82 of Visvakarman Bhauvana, 10.90 Purusha Suktam of Rshi
Narayana, 10.121 Hiranyagarbha Suktam by Rshi Prajapatayo Hiranyagarbha (interestingly Ka or who is the
Devata of this suktam), 10.129 Nasadiya Suktam of Prajapati Paramesthin and 10.190 Aghamarsana suktam of
Rshi Aghamarsana Madhuchandasa, with Bhavavrttam as Devata. 10.81 and 10.82 have Visvakarma as Devata
(architect of the universe?).
Book 9 is different from the rest as all the hymns in it are dedicated to Soma Pavamana, while not a single
hymn dedicated to Soma is found in the Family Books. Many of them are by groups of Rishis. We also find many
obscure words in this Mandala. In the entire Rigveda, Soma is the third most important Devata in terms of
number of hymns dedicated to it; Indra being the first and Agni the second (Indra 289, Agni 218 and Soma123
hymns).
Soma probably mean an intoxicating drink. But there are reasons to believe that at least some of these
references might be to some spiritual experience. For example, RV 10.85.3 says it can be known only by those who
have attained Brahma-jnana, the highest possible spiritual attainment which makes the rshies almost godlike.
RV 10.85.4 says those who are born on earth cannot drink it. RV 10.116.3 says it is available in heavens only. It
is possible that at least some references may be to the spiritual ecstasy experienced when one realizes Brahman.
Or Soma might be some sort of fundamental form of energy or it may have something to do with the composers
concepts of cosmology, as the following verses randomly selected from hymns in Mandala 9 and as translated by
Griffith, seem to indicate.
RV 10.85 also known as the Marriage hymn

satyenottabhitaa bhumih suryenottabhit dyauh rtenaadityaastisthanti divi somo adhi sritah

somenaadityaa balinah somena prthivi mah athonaksatraanmesamupasthe soma aahitah
somam manyate papivan yat sampimsantyosadhim somam yambrahmano vidurna tasyasnaati
kascana chadvidhaanairghupito barhataih soma raksitah ghravnamicchrnvan tisthasi na te
asnati paarthivah

translation by Griffith

1. TRUTH is the base that bears the earth; by Surya are the heavens sustained.
By Law the Adityas stand secure, and Soma holds his place in heaven.
2 By Soma are the Adityas strong, by Soma mighty is the earth.
Thus Soma in the midst of all these constellations hath his place.
3 One thinks, when they have brayed the plant, that he hath drunk the Somas juice;
Of him whom Brahmans truly know as Soma no one ever tastes.
4 Soma, secured by sheltering rules, guarded by hymns in Brhati,
Thou standest listening to the stones none tastes of thee who dwells on earth.

The following may be a better translation of these verses.

Sat sustains the earth; Surya sustains the heavens63 By Rta, Adityas64 are secure and Somas is above all
these.
63
The word used in RV is dyauh. The meaning of the word is uncertain. Griffith has translated it as heavens. But in other
instances, he treats it as a name. M. Williams says the meaning is uncertain. Apte do not offer any meaning for it. One verse talks
about Dyauh; the Asura. Another possible meaning is day or time.
64
The term Aditya came to mean sun later. But in Rigveda it is often used in plural. Some later references in Brahmanas and
other texts suggest there are seven or twelve Adityas. Vedic Devas like Aryaman, Bhaga and Savita are mentioned as Adityas. The
exact function of these Adityas is unclear. But it seems these had a role in maintaining cosmic order.
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 159

Soma makes Adityas and earth strong. Thus Soma is the link of all these.
When one has drunk the extract from the plant, one thinks that he has drunk the Soma juice. But no one
ever drink what the wise men know as Soma. No one who dwells on earth can taste Soma.
In Ric 1, Soma is given the same status as Sat; the absolute truth, Surya and Rta.
The terms sat and rta occurs in Rigveda frequently. But the meaning of these terms cannot be considered
entirely clear. They appear to be universal fundamentals rather than spiritual entities. The above verses seem to
treat Soma in the same class or even above sat and rta.
Second verse says Soma is obove all these or coordinates all nature.
The third says clearly that the Soma juice commonly used for rituals etc. is only a symbol. But wise men
know that nobody can taste Soma.
RV 9.42
1. ENGENDERING the Sun in floods, engendering heavens lights, green-hued, Robed in the waters and the
milk,
2 According to primeval plan this Soma, with his stream, effused Flows purely on, a God for Gods.
It seems to say that soma created the sun and heavens lights. Soma is a God for Gods.
RV 9.60.2
2 Thee who hast thousand eyes to see, bearer of thousand burthens, they Have filtered through the fleecy cloth.
Soma has thousand eyes to see.
RV 9.64.8
8 Making the light that shines from heaven thou flowest on to every form Soma, thou swellest like a sea.
RV 9.64.30
30 Specially, Soma, coming as a Sage from heaven to prosper us, Flow like the Sun for us to see.
Soma makes the light that shines from heaven, flows like the Sun for us to see.
RV 9.84.6,7
6 The beams of Pavamana, sent from earth and heaven, his ensigns who is ever steadfast, travel round.
When on the sieve the Golden-hued is cleansed, he rests within the vats as one who seats him in his place.
7 Served with fair rites he flows, ensign of sacrifice: Soma advances to the special place of Gods.
He speeds with thousand currents to the reservoir, and passes through the filter bellowing as a bull.
RV 9.84.9
9 He on whose high decree the heavens and earth depend nath roared and thundered like the summit of the
sky.
The verse seems to say that the beams of Pavamana is sent from earth and heaven. Soma advances to the
special place of Gods. He speeds with thousand currents to the reservoir.
Somas The heavens and earth depend on Somas high decree
RV 9.84.28
28 These are thy generations of celestial seed thou art the Sovran Lord of all the world of life.
This universe, O Pavamana, owns thy sway; thou, Indu, art the first establisher of Law.
Soma is the Lord of all the world of life, the first establisher of Law.
One can make little sense out of many of the verses from Griffiths often crude translations. Or the many
atrocious etymologies have resulted in serious mistranslations of these hymns. But it is difficult to accept that
all these are inane, incoherent and intoxicated babbling of the composers, as most Western indologists considers
them. The sense one gets is that the poets are trying to tell us something in a very archaic, yet poetic language,
using lot of symbolic expressions. Besides, it is difficult to believe that the redactors of Rgveda, who must have
been sensible people, chose for their collection, 123 hymns or almost 12% of all the hymns in Rgveda, and a whole
dedicated Mandala, if they even suspected that these are just inane drunken babbling.
It is clear that Rgveda, as we know it today, had undergone a very systematic redaction at some time in the
pre-historic past. Madhav Deshpande, Professor in the Asian Studies department at University of Michigan, puts
it succinctly thus
160 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

The way the family books are organised now points to the process of redaction. This is so, as the
books were composed by many generations of the different families, many of whom might have been
separated from each other in time and space. Some of the composers were openly hostile to each other.
Yet we find a level of homogenisation in the language, style and organisation of the texts, which could
only have been the result of a meticulous process of redaction and editing..

Putting all hymns addressed to Soma Pavamana together in one mandala, all vaalakhilya hymns together as
mandala 8.49 to 8.59 and grouping together hymn by a single rshi or a rshi clan, apart from those pointed out by
Prof. Madhav Deshpande, are all clear pointers to this process. We also have the tradition of Veda Vysa giving
us the vedas as we know today. Hindus mythology hold that Vyasa categorised a single Veda into three canonical
collections that helped people to understand it. Atharvaveda is not usually ascribed to him. The literary meaning
of Veda Vyasa is Splitter of the Veda. The word vyasa means split, or differentiate.
There are indications that this process had occurred a long time after the composition of the hymns, which
may be a few centuries, but could well be a millennium or more.
While it is thus clear that the hymns were arranged in the present form during the process of the redaction,
many authors have expressed the opinion that the redactors may have gone further. As mentioned above, it is
possible that these hymns were put together from available stand alone verses or at least a large number of hymns
were created in this manner. Some authors feels that words, syntax and phonetics might have been altered, as the
redactors dialect could have evolved and got transformed in many significant ways. There is even the opinion that
the redactors did not understand fully the meaning of the hymns, resulting in some shoddy redaction. Others, like
George Erdosy suggests that the majority of early old Indo Aryan speakers might have had a Dravidian mother
tongue, which they abandoned gradually, to change over to Indo Aryan dialects. Some authors have expressed
the opinion that Vedic Language was an adopted language for most of the composers of Rgveda; Proto Dravidian
being their mother tongue. This , they suggest , is the reason for presence of retroflex sounds in Indic Languages.
These are issues that may never be fully resolved and answered.

Chandas or Meter
The verses of the Vedas have a variety of different meters. Thirteen different Meters are used in Rigveda. These
are Trishtup, Gayatri, Jagati, Anushtup, Pragath, Ushnik, Dwipada virat, Pankti, Atyashti, Maha pankti, As-
tarpankti, Brihati, and Virat. The seven listed below are main ones.

Gayatri: 3 padas of 8 syllables containing 24 syllables in each verse.

Ushnik: 4 padas of 7 syllables containing 28 syllables in each verse.

Anushtup: 4 padas of 8 syllables containing 32 syllables in each verse. This is the typical shloka of classical
Sanskrit poetry.

Brihati: 4 padas (8 + 8 + 12 + 8) containing 36 syllables in each verse.

Pankti: 4 padas (sometimes 5 padas) containing 40 syllables in each verse.

Trishtup: 4 padas of 11 syllables containing 44 syllabes in each verse.

Jagati: 4 padas of 12 syllables containing 48 syllables in each verse.

Almost 40% of rgvedic rics or verses are in Trishtup meter and it is used in the oldest mandalas of 6, 7 and 3
as well as the latest rics in mandala 10. Tristubh, Gayatri and Jagati together are used for nearly 2/3 rics of the
entire rgveda.
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 161

Though Chandas is one of the six Vedanga(limb of the vedas), no original treatises dealing exclusively with
Vedic meter have survived. Later sources that discusses Chandas or Vedic meters in some detail include theAgni
Purana chapters 328 to 334, chapter 15 of the Natyashastra by Bharatamuni, and chapter 104 of the Brihat-
samhita.

The Anukramanis
TheAnukramanis are systematic indices of Vedic hymns recording traditions of authorship, poetic meter, the deity
to which the hymn is addressed. Six Anukramanis of the Rigveda ascribed to Shaunaka are mentioned in some an-
cient texts. These are Anuvakanukramani, Arshanukramani, Chandonukramani, Devatanukramani,Padanukramani
and Suktanukramani. Anukramanis other than Anuvakanukramani, survive only in quotations found in later texts.
An important Anukramani of the Rigveda is Katyayanas Sarvanukramani, which has a complete, systematic index
of the first word, the number of verses, name and family of rshis, names of deities and metres for each of the 1,028
hymns of the Rigveda. Vedarthadipika, written by Shadgurushishya, who is believed to have lived in about 12th
century CE, is a significant commentary of this work. There are anukramani indexes for other vedas also.
However the exact relation between the names and the hymns or rcs will have to be considered uncertain.
Academic opinion regarding authenticity of the tradition of the names of Rshis is not unanimous. Indologists
generally consider Anukramanies or Indices as not dependable or worthless. The reason generally stated is that
hymns with similar language, phrases or sometimes whole mantras or verses should be of same poet or at least
poets of same clan; but the Anukramanies often show such hymns as by poets of different clans. One example is
RV 3.4.8,11 and RV 7.2.8,11. These four rcs are exactly the same in hymns by poets of two different clans as per
the Anukramani. The argument is that this is quite unlikely and these should be by the same poet. Incidentally
RV 3.4 is the Apri Sukta of Visvamitras and RV 7.2 that of the Vasistas. These kind of conclusions should be
considered too facile and suspect, as one can think of a number of possible reasons for such similarity of these
verses and poetic style. It is true that the lists available today appear to have some inconsistencies in them and
these might have been composed long after Rgveda Samhita. But it is likely that Katyayana and others composed
these based on some older tradition. In any case, we cannot presume to know more than Katyayana or other
ancients about what should be the right content, style and format of these texts. The middle or sensible option
seems to accept these Anukramanies as they are, but not to relay on them too much for arriving at conclusions in
related contexts.
The Anukramanies list about four hundred Rshies. Traditionally, they are regarded, not as composers, but
as seers who heard the Vedas, when they were in deep meditation. Vedas are revealed scriptures, self-evident
and self-authoritative, and not composed by human authors. The Rshies of the hymns are not responsible for the
contents of the mantras, they are only mediums communicating between gods and men. Yaska says that Dharma
(duty) revealed itself to the Rshies who handed it down by oral instruction to their descendants and disciples, to
whom Dharma did not manifest itself.

Apri Suktas
Apri in Sanskrit means propitiation; Something done for avoiding divine retribution or to gain divine favor and
refers to special invocations sung prior to the offering of oblations. The identification of individual Rigvedic verses
as Apris is found in Shrauta Sutra literature. Thus, RV 5.28.1 is the Apri of the Saunaka clan and RV 7.2.1
in that of Vasaistha clan. Gargya Narayana gives ten entire Rigvedic hymns (and not verse) as Aprisuktas
belonging to different gotras.
These Suktas are a particular type of ritual hymn consisting of invocations to a series of deities or deified
objects. These are invocations sung by the Hotar priest, at the time of Prayaja offerings prior to the main animal
sacrifices. Apart from the ten Apries in Rgveda, there are a couple of others in Yajurveda also. Each of these is
associated with one of the ten clans of sages of Rgveda.
162 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

The ten Apri Suktas of Rgveda, and the ten families of composers to whom they belong, are:
1. I.13 Kanvas (Kevala-Angirases)
2. I.142 Angirases
3. I.188 Agastyas
4. II.3 Grtsamadas (Kevala-Bhrgus)
5. III.4 Visvamitras
6. V.5 Atris
7. VII.2 Vasisthas
8. IX.5 Kasyapas
9. X.70 Bharatas
10. X.110 Bhrgus
Out of ten families who have their own Apri Suktas, eight primary families are the Angirases, Bhrgus, Vis-
vamitras, Vasisthas, Agastyas, Kasyapas, Atris and Kanvas. The eponymous sages of all these clans are mentioned
among Saptarshies or The seven great sages in Puranas. Many of them are also in the lists of Mansaputras of
Lord Brahma. Grtsamadas are described as Kevala-Bhrgus. Eponymous Grtsamada is stated to be an Angirase
in Anukramanies. He is described as the son of Sunahotra Bharadvaja of a branch of Angiras clan. Tenth family
is the Bharatas, the most important royal family in Rigveda and they also have an Apri Sukta. These families
together have composed 9853 or almost 95% of the rics of Rigveda. But according to tradition all verses of Rgveda
are attributable to members of these ten clans. Clan affiliations of the the remaining Rshies are uncertain from
Anukramanies.
These Apri hymns generally contain eleven verses each, addressed to eleven separate deities in the following
order. First verse to Agni, second to Tanunapat or Narasarhsa, both believed to be other names of Agni (Kanvas
and Angirases mention both, all others mention only one of these in verse two), third to Ila, fourth to Barhih
(usually understood as sacrificial pile of grass), fifth to Dvara or Dvarah Devi, sixth to Usasana, seventh to Hotara,
eighth to the three Goddesses, Sarasvati, Ila and Bharati, ninth to Tvastar, tenth to Vanaspati, (the lord of the
forest), eleventh to Svaha. Griffith, in his translation, has tried to translate the names of these deities also and
often do not mention the names as such. Prominent vedic devas like Indra, Varuna and Marut gets passing
mention in some Apries, but it is clear that these suktas are mainly dedicated to Agni and some very obscure
deities. Pavamana replaces Agni in the Apri of Kasyapa clan and the name of Pavamana occurs in all eleven verses
of this Apri. All Apries have eleven verses each, except that of Kanvas with 12 and Angirses with 13 verses.
RV 3.29.11 explains the relation between Tanunapat, Narasarhsa and Agni.

RV 3.29.11
11 As Germ Celestial he is called Tanunapat, and Naraasamsa born diffused in varied shape.
Formed in his Mother he is Maatarisvan; he hath, in his course, become the rapid flight of win

There seems to be some subtle difference between these terms, but later vedic literature texts treats them as
different names of the God Agni. Incidentally, Narasarhsa has an Avestan counterpart; Nairyosanha.
These Suktas have many unusual features compared to other Rgvedic verses and hymns. The invocations in
Apri Suktas are addressed to some of the most obscure and mysterious members of the Vedic pantheon. The
origin, nature or role of Ilita or Ila, Barhih, Dvarah, Usasana, Hotara, Tvastr, Vanaspati and Svaha are obscure
and most of them are not mentioned anywhere in Rgveda outside Apries. This might mean that these deities
are from times long before Rgvedic times. The order in which the deities name appears and the verses in which
it does, is the same in all ten Apri Suktas. For example, the last verse invokes Svaha and last, but one verse,
invokes Vanaspati in all these hymns.
One explanation for the presence of these unusual verses and hymns in Rgveda is that these are simple prayers
from pre-vedic times, sung in front of fire, or while circling fire, during simple family rituals. Thus, it is possible
that these are the earliest layer of Rgveda. It is also possible that it was a simple song inherited from the past
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 163

and it was adapted by different clans with minor changes to the original text. Later redactors of Rgveda and
composers of Brahmanas might have adapted them for ritual use.

3.12.2 Meaning of Rig-Veda

Introduction
Rigveda is probably the oldest literary text in an Indo-European language available to us and the oldest inherited
by mankind from pre-historic times. The circumstances or the reason for the original composition of these poems
remain unknown. Many of These hymns might be celebrating the riches of nature, whose forces are frequently
deified. Aspects of nature which are dangerous or inimical to humans are anti gods or Asuras. But the meaning
and content of many of these hymns remain incomprehensible. In fact it is doubtful if we comprehend what the
composers intended to convey in respect of any of these hymns. The reasons for this are not entirely clear. Some
of the possible reasons and issues involved are discussed in the following pages.
The Rigveda Samhita available to us today consists of about 10500 verses. These might have been part of a
larger collection of hymns, parts of which were lost due to passage of time. This large body of text was preserved
for the past 3500 years or more in a remarkable oral tradition. The mechanism was so perfect that the phonetic
part of the hymns has been preserved without much redundancy, corruption or loss of fidelity for almost four
millennia, by hundreds of generations of Vedic scholars, through many centuries of invasions, floods, famines,
epidemics, massive social and political upheavals, long periods of anarchy and lack of political patronage in many
parts of the country for long periods.
This was achieved by evolving an elaborate and meticulous system of recitations. These systems of discipline
with their checks and balances , ensured the correctness of the text including the correct sequence of its words;
purity of the language; exact pronunciation of the words; precise stress on syllables ; measured pause between
syllables; appropriate tone, accent, modulation and pitch of recitation; proper breath control etc. It appears
that the ancient redactors of Rgveda invented a very novel and effective method for its oral preservation. What
was handed down from generation to generation was not the hymns, but its phonetic patterns. Thus, what was
preserved was the sound of it. Faithfully preserved through the centuries as a sacred mystery, the text has probably
come down to us in a state of considerable accuracy.
But whoever designed and perfected this astounding and complex mechanism overlooked or did not know the
meaning or did not consider it necessary to preserve the meaning part of it. This is contrary to what usually
happened in other civilizations, where the meaning was preserved in many cases, but the phonetics got corrupted
and lost. Once the meaning of these verses was lost, the highly metrical form of the poems, together with their
incomprehensibility, made them ideally suited to ritual recitation by a religious elite.
Shiksha, one of the six Vedangas (limbs of Veda), deals with phonetics and phonology of Vedic hymns and
Pratishakhyas are the texts that laid down rules for correct pronunciation of these.65
It appears that Vedas might have become incomprehensible by at least the beginning of the first millennium
BCE. The following point to such a possibility.

Yaska, the auther of Niruktam, which is a commentary of Nighandu, a glossary of Vedic terms of
very ancient and unknown authorship, says that ancient Rshis created Nighandu to help common people
65
Pratisakhyas, collectively constituting four treatises, are the earliest of the Sikshas: works dealing with the phonetic aspects of the
language ofVedas. Rigveda Pratisakhya deal with the phonetic aspects of the Rigveda. The work is generally ascribed to Saunaka. It
has been translated into German by Max Muller.
There are two treatises dealing with phonetic and related aspects of theYajur Veda.Taittriya Pratisakhya deal with Krishna Yajur
Veda Samhita. The second treatise is known asVajasaneyi Pratisakhya for Sukla Yajur Veda. The latter is believed to have been
written by Katyayana. Its translation by Weber is available.
The treatise pertaining to the phonetic and other aspects ofAtharva Vedais also ascribed to the sage Saunaka,There is another
pratisakhya for Sama Veda
164 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

understand the meaning of Vedas. This indicates that the Vedas had become incomprehensible by his time.
Yaskas time might probably be around sixth century BCE or even earlier.

Koulsan believed that Vedas had no meaning. He expressed his belief in his famous declaration Anardhaka
mantra. The period of Koulsan is not clear. But his language indicates that he lived before Panini and
Yaska; though he is usually identified as a Meamamsika. In fact he had advanced three very logical reasons
for this belief, one of them being that the known meaning of the hymns did not make clear sense and was
inconsistent. Similarly Jaimini in Purva Meamamsa sutra 1.2.1 says Atmanayasya Kriayardhatvad. Veda
is not for understanding, but for doing (conducting rituals). Such statements are unlikely for hymns even
remotely understandable.

A number of Puranas has a myth about the loss of Vedas by Devas and Rshies and its recovery from the
bottom of the sea by Lord Vishnu in the incarnation of Matsya (fish). Though such myths cannot be
relied on, these are likely to contain a grain of truth somewhere. Vedas might have remained unused and
unsupported for a long time as its meaning become obscure gradually and might have been revived for ritual
use after a long time.

There is a very ancient tradition which talk about at least three types meaning of Vedic Hymns; Atmiyam,
Tanntrikam and Bhoutikam. Another classification of these different meaning is as Adhyatmika, Adhi-
daivika and Adhi-bhautika. Similarly Yaska says Vedas have two meaning; one for Rishies and for people
with spiritual powers of high order and another for common man. These shows that even in ancient times,
there were serious doubts about the actual meaning of Vedas.

These also point to the distinct possibility that the Rgveda Samhitas were originally composed at least a
millennium before the other texts of Vedic Literature like Brahmanas, and not a couple of centuries assumed in
the now accepted chronology. A language does not become incomprehensible to its own speakers in a
couple of centuries.
The following quote from Ancient Sanskrit Online-Series Introduction-Karen Thomson and Jonathan Slocum
explains in colorful language, part of the difficulty in understanding these hymns and the possible reasons.

The Rigveda remains open to imaginative exegesis because Indologists continue to believe that its
poems are deliberately obscure.As the Brahmanas tell us so often, the gods love the obscure... and
in investigating Vedic matters, we must learn to cultivate at least that divine taste (Jamison The
Ravenous Hyenas and the Wounded Sun. Myth and Ritual in Ancient India, 1991, p. 41). But the
Brahmanas came into existence because the meaning of the poems had become lost. The ancient
commentators didnt understand the Rigveda, and they were trying to work out what the poems were
about. The American linguist William Dwight Whitney, writing over a century ago, had little time
for their misapprehensions and deliberate perversions of their text, their ready invention of tasteless
and absurd legends to explain the allusions, real or fancied, which it contains, their often atrocious
etymologies (Oriental and Linguistic Studies, 1873, p. 110).
Because the poems were put to ritual use by the ancient priests, much of their vocabulary was assumed
by the authors of the later texts to refer in some way to ritual activity. Without the ability to compare
contexts, decipherment is extremely difficult, and ready invention is a tempting alternative.

The web page lists many Vedic terms which appears to have been misinterpreted, in order to frame them in
a ritual contest. Some of these are Asura, Purohita, Soma, Rta, Yajna and possibly also terms like Indra
and Varuna. Most interpretations available today use these doubtful vocabularies of atrocious etymologies and
morphology. When the meanings of so many words are doubtful or plain wrong, it is natural that the meaning of
the hymns is incomprehensible.
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 165

Stephanie Jamison vividly portrays the frustrations inherent in the indological approach for a con-
scientious scholar. The more I read the Rig Veda, the harder it becomes for me and much of the
difficulty arises from taking seriously the aberrancies and deviations in the language (op. cit. p. 9).
Viewed through the eyes of Vedic scholars, this most ancient of Sanskrit texts is by turns tedious, and
unintelligible: One can be blissfully reading the most banal hymn, whose form and message offers no
surprises and suddenly trip over a verse, to which ones only response can be What??!! (Jamison,
op. cit. p. 10).
The sophistication of the earliest Indo-European poetry lies buried beneath a mass of
inherited misunderstandings that overlay the text, like later strata at an archaeological
site. The vast body of derivative material (Other texts of Vedic literature) remains the
subject of extensive study by Indologists. However, from the point of view of understand-
ing the earliest Sanskrit text the Rigveda itself it has always been, and continues to
be, crucially misleading. Indology today, which has these resources, nonetheless adheres
to the ancient methods of investigation. Many ancient mistranslations continue to be
maintained with unshakeable conviction by Vedic scholars.
With major pieces of the jigsaw firmly in the wrong place, the rest, inevitably, refuses to fit, and the
comparison of passages in the attempt to establish word meanings appear to be a fruitless exercise.
Indology has concluded that the Rigveda is not only uninteresting, describing fussy and technical
ritual procedures (Stephanie Jamison On translating the Rig Veda: Three Questions, 1999, p. 3),
but that it is also intentionally indecipherable. One feels that the hymns themselves are mischievous
translations into a foreign language (Wendy OFlaherty The Rig Veda. An Anthology, Penguin,
1981, p. 16).

The confusion about the word meanings has many dimensions. Some of them are listed below. The list is
indicative; and not exhaustive.
It is now certain that presently understood meanings of many words occurring in these hymns are mistrans-
lations. It is possible that many of these have changed their meaning as part of the natural evolution of the
dialect. Many of these occur in the context of obscure incidents and allusions that might have happened
during the time of the composition of these hymns and these words can only be understood if we have some
insight into these incidents and allusions.
The language is highly agglutinative; that is, most words are combination of two or more word roots or
morphemes. These can be split in many different ways to get completely different meaning for the words.
Besides the meaning in which many of the roots are used do not seem to be what later interpretators have
assumed. The tendency to assume the currently understood meanings to these leads to very unsatisfactory
interpretations.
These hymns might be in an early form of Sutra style, which became very popular in Sanskrit later. Sutra
style aphorisms are often very cryptic phrases that do not make much sense by themselves. They seem to
use too few inflections compared to Panninian or Classical Sanskrit. Often it is not clear if the word is a
noun, verb, adjective, singular or plural or the tense in which it is used.
The language might have undergone a long period of evolution as the syntax and semantics appear to be
very different from Classical Sanskrit. It is also possible that Vedic and Sanskrit have evolved from two
different dialects of proto Indo Aryan speech form.
The opacity of these hymns might also be on account of liberal exercise of poetic freedom in respect of rules
of grammar by the composers, particularly as these were composed in strict conformity to the the Meter
or Chandas, which often required bending of these rules.
166 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Karl Geldners translation of Rgveda into German made in early twentieth century, is often considered as
the scholarly standard. Geldners attempt to translate all the poems was however, in his own view, far from
satisfactory, and it remained unpublished during his lifetime. As he wrote in the introduction to a selection of
passages published in 1923, his versions are only a renewed attempt to make sense of it, nothing conclusive...
where the translation appears dark to the reader, at that point the meaning of the original has also remained more
or less dark to me. Thus one of the best translation of Rgveda available today, freely admits that it is only a
renewed attempt to make sense of it, and that meaning of the original has also remained more or less dark to
me.
Even well known, reputed translators appear to have used doubtful methods when confronted by expressions
they did not understand. Renfrew points out a typical reference to Soma juice based on Rigveda I.102.1, using
Griffiths translation:

To thee the Mighty One I bring this mighty Hymn, for thy desire hath been gratified by my praise.
In Indra, yea in him victorious through his strength, the Gods have joyed at feast, and when the Soma
flowed.

The picture conjured up is pleasing, calling to mind Greek gods supping nectar on Mount Olympus, or Anglo-
Saxon heroes feasting in the mead-hall. But when the Soma flowed translates a single word only; the abstract
noun prasave. This same locative form, prasave, is repeated eight verses later (RV 1.102.9) in the poem, where
Griffith interprets it entirely differently, as in attack: may Indra make us prasave purah foremost in attack. So
is the Rigveda typically about the drinking of an intoxicating juice whose identity remains unidentified, or about
warfare? Or is it about neither?.
In spite of these, we find that most translations available today give more or less the same meaning for these
verses. I quote translations by some renowned scholars of the first verse of Rgveda .

RV 1.1.1 Rshi Madhuchhanda, Chandas Gayatri, Devata Agni

Agnimeele purohitai yajnasya devamrtvijam hotaaram ratnadhaatamam
Agnio puurvebhirshibhireadyo nuutanyaruta sa devai eha vakshati

Trasalation by Sri Aurobindo

I adore the Flame, the vicar, the divine Ritwik of the Sacri- fice, the summoner who most founds the
ecstasy.
The Flame adorable by the ancient sages is adorable too by the new. He brings here the Gods.

By Griffith

I Laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice, The hotar, lavishest of wealth.
2 Worthy is Agni to be praised by living as by ancient seers. He shall bring hitherward the Gods.

The translations by these two scholars, with such differing attitudes, philosophies and world view are very
similar, except that while Sri Aurobindo translates ratna as (spiritual) ecstasy, Griffith calls it wealth. While
Sri Aurobindo believes that Vedas represent inspired knowledge, for Griffith these are wild songs of barbarians,
which are often surprisingly poetic. While Sri Aurobindo is looking for the soul of the most sacred scriptures of
Hinduism, Griffith is trying to unravel the Indo European past or rather the evolution of European past from
pre-historic barbarian times. Yet their translation of the verses are very similar.
Another author translates the second part of the verse thus; The Devas invites Agni, who was praised by
ancient sages and who is still praised by them, to the yajna. In the first two translations it is the Agni which
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 167

is inviting the Devas, but in the third it is the Devas who invite the Agni to the yajna. Clearly nobody seems to
have any clear idea what the verse is all about.
Similarly, what is this flame or Agni, which is adored by the ancient as well as the new sages? The verse seems
to make little sense other than as meaningless intonations by priests as part of some obscure ancient rituals and
sacrifices. The whole verse is made to sound as if it has to do with such activity. As mentioned earlier, this might
well be because the ancient redactors of Rgveda did not understand the meaning, context or theme of the verses
and so developed some atrocious and absurd etymologies of many of the terms that occur in these verses, so that
they are made to conform to the ritual context. In the absence of any other authentic translations, authors tend
to follow the ancient redactors, except whenever it seemed rational, and consistent with the context, as Griffith
says he did. But Griffith does not say how he determined what is rational, and consistent with the context.
Surprisingly, it is not very difficult to find entirely new meanings for these verses, which are far more consistent
and sensible, and which has nothing to do with ritual practices, using very legitimate tools like the Niruktam.
Yaskas Niruktam gives many different meanings for many word roots occurring in Rgveda. We can create many
different meanings for these verses using different permutations and combinations of these different meanings.
But such a translation is unlikely to be acceptable to most, unless it is supported by some very solid supporting
evidences. This is primarily because of our general reluctance to accept a paradigm shift in any field, even if what
is available now is clearly of doubtful quality or reliability.
Many of these hymns might have missing key words in them, as they do not seem to convey a clear, consistent
meaning. These might have been obvious at the time they were composed, but in the absence of the contexts, we
have no means to know whether there are such unstated words and if there are, the nature of them. Thus most
interpretations might be on the basis of incomplete data or unstated assumptions. But then, a different set of
assumptions could give a completely different meaning to it.
One instance, where such incomplete data or unstated assumptions might have resulted in serious misinterpre-
tation, is probably the most important verse in the entire Vedas; the Gayatri.

Interpretations of Gayatri
RV 3.62.10 Gayatri is probably the most important verse in entire Vedas, as it appears in all four Vedas and is
of prime importance in all Brahmanical rituals and rites. But the actual meaning of even this verse is not quite
certain. Interpretations of it given by some eminent scholars are as follows.

Gadhino Visvamitra Rshi, Gayatri Chanda, Savita Devata.

Tat savitur varenyam
bhargo devasya dhimahi
dhiyoyona prachodayat

May we attain that excellent glory of Savitar the God: So May he stimulate our prayers. Griffith
We mediate on the glory of that being who has produced this universe. May he enlighten our minds
Vivekananda
We mediate on the effulgent glory of the divine light; may he inspire our understanding Dr. S. Radhakrishnan.
It has been put beautifully and poetically in Malayalam as Velichame Nayichalum OH! Divine Light! Please
lead us
As can be seen most interpretations treat the third and last Paada as a prayer to Savitav for illumination
or inspiration. But there may not be any phrase/word/morpheme/word root to indicate us or our or a prayer
in the verse.
The following is the rough meanings of the words or word roots that occur in the last line or Paadam of
Gayatri mostly based on Monier Williams dictionary, though it is known that this dictionary has its share of
errors.
168 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Dhi- intellect (it could be cosmic or divine intellect; not human intellect), consciousness, awareness.
Yoyo- proportionately, progressively, uniformly, could also be in waves.
Na - as, binding, not. Na is usually taken to mean as us by many authors. Monier Williams do not mention
any meaning close to us for it. According to him the morpheme Nas may have meaning like us, to us and of
us, but it may also mean to flow, to bend etc. Thus, the validity of the generally accepted interpretation for
the term Na may need to be fully substantiated. And it is crucial for the interpretation of the entire verse.
Pra- Before, forward, in front, excessively, very much.
Chodaya- inspire, stimulate.
At- to go, expand, progress
As can be seen, it is difficult to make any sense from the above directly. Two crucial elements of all the
above translations; the prayer and us; seems to be unstated assumptions and one can have other unstated
assumptions to interpret the verse in many different ways. In fact I have come across at least one such very credible
interpretation of the entire hymn, including Gayatri as dealing with creation and cosmology or cosmogony. One
possible translation could be as The cosmic intellect flows uniformly forward and stimulates expansion if this
fits in with the context of the entire hymn. It appears as if there are some vital pieces missing in the jigsaw or
alternatively we are completely on the wrong track in our effort to make sense of the verse. Thus anybody really
keen to make any sense of it will need to invent some pieces on their own to complete the puzzle. Added to this
is the possibility that these verses can be broken into different sets of word roots to arrive at many more possible
interpretations. The possibility to arrive at multiple interpretations also point to the possibility that none of them
might be what the composers had tried to convey.
An intriguing aspect of Gayatri Mantra is that, while the original version in RV 3.62.10 is strictly in the
Gayatri chandas or meter, with 3 padas of 8 syllables each, for a total of 24 syllables in the entire verse, at some
point of time later, an additional pada or line was added to it, in the form of Om! bhur bhuva suva. This new
version, which first appears in the Yajurveda versions available today, is the generally accepted official one now.
There seems to be no obvious reason why the redactors thought such an addition was necessary. Considering the
importance of Gayatri Mantra as the most important verse in the entire vedas, one would have thought only a
person of great eminence could have done this redaction. But the additional line appear to have been composed
quite unprofessionally. This new line, not only leaves the verse in a form without a proper chandas, it also has
only 6 syllables in the new first line, as against 8 in the next three. Thus, at present Gayatri is not in gayatri
meter or in Ushnuk (7*4) or in Anushtubh (8*4) meters or in other words, Gayatri has ceased to be Gayatri, as
it gets its name from the chandas in which it was composed.

Doubtful Interpretation of Some Other Hymns

These hymns contain many obscure symbols and allusions. Based on these many colorful mythical stories have
been invented later, often with little basis apparently. Many of these can be found in later texts like Upanishads,
Brahmanas and Puranas. But without any clear indications of contests or their original import, these imaginative
inventions make the hymns even more incomprehensible by adding confusions reguarding their actual significance.
Available interpretations only help to misdirect things. These utter uncertainties with respect to syntax as well
as semantics prompted at least one western author to suspect that these hymns might be crude translations from
some unknown foreign language.
There are many instances of such clear misinterpretations that are the accepted wisdom today. I will point
out just a few of them below.
RV 1.130 is one such hymn that do not seem to have a consistent and satisfactory interpretation that make
sense. Verses 5 to 10 of the hymn in original in English script and its interpretation by Ralph Griffth is given
below.

tvam vrtha nadya indra sartave.acha samudramasrjo rathaaniva vaajayato rathaaniva

3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 169

ita utirayunjata samaanamarthamaksitam

dhenuriva manave visvadohaso janaaya visvadohasah
imaam te vaacam vasuyanta aayavo ratham na dhirah svapaataksisuh sumnaaya tvaamataksisuh
sumbhanto jenyam yatha vaajesu vipra vaajinam
atyamiva savase saataye dhana visva dhanaani saataye
bhinat puro navatimindra purave divodaasaaya mahi daasuse nrto vajrena daasuse nrto
atithighvaaya sambaram ghirerughroavabharat
maho dhanaani dayamaana ojasa visva dhanaanyojasa
indrah samatsu yajamaanamaaryam praavad visvesu satamutiraajisu svarmihesvaajisu
manave saasadavrataan tvacam krsnaamarandhayat
daksan na visvam tatrsaanamosatinyarsasaanamosati
surascakram pra vrhajjaata ojasa prapitve vaacamaruno musaayatisaana aa musaayati
usana yat paraavato.ajaghannutaye kave
sumnaani visva manuseva turvanirahaa visvevaturvanih
sa no navyebhirvrsakarmannukthaih puram dartah payubhihpaahi saghmaih
divodaasebhirindra stavaano vaavrdhitha ahobhiriva dyauh
5 Thou, Indra, without effort hast let loose the floods to run their free course down, like chariots, to the
sea, like chariots showing forth their strength. They, reaching hence away, have joined their strength
for one eternal end, Even as the cows who poured forth every thing for man, Yea, poured forth all
things for mankind.
6 Eager for riches, men have formed for thee this song, like as a skilful craftsman fashioneth a car,
so have they wrought thee to their bliss; Adorning thee, O Singer, like a generous steed for deeds of
might, Yea, like a steed to show his strength and win the prize, that he may bear each prize away.
7 For Puru thou hast shattered, Indra ninety forts, for Divodaasa thy boon servant with thy bolt, O
Dancer, for thy worshipper. For Atithigva he, the Strong, brought Sambara. from the mountain down,
Distributing the mighty treasures with his strength, parting all treasures with his strength.
8 Indra in battles help his Aryan worshipper, he who hath hundred helps at hand in every fray, in frays
that win the light of heaven. Plaguing the lawless he gave up to Manus seed the dusky skin; Blazing,
twere, he burns each covetous man away, he burns, the tyrannous away.
9 Waxed strong in might at dawn he tore the Suns wheel off. Bright red, he steals away their speech,
the Lord of Power, their speech he steals away from them, As thou with eager speed, O Sage, hast
come from far away to help, As winning for thine own all happiness of men, winning all happiness each
day.
10 Lauded with our new hymns, O vigorous in deed, save us with strengthening help, thou Shatterer
of the Forts! Thou, Indra, praised by Divodaasas clansmen, as heaven grows great with days, shalt
wax in glory.

The following is what the web site mentioned above has to say about some authoritative interpretations
available today on RV 1.130
170 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Tradition colors translations in a number of ways that can be misleading for scholars. Ralph Griffths
nineteenth-century translation of Rigveda I.130 is typical. The only reference to human strife in the
poem has svar or sunlight as its prize (verse 8); chariots only appear in similes describing streams
running down to the sea (verse 5), and wise men fashioning a speech (verse 6); and the Sanskrit word
asva, related by linguists to other words for horse in the Indo-European language family, is absent
from the poem. The three adjectives interpreted as horse by the English translator could all have an
entirely different meaning. The problem does not lie in the choice of a nineteenth-century translation;
Geldners version of I.130 is similar, and Louis Renou, working in the 1960s, supplies a word for horse
to his French translation of this poem in two additional places.

All these interpretations treat the hymn as describing some battle involving horses and chariots and Indra
being hailed as the supreme hero. But it appears that the hymn might have nothing to do with battles and strife,
and might be talking about something entirely different. Besides it seem to make many obscure allusions that
need to be explained for the hymn to make sense.
Another hymn that creates more doubts than understanding is RV 10.95, which is usually understood as a
conversation between King Pururavas and Urvasi. These verses seems to contain multiple levels of symbolism
by playing on the multiplicity of meanings in the Vedic Sanskrit terms. Most interpretations assume it is a
conversation between lovers, expressing the conflict of interest between a lover and his beloved. But it could well
be a poetic expression of the immortal relationship between the Sun (Pururavas) and the Dawn (Ushas). At least
one noted Indian historian has interpreted it as Urvasi about to conduct a human sacriffce of Pururavas and his
pleading with her to spare him. In addition to these levels of meaning, it also might be a magic prescription for
some obscure ritual activity. Confusingly there are so many words/expressions/allusions in it that make little
sense, if we accept any one of these interpretations.
Another example of such doubtful trasalations is of RV 10.121
RV 10.121. Eakavimsatyutharasatatamam or Hiranyagarbha suktam Prajapatayo Hiranyagarbha Rshi, Ka
Devata, Trishtup Chanda
Translation by T H Griffth

1. IN the beginning rose Hiranyagarbha, born Only Lord of all created beings.
He fixed and holdeth up this earth and heaven. What God shall we adore with our oblation?

The word by word meaning of the terms in the verse is somewhat like
Hiranyagarbha Golden womb
Samavartatagre Something that remains unchanged for ever
Bhutasyajata That which emerged from whatever was there before
Patireka asit I am not able to give a satisfactory translation for this term. Pati could mean master, motion,
droped etc and asit could mean it was.
Sa dodhara flowing uniformly
Pridhvim dyamutemam Everything including earth and heaven.
Kasmai devaya havisha vidhema This being so, which deity I should worship?

2 Giver of vital breath, of power and vigor, he whose commandments all the Gods acknowledge -
The Lord of death, whose shade is life immortal. What God shall we adore with our oblation?

Again, word by word meaning of the terms in the verse is somewhat like
Ya atmada Thus the Atman or the essence of life was gained or acquired
Balada yasya gaining strength thus
Visva upasate Lives in this world. It could be also worshiping this world
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 171

Prasisham Human being

Yasya deva; yasya chayamrtam yasya mrtyu Godlike, immortal and (yet) subject to death
Kasmai devaya havisha vidhema This being so, which deity I should worship?
The limitation of Griffiths translation, or for that matter, any other translation, should be quite apparent
from the above. He appear to have simply ignored expressions in the verse, which were inconsistent with what he
determined as the context of the verse. To be fair to him, it should be admitted that it is difficult to make a clear
sense of the verses, except that it appears to be a version of creation. But it appears that the creation is described
as a natural process, or as a flow of creation. The process is described as a flow in more than one instance in
the hymn. Natural flows are normally processes that obey only the laws of nature. Thus what is described might
be the process of creation in accordance with laws of nature; and not as an intelligent creation initiated by an
intelligent first cause. The expression, Kasmai devaya havisha vidhema, that appears at the end of nine out of
ten verses in the hymn, seems to suggest the Gods had nothing to do with creation. Though the last verse of the
hymn says that everything was created by the Prajapathi, this prajapathi is not the Puranic Prajapathi, but
one that is the cause of everything, as an unintelligent first cause. The last line of the last verse make it clear
that the process of creation was a self driven flow by the words Vayam syama pathyoo rayinam. RV 10.129.7
reiterates this point rather hilariously.
RV 10.129.7 Nasadiya Suktam

iyam visrstiryata ababhuva yadi va dadhe yadi va na yo asysdhyaksah parame vyoman so angha
veda yadi va naveda

English version by Griffith

7 He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not.
It asks whether He, the first origin of this creation, created and maintains all these?. The verse then says
yadi va naveda or even HE may not know who or how the universe was created.
Another probable misinterpretation might be of RV 8.96.13-15 described in Page 83 above. Apart from the
interpretation in which Indra, with the help of Brhaspati, kills Krishnasura and his ten thousand followers in a
battle on the banks of Amsumati River, the Puranic (Bhagavata 10th skanda) story of the fight between Krishna
and Indra might be another version of the same. In the Puranic story Krishna is the winner and Indra admits
defeat as he recognizes who his opponent was. But the original intended meaning of the hymn might be just the
poetic description of monsoon rains and the story of the battle might be a product of some fertile imagination.
All Rig-Vedic hymns have a Rishi, Devata and Chandas assigned to them. The current understanding is
that Devata is the deity to whom the hymn is dedicated, in the belief that most Rg-Vedic hymns are prayers
addressed to various primitive nature gods. If this is so, Rg-Veda has some strange Devatas. These include Food
RV1.187, Falcon RV4.27, Cows, Frogs RV7.103, Dice RV 10.34, Rogasanti (relief from illness) RV 10.163,
Svapnasanti (relief from bad dreams) RV 10.164 and Ka RV10.121.
The last is particularly intriguing as the meaning of the term Ka is who. RV 10.121, mentioned above is
the well known Hiranya Garbha Sukta. The subject of the hymn is quite clearly creation and cosmology. Of
its ten verses nine ends with the beautiful poetic words Kasmai devaya havisha vidhema which means, This
being so, which deity I should worship. This seems to imply that the poet is uncertain about the potency of the
commonly accepted deities. Thus he seems to ask who created everything in the first nine verses and gives the
answer in the tenth verse that it was Prajapati. The hymn ends with the equally beautiful line Vayam syama
patayo rayinam. Thus Ka seems to be the subject or rather the title of the hymn and has nothing to do with
any Devata. This is also the case with many other hymns and if we treat Indra, Varuna and Agni as natural
forces, the more appropriate meaning of the term Devata might be the subject/title. The presently accepted
meaning of the term Devata in Vedas to mean deity might also be part of the misinterpretation.
172 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

Mythical Stories in Vedas and Ithasa-Puranas

All Puranas are believed to have been authored by Vyasa, or more particularly the 28 th Vyasa. It is said that
they were created or revealed, even before the Vedas were first heard by the rshies. Modern consensus is that
they were created, at least in the present form, in the first centuries of common era. But it is possible that the
original forms of these might have come down from pre-historic past.
Rgveda contain many vague allusions that might be the form in which the composers chose to record incidents
that happened during their time or what they had heard had happened in times earlier to them. Many of these
are retold as colourful mythical stories in Puranas. However it is often not clear if these Puranic stories are faithful
expansions of the Rgvedic myths and allusions or imaginative inventions of later story tellers. It is possible that
these are different versions of a common older tradition. Most modern historians reject these Rgvedic myths as
well as their expanded versions in Puranas as myths without any factual content. However, it is possible that
at least some of them might contain bits of pre historic incidents and facts. Thus, though it might be difficult
to segregate these bits from the mass of embellishments, total rejection of the vedic literature as worthless, with
regard to their factual content, will be denying ourselves a possibly valuable source of information on Indias pre
history.
European historians of 18 and 19 centuries, who created The history of India, as we know it today, believed
that early/medieval Indians were ahistorical, as they could not find in the Sanskrit texts they encountered,
anything comparable with histories created by other ancient civilizations they were familiar with; Greco-Roman,
Arab or Chinese. This led to the origin of the axiom of Indian society denying history. This was part of the
characterisation of Indian society by these European historians as historically ruled by Oriental despots. Oriental
despotism resulted in the stagnant unchanging nature of Indian society. Hegel, for example, remarked on the
absence of dialectical change in Indian history, and consequently dismissed Indian civilization as static, despotic in
its orientation and outside the mainstream of relevant world history. This was also the basis of Marxs theoretical
model of Asiatic mode of production. They mostly rejected the Itihasa-Puranas as myths with no factual content.
Works of Vedic literature and other Sanskrit texts were also rejected in contempt. Part of the reason for this was
that none of these authors and historians had actually visited India and had no first hand experience of Indian
Society. Besides, they did not have access to or were unfamiliar with other sources like Pali and Jain texts, oral
traditions in many different languages and inscriptions that were lying around all over India. Romila Thapar in
her article, Historical consciousness of early India puts this colourfully thus; The construction of reality of the
other was derived not from trying to understand a culturally different perception of the world, but from noting
the absence of European characteristics in this perception. The stories of others, which do not conform to the
style and structure of those we are familiar with, cannot be factual history.
Contrary to this generally accepted wisdom that stories in texts of Vedic Literature as well as Itihasa-Puranas
are just myths without factual content, we now know that, at least part of these accounts, are more or less true
accounts of history. Many Puranas have lists of pre-historical as well as historical dynasties. While some of them
like Vishnu Purana list the Nandas and Mouryas, others have lists of later dynasties up to Guptas and further.
These genealogies were not taken seriously until recently as they were considered fanciful concoctions without
any factual or historical content. Recent works have changed this perception some what. Many of the details
mentioned are now found to be historically accurate, like how Mahapadma Nanda became king of Magadh, the
length of his rule as well as that of his descendants (100 years). A number of Puranas says Mourya dynasty had
ten rulers who ruled for a combined period of 137 years. This agrees with other accounts like those in Mahabodhi
Vamsa; a Pali text. Accepted historical period of Nandas is from 424 BC to 322 BC and Mouryas from 322 BC
to 187 BC. Puranas also seem to have recorded other facts of history correctly. These include the means by which
Mahapadma Nanda, an illegitimate son of King Mahanandi of Magadh, the last Kshatriya king of Brhadradha
dynasty, became the king, by killing his father, Mahanandi as well as all other possible claimants to the throne;
how Chanakya, a Brahmin, plotted the annihilation of the entire Nanda clan and made Chandra Gupta Mourya
the new king and how the last Mourya king, Brahadradha was killed by his own general, Pushyamitra Sunga,
3.12. MEANING AND CONTENTS OF RIG-VEDA 173

during a royal parade and how Pushyamitra later declared himself the king.
Another instance where the accounts in Puranas have turned out to be accurate, is a reference to Hastinapura
being destroyed by River Ganga, in a flood during the reign of one King Nichaka. It is stated that the capital
was then shifted to Kousambi, near Allahabad. Archeological investigation now confirms that Hastinapura was
destroyed in a flood in Ganges in about 900 BC and earliest human habitation in Kousambi is dated just about
the same time. Hastinapura was just west of Meerat. Both Hastinapura and Kousambi are within Ganga-Yamuna
Doab. Thus it cannot be said that Puranas are completely without any factual or historical content. This result of
this Archeological investigation cannot be said to confirm the Puranic account; but it becomes a distinct possibility.
What is particularly interesting about this result is that, the date is very close to the composition of Rgveda as
per the popular model. If the Puranic account of destruction of Hastinapura in 900 BCE is correct, it is reasonable
to assume that many other Puranic stories also might be factually correct.
One feature of all Puranas is the narration shifting from past incidents to future predictions. However the
point of shift is different in different Puranas. For example in Vishnu Purana all events upto the reign of Parikshit,
the son of Abhimanyu, is in the past. It then shifts to future tense. In Vayu Purana the shift is during the reign of
Asima Krishna, the fifth descendant of Parikshit (Parikshit, Janamejaya, Satamika, Asvamedha Datta and Asima
Krishna). These differing period of shift might rule out the possibility that, the shift from past to future, was just
a convention in composing Puranas. It also point to the possibility that the shift might be indicative of the time
of first composition of the Purana, though it might have undergone later revisions and additions. We can only
speculate on its possible significance.
It is generally believed that the insidents vaguely mentioned in Rgveda, and their expanded representation in
Puranas are unreliable myths and legends. It is certain that these Puranic stories are in an embellished form,
probably as a result of later story tellers imagination running wild. But the evidence that Puranas have got at
least some of the insidents that happened very close to the period of composition of Rgveda correctly, call for some
rethinking on the validity of our perception, at least in cases where we have corroboration form other sources. But
this corroboration is crucial and we must also equally firmly reject the attempts of some right wing authors to
treat Puranas as texts of history.

3.12.3 Conclusion
To sum up, the interpretations of Vedas available to us today are far from satisfactory. The reason for this is not
clear. Available interpretations of many of these hymns, or even verses, do not make any consistent sense, with far
too many opaque allusions and expressions. A prime example of such hymns are RV 1.140 to 164 attributed to Rshi
Dirghatamas. None of the available interpretations do not even attempt to clarify what these hymns are about.
Modern interpretations are mostly based on ancient/medieval interpretations inherited by us. But these might
have been created for entirely different purposes and might not be serious attempts to understand the contents.
The huge mountain of these misinterpretations have now become a crucially misleading and serious impediment
to the actual understanding of the hymns, as most people might not be comfortable with a conceptually different
interpretation. The sophistication of the earliest Indo-European poetry lies buried beneath a mass of inherited
misunderstandings that overlay the text, like later strata at an archaeological site. With major pieces of the jigsaw
firmly in the wrong place, the rest, inevitably, refuses to fit
Available indications point to the possibility that at least part of the reason for the difficulties in understanding
these hymns might be their extreme antiquity. It is distinctly possible that there might have been a time gap of
a millennium or more between the Rgveda and later Vedic texts like other Vedas or Brahmanas.
The above statements should not be interpreted as an attempt to glorify the Vedas, as many, with extremist
religious views, have been attempting to do. It is often suggested that Rigveda might contain profound wisdom
and invaluable knowledge that can explain everything, but these are in a hidden form that cannot be understood
in normal course. But as far as I can see, most of these hymns express sentiments and world views that can be
expected from people who lived 4000 or 5000 years ago, while some of them might contain ideas quite advanced
174 CHAPTER 3. ORIGIN OF VEDIC LANGUAGE

for the times. These verses are very musical and many of them are breathtakingly beautiful poetically, often
expressed in imaginative symbols. But they seem to mostly discuss mundane issues, though some of them deal
with philosophy and astronomy beyond its time. Many of them just do not make any consistent sense; probably
because we do not have the tools to unravel the archaic language forms. I an sceptic about any hidden meaning
in Vedas containing cosmic wisdom, but would avoid being cynical about it.
Chapter 4

Conclusion

The accepted wisdom at present, now increasingly limited to historical linguists, is that Indo-Aryan language was
brought to India from outside by a group of nomadic barbarians with little claim to culture or refinement just
about 3500 years BP. Yet here we have a paradox. Sanskrit, which is a Sanskritised or refined form of Vedic
language, is one of, if not the most, refined language in the world. It is regarded as probably the only natural
language that can be used as a computer language without too many modifications as it has the strict syntax and
semantics required for a computer language.1
Moreover Sanskrit is a highly musical and metrical language. Ideas can be expressed in it with a greater
economy of words than any living language. It possesses the oldest and most sophisticated grammatical science,
going back to a period before the Buddha to the time of Panini and before. It has a highly algorithmic grammar,
both in terms of morphology and syntax so much that by mechanically applying the sutras of Panini to nounal and
verbal roots one can form perfectly correct words and sentences without even knowing what they mean. Sanskrit is
morphologically very complex, with seven declensional cases for nouns and a whole host of verb forms that we dont
have in most modern languages. Yet the orderly and systematic, yet extremely versatile word formation, which,
using a fairly limited number of nounal and verbal roots, with the help of a few prefixes, suffixes, and pronouns,
expands into a practically unlimited range of words and their meanings. It uses lexical lists Dhatupatha and
Ganapatha (that most probably pre-existed Panini) as input and has algorithms to be applied to them for the
generation of well-formed words. Thus Sanskrit needed no dictionary or new grammar rules for the past 2500
years, as a new word to represent a completely new concept or idea can be formed using the strict rules and the
lists of word roots. Similarly anyone familiar with the lexical lists and the rules can understand the meaning of the
word by breaking them into the roots and thus there was no need for a dictionary. This is quite unlike English (or
most other natural languages) which is a mixture of loan words from different languages like old German, Danish
and French, with an admixture of Greek and Latin. In most modern languages, when the need for a new word
arises, either it is borrowed from another language or just a random pattern of sound is introduced to represent it.
The only test is whether the new word becomes generally acceptable. Another quite unusual feature of Sanskrit
is its inflection-based syntax, which makes the overall meaning of a sentence almost independent of the position
of its constituent words, again unlike most other languages.
Classical Sanskrit is based on Ashtadhyayi, a manual of about 4000 sutras or aphorisms composed by Panini
in about 600 BCE (there are differing opinions about the period). It is one of the earliest known grammars
in any language. It is the earliest known work on descriptive linguistics, and together with the work of his
1
Human languages use fuzzy logic extensively to code information. The syntax can be very flexible, with same expression having
multiple meanings and many different expressions, sounds and expressions having same meaning, depending upon the context. Many of
these may not obey any specific rule of grammar. Similarly, semantics or word meanings often can be context dependent. But present
day computers need instructions in very strict syntax and semantics. It is in this respect that Sanskrit is said to be closer to computer
algorithms than any other human languages. Sanskrit has its share of fuzzy features. It is only that its syntax is far more rule based
compared to other languages.

175
176 CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSION

predecessors (Nirukta, Nighantu, Pratishakyas) stands at the beginning of the history of linguistics itself. It is
highly systematized and technical. Inherent in its approach are the concepts of the phoneme, the morpheme and
the roots. Paninis brilliant codification of Sanskrit grammar was not equalled until the days of modern linguistics
(whose birth was probably inspired by 18th- and 19th-century philologists encounters with Sanskrit grammar).
His morphological analysis was more advanced than any equivalent Western theory before the mid 20th century,
and his analysis of noun compounds still forms the basis of modern linguistic theories of compounding. Prof. Prof.
Frits Staal points out that the ancient Indian grammarians, especiallyPanini, had completely mastered methods of
linguistic theory, not understood and mastered again until the 1950s, and the applications of modern mathematical
logic to linguistics byNoam Chomsky. Chomsky himself has said that the first generative grammar in the modern
sense was Paninis grammar. Pananis methods allowed the construction of discrete, potentially infinite generative
systems. Panini used meta rules, transformations and recursion with such sophistication that his sutras have the
computing power equivalent to a Turing machine. Paninis brilliance also is amply demonstrated in the fact that
the grammar he wrote, in addition to being a descriptive grammar, is also a generative grammar. His rules have a
reputation for perfection as they describe Sanskrit morphology fully, without any redundancy in just about 4000
brief aphorisms which are immensely information dense. The near perfection of his rules is clear from the fact
that in spite a long continuous line of brilliant grammarians Sanskrit produced for the past 2500 years, his Sutras
needed little alteration, but only comments, explanations and analysis. Just as an example of these aphorisms,
Sutra 1.2.45 of Paninis Astadyayi is reproduced below.
arthavadadhaturapratyayah.
An explanation of this sutra requires whole books.
Most of what is described above is also true of Vedic Language; particularly late Vedic. The language of
Brihdaraynaka or Chandogya Upanishads, or the epics is more or less the same as Paninian Sanskrit. Only
those with adequate scholarship in Sanskrit language can appreciate differences if any. It is possible that the
style, content and technique of Ashtadhyayi were not invented by Panini. He might have only classified, codified
and formalized existing rules.2 The sutra style of making use of very brief, yet immensely information dense
aphorisms was common for Sanskrit of that period. Its excellent morphology and sophisticated grammar might
have evolved over a very long time as Panini himself mentions many earlier grammatical traditions. Panini refers
to Yaskas Niruktam which gives a commentary of Nighandu, a glossary of Vedic terms of very ancient and
unknown authorship. Niruktam gives a number of different meanings of terms in Nighandu as also interpretation
and etymology of archaic Vedic terms. There are some references which name one Rshakapi as the author of
Nighandu. Both Yaska and Panini refer to etymologists and grammarians like Sakatayana before them. In fact
various ancient texts mentions many earlier grammarians. Thus it is evident that the tradition of grammar in
Sanskrit and Vedic had a very long history before Panini. It is remarkable that Vedic Language seems to have had
very well advanced traditions in the three main components of modern linguistics; morphology (Nirukta), syntax
(Satakayana) and phonetics (Pratisakhyas).
Panini notes a few special rules, marked chandasi (found in Vedas) to account for forms in the Vedic scriptures
that had fallen out of use in the spoken language of his time. These indicate that Vedic Sanskrit was already archaic.
As mentioned earlier, early or Samhita Vedic found in the Rig-Veda and late Vedic found in the earlier Upanishads
are substantially different, but Samhita Vedic already had the linguistic complexity of Paninian Sanskrit. Rig Veda
is composed in complex meters. It uses many synonyms indicating a long and rich development. For example at
least four different synonyms for horse can be found in Rig-Veda; ashva, vagin, haya and arvan, each with
2
The present popular wisdom is that Panini created a completely new perfected or refined language or that Classical Sanskrit
is an artificial language. The task accomplished by him was truly superhuman, even if he had only classified, codified and formalized
existing rules. It is difficult to believe that he had also thought up all those rules on his own. I am suggesting an alternate possibility
that he might have just classified, formalized and codified the rules of many different dialects in use in the Indo-Gangetic Planes during
his time. The case of Pali is also somewhat similar. It is said that it never was a spoken language, but was an artificial language
created by the disciples of Buddha, as the area where he preached had many mutually incomprehensible dialects. The new artificial
language was created, so that everyone can comprehend his preachings directly.
 177

subtle differences in their meaning, depending on the context in which they are used. Nomadic pastoralists, with
little claim to a sophisticated poetic culture, would have found such linguistic complexity beyond them. Vedic is a
complex language with singular, dual and plural for nouns and verbs and many classes of nouns. The verbs have
present, past and future tenses and the past tense alone is of 6 or 7 kinds. The language, expressions and phrases
are often poetic, enigmatic, symbolic, highly lyrical and often hyperbolic. It appears to have had a grammatical
tradition beyond its time. Thus Vedic Sanskrit seem to be a language of an old, venerable, sophisticated poetic
culture and that the language had evolved over a very long time in an environment of intellectual and cultural
refinement. It is difficult to believe that nomadic barbarians could speak and develop a language of such refinement.
Rgveda uses around 18000 specific words or word roots for its composition. This makes Vedic Language one of
the most developed languages that was in use before first millennium BCE, if not the most developed. Nomadic
pastoralists are unlikely to develop a language with such rich vocabulary. They usually would not have more than
5000 words in their dialects. Yet we are told that Vedic was the language of barbarian nomads who were on the
move for centuries.
Till the middle of the last century the dating of Vedas was based on an educated guess at best. When Max
Muller first suggested the time of entry of Indo-Aryan language into South Asia as 1200 BC, it was mainly based
on his firm belief in the then accepted Biblical chronology of creation of earth. Later he himself expressed doubts
about this chronology, but by then the date was struck in the minds of academics. Max Muller chronology was first
treated as a hypothesis, but soon was accepted as a proven fact all over the world by academics, stated as a fact
of history in school text books and in common perception, even though there were many sceptics and dissenters
as well as inconsistent data. This happened partly because of what is often termed as Intellectual filtering.
Intellectual filtering is a process by which opposing views on any subject is not afforded opportunity to
be discussed freely. Only ideas favoured by The Metropolis are allowed to gain prominence. Scientists and
others routinely accept evidence that supports their preconceptions and theories while rejecting, either consciously
or unconsciously, other evidence that does not uphold their views. Most academics are uncomfortable with a
completely new paradigm. Many of them are incapable of changing the paradigm and are fearful of others doing
it. This often necessitates trying to force the facts to fit the preconceived theories so as to conform ones findings
within it. This often happens not intentionally, but is on account of the organization of the knowledge dissemination
infrastructure within the domain. Junior researchers are scared about the censor of senior faculty members. Senior
faculty members are afraid about ridicule from peers. Prestigious journals and organizers of important conferences
are worried about losing their status. Everyone is concerned that their career prospects may be compromised on
account of support to a rebel proposal, as career advancement depends on number of publications in important
journals and the number of references papers attract. In the past, though everyone was aware of the situation,
few dared to discuss it openly or it was a sort of inarticulate major premise.3
In this respect, a view expressed recently by 2011 Nobel Laureate for Chemistry, Dan Shechtman, may be
relevant. Unlike religion and faith based systems, science is not dogmatic and is open to revision. But in frontiers
of science, there is not much of a difference between science and religion. People have their beliefs and they would
not listen. Any new idea that is opposed to their views on the subject is dismissed in contempt. A true scientist
should be a humble person willing to listen to opposing views and should be a true skeptic. But unfortunately this
is not often the case. The more scientifically literate you are, the more likely you are to misinterpret information
in a way that supports your own ideology. He was saying this based on his own struggles lasting more than a
decade against such inflexible beliefs among leading scientists in his own field.
Heinrich Harke, in his paper Archaeology and Nazism: A Warning from Prehistory discusses how archaeology
and archaeologists were manipulated and forced to conform their reserch and findings to the official Nazi line, in
the Third Reich. He goes on to discuss the possibilities for such distortions even in todays perfectly democratic
3
Inarticulate Major Premise is a legal principle proposed by Mr. Oliver Wendell Holmes in late nineteenth century. He was a judge
of the United States Supreme Court from 1902 when President Roosevelt nominated him to that office. It means a premise that is not
openly articulated for reasons unrelated to its validity. In the legal domain it implies that justice can never be completely impartial as
judges are influenced by their social background, beliefs, moods, likes and dislikes etc.
178 CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSION

set-ups.

A critical look at our own institutional contexts and our own behaviour reveals disturbing parallels,
even in perfectly democratic states. Our disciplines, by and large, rely on state funding for institutions,
for posts, for research. So archaeologists, historians, linguists and others bend with the wind and try
to anticipate what they think the powers that be want to hear. At the end of the Thatcher era, and
with the incoming Blair government, I noticed my British colleagues switching the terminology of their
grant applications and book advertisements from key concepts of the Conservative Party (innovation,
entrepreneurial initiative, expansion etc.) to those of the Labour Party (social inclusion, multivocality,
sustainability, etc.). On the European mainland, German, French and other colleagues have for years
tried to tap the rich funds of the European Union with projects and exhibitions which present the early
medieval Franks, or the Iron Age Celts, or even the Bronze Age cultures, as predecessors of a united
Europe.

All processes of creating new knowledge goes through many stages. It usually starts as a flash of intuition.
It might then become a speculation by adding a logical framework to it. As the supporting evidence grows, it
becomes a hypothesis, a theory and finally is accepted as a fact. None of these stages are well defined and thus
it may be a gradual process of progress from speculation to fact. But often some idea may skip some of these
stages and may be accepted as fact under various circumstances. These are continuing processes and some of
them may be proven wrong at a later stage and others once rubbished and ridiculed may later be accepted as
the true position. The situation may be described in the words of Arthur Schopenhauer as follows All truth
passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being
self-evident.
The Indo-European language family is the largest linguistic group in the world; three out of the four most
spoken languages in the world (Spanish, English and Hindi) derive from Indo-European roots, and its three billion
native speakers cover the globe. Geographically IE languages are spoken in most of Europe from the Atlantic coast
to the Urals, Iran, Afghanistan and South Asia apart from North and South America, Australia and in many other
countries. The evolution and spread of this language group in pre-historic times is still hazy. In fact there are
sceptics among scholars about the concept of IE Languages itself. The evidence that the Indo-European languages
are related lies primarily in their grammar and vocabulary. Thus the Sanskrit agni (fire) is cognate with Latin
ignis. Foot is pada in Sanskrit, pedis in Latin, pied in French foot in English. The Sanskrit pashu (cattle)
cognates with pecus in the Latin. But the temptation to draw simple conclusions about non-verbal facts from
such cognates or verbal correspondences might lead to serious errors. The fact that many others, like the word
for hand, are different in most of these languages should put us on guard and make us skeptic of such facile
conclusions.
The difficulties encountered by these models seem to grow as our knowledge expands in different fields. The
more precise our knowledge of DNA patterns grows, the harder it is to fit an Indo-European migration in anywhere.
This is also the case with archaeology. Yet we know that the language group had spread all over Eurasia at some
time in the past. Thus Indo-European has become a kind of ghostly presence, with no firm ties to history,
archaeology, or genetics. The model which has more support at the moment is the Kurgan Hypothesis, but it
has yet to overcome many adverse facts and as J. P. Mallory said, it is at best the least bad solution. Mallory
notes that with the the growing sophistication of the knowledge on the Indo-European origin and migrations, new
uncomfortable questions arise, and that it is evident that we still have a very long way to go.. One of those
questions is the origin of the shared agricultural vocabulary, which appears to belong to the earlist layer of proto
Indo-European vocabalary and the earliest dates for agriculturalism in areas settled by the Indo-Europeans. Those
dates seem to be too late too account for the shared vocubalary. Support for the model is now limited to linguistics
and archaeological finds from the Steppes. But even here many scholars are not convinced PIE lexicon is consistent
with the kurgan culture. Evidence from hard sciences like genetics is mostly against it and archaeology beyond
 179

Steppes, in the west as well as east, is emphatically against it. Thus the model may be in need of a serious relook.
However the current majority position of genetics and archaeology need not be treated as final. It is a continuing
process and as the technology and data set is improved and fine tuned new interpretation might emerge.
But such enquiries are now facing a new challenge, as the domains and disciplines involved seem to multiply as
we go forward. Till the middle of twentieth century linguistics was the only discipline involved, with some inputs
from textual and archaeological sources. Then came Marina Gimbals novel method of use of archaeology and
linguistics together, to arrive at conclusions about historical linguistics. In the second half of twentieth century,
archaeology became even more important in the IE origin and expansion than linguistics, as breakthroughs in
linguistics has been rare in the absence of discovery of written attestations from ancient times. In fact data/findings
from linguistics has now become dependent variables, as it cannot determine the origin or actual chronology of
evolution of a language on its own. New discoveries in archaeology, related to IE linguistics, also has been rare for
the past few decades.
By the turn of the century, we were beginning to get results from genetics or Archaeogenetics or genealogical
DNA tests. Here again, in the beginning these studies were restricted to Short Tandem Repeats or STR and
single-nucleotide polymorphisms or SNP in mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome DNA. As the technology
and techniques improved, autosomal DNA also were began to be used. The preferred choice now for genealogy is
micro-array chips that use hundreds of thousands of autosomal SNPs. Further improvements of these resulted in
the ability to extract DNA samples from fossils and ancient biological remains of long dead individuals. These are
beginning to modify and fine tune our understanding of pre-historic human history and migrations.
A powerful new method for study of history of origin and evolution of languages is an extremely complex Math-
ematical/statistical/computational tool developed recently and since refined greatly, which involves phylogenetic
analysis of linguistic data. phylogenetics is the study of evolutionary relationships among groups of organisms. In
historical linguistics, similar concepts are used, with respect to relationships between languages, using methods of
computational phylogenetics. The problem with such multiplicity of disciplines used to enquire into same aspects
of human history, is that a single expert cannot have expertise in all these fields. Thus such enquiries will have
to involve experts from different fields in a team in future. Such team work may run into difficulties, as these
different domains have different systems, methods, language, lexicon, world views, attitudes and philosophy, which
may be incompatible with each other. The problem is becoming quite apparent now, as linguists and historians,
who were in the forefront of these discussions till recently, have difficulty in challenging the new findings, which
are mostly against their pet theories.
Available data on PIE homeland and expansion is mostly controversial. For example some authors, after
exhaustive analysis, arrive at the conclusion that PIE dialect had many agricultural related words in its earliest
layers. Others, after equally detailed studies, conclude that these terms are later additions or borrowings. Similarly,
according to Kurgan Hypothesis, Indo-Europeans invaded Europe in the second millennium BCE and transformed
the culture and language of the entire continent, after erasing most pre-existing languages. The Anatolian
Hypothesis and PCT are equally emphatic that there was no major genetic, cultural or archaeological change in
Europe from the neolithic or even earlier. This is true of many other related issues. Part of the problem is that
we are looking into the pre-historic past without any reliable empirical data. Data on which these conclusions are
based are often doubtful or even motivated or false. Besides these discussions often have the tendency of reaching
the standards of fairy tales and do not conform to the standards of scientific rigour. These are often a series of
assumptions, presumptions and speculations leading to fanciful conclusions; and thus are just probable models;
not facts. The differing conclusions point to the need for far more studies to get closer to the true position. Since
the nature of the data itself is suspect, interpretations of the data becomes even more problematic. Various home
land theories discussed above uses a chain of such data and interpretations to arrive at their final conclusions.
Each of the individual items in the chain can generally be described only as one of the possibilities. If one or
more of the parts are found to be erroneous or interpretations based on wrong premises, the whole model can fail.
The excruciatingly limited reliable data we have about the languages, the people, their materiel culture, migration
patterns and a host of other related aspects contain too many complex puzzles and unanswered or unanswerable
180 CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSION

questions, that it is impossible to build a reliable and satisfactory model at present. Hans Henrich Hock, Professor
Emeritus of Linguistics and Sanskrit at the University of Illinois says

The issue is much more difficult to figure out. Im always amazed by people who on one side or
another have this very clear view that they know the truth. I think we have to take this basically as a
scientific issue where we have to judge which is the best hypothesis. And that doesnt mean that it is
the absolute truth because we cant go back in time.

Thus, it is best that these models are treated as good hypothesis at present, and not as facts.
All these models of IE origin and expansion are essentially European centric as they mostly try to explain
IE arrival and expansion in Europe. Its arrival in South Asia is really a sub plot of these models of Porto IE
origin and expansion. But South Asia poses serious difficulties for the Kurgan model, as so far, there is little
archaeological evidence for arrival of IE people here in the second millennium BC. Besides genetic evidence, as
of now, rule out any significant gene flow into South Asia for a very long time. Thus the only way the Kurgan
model can be related to Vedic Language is by the so called trickle in and elite dominance model. But such a
model seems too far-fetched and illogical and there is no parallel for it anywhere. Besides the chronology of the
Kurgan model is in conflict with evidence available now on the timing of drying up of Sarasvati River as also the
astronomical evidences in Vedic texts. Equally significant is the absence of any reference to a Migration Event
of the Vedic people in these texts. There are no references in Vedic/Puranic texts or mythical stories in any part
of India to a major or minor migration event from the north to support AMT/AIT. The only one such possible
reference is about the arrival of Manu (the mythical progenitor of mankind) over the sea from the south after
The great flood. The battles described in RV are hardly battles between small groups of immigrant elites and
a large local enemy. We probably need more ancient chronologies for Indo-Aryan presence in South Asia as well
as PIE origin and expansion, as the current evidences and data from multiple fields like archaeology, genetics,
literature, local myths and even linguistics are inconsistent with the currently accepted time frame. Thus it is
best to await results of further studies and research before coming to a firm conclusion. Till then it may be more
logical not to treat any of these models as proven facts, but only as hypotheses which might be subject to future
revisions or even rejection.