The Vedas

by Roshen Dalal

  The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective (Vedic Literature: The Four Samhitas)

  Cultural interaction in this region is well known for later periods from historical sources. It would seem to have extended back to 10,000 BCE.

  In West Asia by 9000 BCE there were village settlements in Anatolia, Cyprus, Jordan, and other areas. By 5000 BCE cities and city states had emerged in Sumer, the southern region of Mesopotamia, and the great Mesopotamian civilization soon developed. In 2334 BCE Sargon of Akkad took over Sumer. Other later groups and dynasties in the region were Hurrians, Hittites, Kassites, Assyrians, and Babylonians.

  Jordan and Lebanon had early coastal settlements of the Phoenicians. The region of Palestine and Israel has evidence of occupation dating back to the Palaeolithic age. It was later occupied by the Cannanaites and the Hebrews. The Arab peninsula, with Saudi Arabia and other countries, also has early settlements dating back to Palaeolithic times. The Maqar civilization in Saudi Arabia has a suggested date of 7000 BCE.

  LANGUAGES

  As we have seen, West Asia was one of the main regions where scholars located the origins of pre-Indo-European, or Indo-Hittite, its precursor. However, early West Asian languages are diverse and numerous, and many were not Indo-European. They included the following:

  Sumerian, one of the languages of Mesopotamia, was used in Sumer from at least the 4th millennium BCE, and is known from inscriptions and texts. Around the 3rd millennium BCE, it began to be replaced by Akkadian. Ancient Sumerian was an isolate language—one that does not seem to be related to any other known language—though scholars have suggested that it was related to other language families. Such suggestions include the Munda, Dravidian, Nostratic, Dene-Caucasian, and Hurro-Urartian languages.

  Akkadian is the earliest known Semitic language. It is known from proper names in Sumerian texts in circa 2800 BCE, and later from thousands of other records. As it belonged to the same region as Sumerian, the two languages deeply influenced each other. From the 2nd millennium BCE, Assyrian and Babylonian were two languages that developed from Akkadian, which itself went into decline by the 8th century BCE and was gradually replaced by Aramaic.

  Hittite, an Indo-European language, is now extinct. It was the language of the Hittites, who ruled in Anatolia around 1900–1300 BCE with their capital at Hattusas.

  Hurrian and Urartian are related languages of ancient West Asia. They are neither Semitic nor Indo-European. Hurrian was the language of several states in north Mesopotamia, Syria, and south-east Anatolia between 2225 BCE and 1000 BCE. Urartian, an offshoot of Hurrian, is known from records of the state of Urartu between the 9th and 7th centuries BCE. Urartu was loacted in the mountainous areas near Lake Van (Turkey). Hurrian–Urartian are sometimes included, along with north Caucasian (Nakh-Daghestanian) languages, in a language family termed Alarodian, but this theory does not have much support.

  Kassite, Elamite, and Subarian were among other languages in the region.

  There is evidence that some of these West Asian languages had Indo-Aryan connections.

  AKKADIAN AND INDO-ARYAN

  According to the Hungarian linguist Janos Harmatta, there is evidence of Indo-Aryan names in inscriptions of the Akkadian dynasty of Akkad in northern Mesopotamia. Harmatta points out two names, reconstructed as Arisen and Somasena, of the period 2300–2100 BCE. The Indian Indologist Malati Shendge has pointed out many more similarities in Akkadian and Indo-Aryan names, and suggested that even the Harappans were Akkadians. She provides a list of Sanskrit words for which she suggests Akkadian and, at times, Sumerian correspondences. She believes that the Harappans are those described in the Rig Veda as asura, rakshas, yaksha, pishacha, and gandharva. Of these, the asura is the most prominent and staunchest adversary of the aryas. She claims that the Harappans had different ethnic groups and may have been multilingual but only one language—the one understood by the majority—is on the inscriptions and this is Akkadian or a lineal descendant of it. It was the language of the asuras who migrated to the region from the Tigris–Euphrates in very early times. The script was developed in the Indus region. According to her, this very language became Vedic and, later, classical Sanskrit. She interprets names of the Rig Vedic composers through Akkadian and Semitic terms, and believes that many were asuras, that is Akkadians. Her views seem rather far-fetched and find little support, though there is some correspondence with Sanskrit and Akkadian names. This only indicates, as Harmatta pointed out, Indo-Aryan influence in the region.

  KASSITE AND INDO-ARYAN

  Indo-European or Indo-Aryan terms are found in Kassite inscriptions of around 1600 BCE from Babylon (Iraq area), which refer to Suryash and Marutash, similar to the names Surya and Marut. Kassite rule here began in the 18th century BCE. Their god of the wind, Buriash, could be related to the name Vayu. Buriash and, at times, Indash occur at the end of the names of Kassite kings. The horse was known in Mesopotamia, as an ideogram of circa 2500 BCE seems to refer to it, but it is thought it came into use in the region with the Kassites.

  MITTANI INSCRIPTION

  An important inscription, which has been used for dating, was found in the ancient region of Anatolia. This inscription of the 14th century BCE contains the names of Vedic deities. At this time, the area was occupied mainly by Hurrians and Hittites. The Hurrians occupied the Khabur river valley in the 3rd millennium BCE, with their capital at Urkesh, and were probably allied with the Akkadians. As seen earlier, their language was neither Semitic nor Indo-European. They adopted the Akkadian cuneiform script around 2000 BCE. The Hittites were located to the north-west of the Hurrians.

  THE MITTANI KINGDOM

  A new kingdom, known as the Mittani, arose in Hurrian territory around 1500 BCE in northern Syria and south-east Anatolia and existed till around 1300 BCE. Founded by a legendary king Kirta, it became a powerful state but seems to have ruled through a number of vassals. The Mittani kingdom probably came to power after the decline of Babylon following Kassite and Hittite invasions. Maittani, and later Mittani, was the term used by the people themselves. Hanigalbat was another name they used, also found in Assyrian, Babylonian, and Hattian texts. The Hattians were a pre-Hittite people of the same region. Another name was Nahrin (from the Assyro-Akkadian word for ‘river’).

  Numerous Mittani kings are known though their chronology is not very certain. There is also some variation in names in different sources. It is suggested that they had rulers who were Indo-Aryan or had Indo-Aryan connections. Alternatively, they are thought to have been Indo-Iranian or early Iranian. The people were largely Hurrians. The Mittani king list (as given by the Belgian archaeologist Marc Van de Mieroop, and modified from other sources) is as follows, with alternative names in brackets:

  Before circa 1500 BCE: Shuttarna I;

  Circa 1500 BCE: Parrattarna (Barattarna, possibly the same as Parshatar);

  Saustatar (Shaushtatar);

  Followed by some unknown kings;

  The next king was known as Artatama I, who gave his daughter in marriage to Thutmose 1V (1400–1390 BCE) of Egypt;

  Circa 1380 BCE: Shuttarna II, whose daughter Kilu-hepa or Gilukhipa was married to Amenhotep III of Egypt;

  Succeeded by Artashuma (Artashumara), who was murdered by Udhi or Uthi;

  Succeeded byTushratta, whose daughter Tadu-hepa or Tadu-khipa was sent to Egypt;

  Succeeded by Artatama II, a rival of Tushratta;

  Circa 1340 BCE: Shuttarna III, who succeeded Artatama II while the main line continued through Tushratta who was succeeded by his son Shattiwaza;

  14th century BCE: Shattiwaza (Kurtiwaza);

  14th–13th century BCE: Shattiwaza succeeded by Shattuara I;

  13th century BCE: succeeded by Wasashatta;

  Succeeded by perhaps one unknown king;

  Followed by circa 1250 BCE: Shattuara II.

  Parrattarna unified the smaller states, thus expanding the kingdom, and came in conflict with Egypt, probably at the time of Thutmose III. After Shuttarn
a II, there was political turmoil. Shattiwaza, a son of Tushratta, fled after his brother killed their father. He then made a pact with the Hittites who helped him defeat his rivals. This pact is recorded in an inscription on a cuneiform clay tablet found at Boghazkoy in ancient Hattusilas (present-day Turkey) and includes names of Rig Vedic deities. By this time, the Mittani kingdom was considerably diminished. Most, if not all, Hurrian states as well as Mittani states were conquered by the Assyrians in the mid-13th century BCE.

  To corroborate Indo-Aryan connections, the names of some Mittani kings have been converted into Sanskrit in the following way: Tushratta (Tvesaratha, ‘one who has an attacking chariot’); Artatama (Rita-dhaaman, ‘one who has the abode of rita’); Artashumara (Ritasmara, ‘remembering rita’); and Sattuara (Satvara, ‘warrior’). Wassukanni, the capital, was said to be derived from Old Indic vasu-khani, ‘wealth-mine’. However, this sort of conversion seems unwarranted. Arta, for instance, is a common beginning for a name in Old Persian. Artakhshassa I (Greek ‘Artaxerxes’) and Artakhshassa II were names of Achaemenian kings who ruled from 466–424 BCE, and 404–358 BCE respectively. The term developed from Avestan asha while ‘khshassa’ was a development from Avestan khshathra, the whole name meaning ‘he who ruled with truth’. Asha and arta can be related to the Sanskrit rita but there is no reason to convert arta into Sanskrit as it was an independent development in a related but different language.

  Tama and tamas are common name endings, both in Old Avestan and in the Rig Veda, for instance Spitama, Haechastama in Avestan, Dirghatama in the Rig. In fact, some scholars felt that the names and terms used in the Mittani inscription belonged to the Indo-Iranian period before the two groups separated. These names could thus indicate Indo-Aryan, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, or other links and cannot conclusively be assigned to Indo–Aryans alone. The name Tushratta is also equated with Hebrew or Assyrian kings.

  The Mittani treaty, written in Hurrian language and Hittite cuneiform script, contains a long list of deities who are called upon as witnesses to the compact. Of these, only four can possibly have Indo-Aryan connections: Indara (Indra), Mitra, Urwana (Varuna), and the Nasatyas (Ashvins). The list of gods starts with Iskur, lord of heaven and earth, and continues with Sin; Shamash; Teshob, Lord of the town of Kahat; Nergel of Kurda; Teshob, Lord of Uhasuman; Eiasarri, Anu, and Antu; Enlil and Ninlil; and then the Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan gods, a few local gods, and finally the god Assur. A list of goddesses follows, then mountains, rivers, gods of heaven, and gods of earth.

  The deities in this inscription thus include Hurrian and other deities. Anu/Antu and Enlil/ Ninlil were Mesopotamian gods. To reiterate, the mention of a few Indo-Aryan deities, among so many others, does not indicate that the Mittani rulers were Indo-Aryan. In fact, the Russian historian and linguist I.M. Diakonoff, among others, is not convinced that Urwana refers to Varuna. In any case, the worship of a few deities could have spread through merchants or trade.

  When describing this inscription, some Western scholars make a number of unfounded assumptions. The American archaeologist David Anthony, for instance, states that Indra, Varuna, and the Nasatyas were the three most important deities in the Rig Veda—and this is certainly not correct. The term maryanna used for chariot warriors of Mitanni is thought by some to be derived from Sanskrit marya. In the Rig Veda, marya is a term for both a man and a stallion. But, as a man, it usually refers to a ‘young lover’, not a warrior.

  Other clay tablets of about the same time have Vedic numerals and references to the training of horses. Kikkuli (a Hurrian name) seems to have been a Mittani expert in horse training and wrote a text on horse training, which had some Indo-Aryan terms for technical details, including horse colours and numbers of laps. The term aika for ‘one’, as Manfred Mayrhofer, an Austrian professor specialized in Indo-European studies, has pointed out, is particularly Indo-Aryan (Skt: eka) and not Iranian. Other numerals it uses similar to Sanskrit are tera (traya), panza (pancha), satta (sapta), and na (nava). The colours of horses are given as babru (babhru), parita (palita), and pinkar (pingala). There are similar words in other Indo-European languages.

  ASSYRIAN

  Indo-Aryan or Iranian loanwords have also been identified in Assyrian inscriptions and texts. Diakonoff finds evidence of Zoroastrianism in Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions of the 9th–8th centuries BCE from the Median area. Iranian words include masda (mazda), arta (old Persian arta, Avestan asha), satar or kastar/kistar (Avestan khshathra, ‘authority’), and parna/barna (Median farnah, Avestan khvarenah, ‘glory’). He feels that Assara Mazas found in an Assyrian source in a list of gods from Assyria, Urartu, northern Syria, and Elam may be the name Ahura Mazda. He concludes: ‘From such Iranian words and Assyrian texts referring geographically to Media, we can deduce Zoroastrianism was known in western Iran in the 9th century BCE.’

  There is thus evidence of possibly Indo-Aryan or Indo-Iranian names and/or deities in the Anatolia region, first in Akkadian times and continuing up to the 8th century BCE.

  THE HOMELAND

  How did these names and terms come to be used in this region? There are several theories. Were these in continuity and evolution from the early Indo-Hittite or PIE that some scholars believe existed in the region? Though this may be possible, the intrusion of several other languages in the region needs to be explained.

  David Anthony suggests that Hurrian kings may have hired mercenaries, perhaps charioteers, who ‘regularly recited the kinds of hymns and prayers that were collected at about the same time far to the east by the compilers of the Rig Veda’. They then usurped the Hurrian throne and founded a dynasty. The dynasty became Hurrian in most ways but retained royal names, some Vedic deity names, and ‘Old Indic technical terms related to chariotry long after its founders faded into history’. It is possible that mercenaries founded a dynasty, but unlikely that they were charioteers; chariots are generally not believed to be indigenous to India. In fact, one of the main pillars of the migration theory rests on the assumption that horses and chariots were imports to India. And, as seen above, the names of kings are more likely to have an Iranian origin.

  Another theory links the Mittani rulers with Indo-Iranian- or Indo-Aryan-speaking migrants from the steppe regions, moving towards Iran and India.

  THE RUSSIAN STEPPES

  A number of scholars, particularly Russian, associated the Indo-Iranian homeland with the Yamnaya or Pit Grave culture, Timber Grave culture, or Andronovo culture of the Russian steppes. Genetic connections have also been established between the later Iranian-speaking Scythians, Sarmatians, and Shakas and the earlier Timber Grave and Andronovo cultures. The Abashevo, Catacomb, and Bishkent (Vaksh) cultures have also been connected with Indo-Iranians or Indo-Aryans. The Zaman Baba culture is another possibility.

  Linguistic relationships with Finno-Ugrian and Indo-Iranian have been identified and are considered an additional reason to see this area as the homeland.

  A steppe homeland is a popular theory both for Indo-European and Indo-Iranian languages. According to this theory, while Indo-European languages began to spread across Europe, Indo-Iranian developed in the Indo-European homeland of Ukraine and southern Russia. Alternatively, it reached here from Anatolia, and then began to cross Central Asia to Iran and India.

  The second theory, based on the work of Renfrew and Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, sees one group reaching Iran and India directly from Anatolia, and another spreading to the South Russian steppes and on to other areas.

  Based on Renfrew’s theories, as discussed in Chapter 3, linguistically there were two waves of migration, which would have represented pre- and post-PIE languages. Thus, he felt, that in the 2nd millennium BCE, a population with Andronovo and Timber Grave characteristics spread into western Central Asia. The language they spoke had reached the Eurasian steppes through eastern Europe, and then was further transformed in its journey to the Iranian plateau, Afghanistan, and the Indus.

  According to Boyce, the noted scholar of Zoroastrianism,
in remote times, the Proto-Indo-Iranians possibly lived together on the South Russian steppes to the east of the Volga. At this time, she feels they were probably semi-migratory, with herds of cattle, sheep, and goats. They moved within a limited area on foot and used dogs to help herd the animals. This was a period when the horse had not yet been tamed. She sees their society as probably divided into two groups, priests and laity, the latter including herdsmen and hunters. The Proto-Indo-Iranians began to separate early in the 3rd millennium BCE. They had contacts with different areas: from Mesopotamia, they learnt to use wooden carts pulled by oxen and later the use of the war chariot; to draw these chariots, they tamed the wild horses of the steppes; bronze came into use about the same time; mountains flanking the inner Asian steppes, notably Altai, had rich deposits of copper and tin, hence they could equip themselves as fighting men.

  Libations (zaothra) offered to life-giving water and to fire were part of the daily act of worship, yasna or yajna. They also sacrificed animals after consecration and worship, and used haoma. She believes that the Andronovo culture may represent the pre-Zoroastrian stage of the Iranians. Such imaginative reconstruction, based on limited evidence, is provided by other scholars as well.