Among the creatures of the Supreme Being are some superior to man, who

should be adored, and from whom protection and favours may be obtained

through prayer. The most frequently mentioned of these are the gods

of the elements, the stars, and the planets; but other personified

powers and virtues likewise appear. “The three principal manifestations

of the Divinity (Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva), with other personified

attributes and energies, and most of the other gods of Hindu mythology,

are indeed mentioned, or at least indicated, in the Veda; but the

worship of deified heroes is no part of the system.” Brahma, Vishnu,

and Siva, are rarely named, enjoy no preëminence, nor are they ever

objects of special adoration; and Mr. Colebrooke could discover no

passage in which their incarnations were suggested. There seem to have

been no images and no visible types of the objects of worship. The

doctrine of monotheism prevails throughout the Institutes; and it is

declared towards the close that, of all duties, “the principal is to

obtain from the Upanishads a true knowledge of one supreme God.” But

although Manu has preserved the idea of the unity of God, his opinions

on the nature and operations of the Divinity have fallen off from the

purity of their original. This is chiefly apparent in his account of

the creation. There are passages in the Vedas which declare that God

is “the material, as well as the efficient, cause of the universe; the

potter by whom the fictile vase is formed; the clay out of which it is

fabricated”: yet those best qualified to interpret conceive that these

expressions are not to be taken literally, and mean no more than to

assert the origin of all things from the same first cause. The general

tendency of the Vedas is to show that the substance as well as the form

of all created beings was derived from the _will_ of the Self-existing

Cause.

The Institutes on the contrary, though not very distinct, appear to

regard the universe as formed from the substance of the Creator, and to

have a vague notion of the eternal existence of matter as part of the

divine substance. According to them, “the Self-existing Power, himself

undiscerned, but making this world discernible, with five elements

and other principles, appeared with undiminished glory dispelling the

gloom.”

“He, having willed to produce various beings from his own divine

substance, first with a thought created the waters, and placed in them

a productive seed.”

From this seed sprung the mundane egg, in which the Supreme Being was

himself born in the form of Brahma. By similar mythological processes,

he, under the form of Brahma, produced the heavens and earth, and the

human soul; and to all creatures he gave distinct names and distinct

occupations. He likewise created the deities “with divine attributes

and pure souls,” and “inferior genii exquisitely delicate.” This whole

creation only endures for a certain period; when that expires, the

divine energy is withdrawn, Brahma is absorbed in the supreme essence,

and the whole system fades away. These extinctions of creation, with

corresponding revivals, occur periodically, at terms of prodigious

length.

The inferior deities are representatives of the elements, as Indra,

air; Agni, fire; Varuna, water; Prithivi, earth: or of heavenly bodies,

Surya, the sun; Chandra, the moon; Vrispati and other planets: or

of abstract ideas, as Dharma, God of Justice; Dhanvantari, God of

Medicine. None of the heroes who are omitted in the Vedas, but who now

fill so prominent a part in the Hindu Pantheon (Rama, Krishna, etc.),

are ever alluded to. Even the deities of which these are incarnations

are never noticed. Brahma is more than once named, but Vishnu and

Siva never. These three forms of the Divinity occupy no conspicuous

place among the deities of the Vedas; and their mystical union or

triad is never hinted at in Manu, nor probably in the Vedas. The three

forms, into some one of which all other deities are there said to be

resolvable, are fire, air, and the sun.

Altogether distinct from the gods are good and evil genii, who are

noticed in the creation rather among the animals than the divinities:

“benevolent genii, fierce giants, blood-thirsty savages, heavenly

choristers, nymphs and demons, huge serpents and birds of mighty wing,

and separate companies of Pitris, or progenitors of mankind.”

Man is endowed with two internal spirits, the vital soul, which gives

motion to the body, and the rational, which is the seat of passions

and good and bad qualities; and both these souls, though independent

existences, are connected with the divine essence which pervades all

beings. It is the vital soul which expiates the sins of the man. It is

subjected to torments for periods proportioned to its offences, and is

then sent to transmigrate through men and animals, and even plants; the

mansion being the lower the greater has been its guilt, until at length

it has been purified by suffering and humiliations, is again united to

its more pure associates, and again commences a career which may lead

to eternal bliss.

The practical part of religion may be divided into ritual and moral.

The ritual branch occupies too great a portion of the Hindu code, but

not to the exclusion of the moral. There are religious ceremonies

during the pregnancy of the mother, at the birth of the child, and on

various subsequent occasions, the principal of which is the shaving of

his head, all but one lock, at the first or third year. But by far the

most important ceremonial is the investiture with the sacred thread,

which must not be delayed beyond sixteen for a Brahman, or twenty-four

for a merchant. This great ceremony is called the second birth, and

procures for the three classes who are admitted to it the title of

“twice-born men,” by which they are always distinguished throughout

the code. It is on this occasion that the persons invested are taught

the mysterious word om, and the gayatri, which is the most holy verse

of the Vedas, which is enjoined in innumerable parts of the code to be

repeated either as devotion or expiation; and which, indeed, joined to

universal benevolence, may raise a man to beatitude without the aid of

any other religious exercise. This mysterious text, though it is now

confined to the Brahmans, and is no longer so easy to learn, has been

well ascertained by learned Europeans, and is thus translated by Mr.

Colebrooke, “Let us meditate the adorable light of the Divine Ruler;

may it guide our intellects.”

From fuller forms of the same verse it is evident that the light

alluded to is the Supreme Creator, though it might also appear to

mean the sun. It is not easy to see on what its superior sanctity

is founded, unless it may at one time have communicated, though in

ambiguous language, the secret of the real nature of God to the

initiated, when the material sun was the popular object of worship.

Every Brahman, and perhaps every twice-born man, must bathe daily; must

pray at morning and evening twilight, in some unfrequented place near

pure water; and must daily perform five sacraments, viz., studying

the Veda; making oblations to the manes and to fire in honour of the

deities; giving rice to living creatures; and receiving guests with

honour. The gods are worshipped by burnt-offerings of clarified butter,

and libations of the juice of the moon plant, at which ceremonies they

are invoked by name; but although idols are mentioned, and in one place

desired to be respected, yet the adoration of them is never noticed but

with disapprobation; nor is the present practice of offering perfumes

and flowers to them ever alluded to.

The reading of the Vedas is a serious task. They must be read

distinctly and aloud, with a calm mind and in a respectful posture.

The reading is liable to be interrupted by many omens, and must be

suspended likewise on the occurrence of various contingencies, which,

by disturbing the mind, may render it unfit for such an occupation.

Wind, rain, thunder, earthquakes, meteors, eclipses, the howling of

jackals, and many other incidents are of the first description: the

prohibition against reading where lutes sound or where arrows whistle,

when a town is beset by robbers, or when terrors have been excited by

strange phenomena, clearly refers to the second. The last sacrament,

that of hospitality to guests, is treated at length, and contains

precepts of politeness and self-denial which would be very pleasing if

they were not so much restricted to Brahmans entertaining men of their

own class.

Besides the daily oblations, there are monthly obsequies to the manes

of each man’s ancestors. These are to be performed “in empty glades,

naturally clean, or on the banks of rivers, and in solitary spots.” The

sacrificer is there to burn certain offerings, and with many ceremonies

to set down cakes of rice and clarified butter, invoking the manes to

come and partake of them. He is afterwards to feast a small number of

Brahmans (not, however, his usual friends or guests). He is to serve

them with respect, and they are to eat in silence. “Departed ancestors,

no doubt, are attendant on such invited Brahmans, hovering around

them like pure spirits, and sitting by them when they are seated.”

Innumerable are the articles of food from which a twice-born man must

abstain: some for plain reasons, as carnivorous birds, tame hogs, and

other animals whose appearance or way of living is disgusting; but

others are so arbitrarily fixed that a cock, a mushroom, a leek, or an

onion occasions immediate loss of caste; while hedgehogs, porcupines,

lizards, and tortoises are expressly declared to be lawful food. A

Brahman is forbidden, under severe penalties, to eat the food of a

hunter or a dishonest man, a worker in gold or in cane, or a washer

of clothes, or a dyer. The cruelty of a hunter’s trade may join him,

in the eyes of a Brahman, to a dishonest man; but, among many other

arbitrary proscriptions, one is surprised to find a physician, and to

observe that this learned and beneficent profession is always classed

with those which are most impure. What chiefly surprises us is to

find most sorts of flesh permitted to Brahmans, and even that of oxen

particularly enjoined on solemn festivals. Brahmans must not, indeed,

eat flesh, unless at a sacrifice; but sacrifices, as have been seen,

are among the daily sacraments; and rice pudding, bread, and many other

things equally innocent are included in the very same prohibition.

It is true that humanity to animals is everywhere most strongly

inculcated, and that abstaining from animal food is declared to be

very meritorious, from its tendency to diminish their sufferings; but,

though the use of it is dissuaded on these grounds, it is never once

forbidden or hinted at as impure, and is in many places positively

declared lawful. The permission to eat beef is the more remarkable as

the cow seems to have been as holy in those days as she is now. Saving

the life of a cow was considered to atone for the murder of a Brahman,

killing one required to be expiated by three months’ austerities and

servile attendance on a herd of cattle.

Besides these restraints on eating, a Brahman is subjected to a

multitude of minute regulations relating to the most ordinary

occupations of life, the transgressing of any of which is nevertheless

to be considered as a sin. Drinking spirits is classed in the first

degree of crime. Performing sacrifices to destroy the innocent only

falls under the third. Under the same penance with some real offences

come giving pain to a Brahman and “smelling things not fit to be

smelled.” Some penances would, if compulsory, be punishments of the

most atrocious cruelty. They are sufficiently absurd when left, as they

are, to the will of the offenders, to be employed in averting exclusion

from society in this world or retribution in the next. For incest

with the wife of a father, natural or spiritual, or with a sister,

connection with a child under the age of puberty, or with a woman of

the lowest class, the penance is death by burning on an iron bed, or

embracing a red-hot metal image. For drinking spirits the penance is

death by drinking the boiling hot urine of a cow.

The other expiations are mostly made by fines and austerities. The

fines are almost always in cattle to be given to Brahmans, some as

high as a bull and a thousand cows. They, also, are oddly enough

proportioned: for killing a snake a Brahman must give a hoe; for

killing an eunuch, a load of rice straw. Saying “hush” or “pish” to a

superior, or overpowering a Brahman in argument, involve each a slight

penance. Killing insects, and even cutting down plants and grass (if

not for a useful purpose), require a penance, since plants also are

supposed to be endued with feeling. One passage about expiation is

characteristic in many ways. “A priest who should retain in his memory

the whole Rig-Veda would be absolved from all guilt, even if he had

slain the inhabitants of the three worlds, _and had eaten food from the

foulest hands_.”

The effect of the religion of Manu on morals is, indeed, generally

good. The essential distinction between right and wrong, it has

been seen, is strongly marked at the outset, and is in general well

preserved. The well-known passages relating to false evidence, one or

two where the property of another may be appropriated for the purposes

of sacrifice, and some laxity in the means by which a king may detect

and seize offenders, are the only exceptions noted. On the other

hand, there are numerous injunctions to justice, truth, and virtue;

and many are the evils, both in this world and the next, which are

said to follow from vicious conduct. The upright man need not be cast

down, though oppressed with penury, while “the unjust man attains no

felicity, nor he whose wealth proceeds from false evidence.”

The moral duties are in one place distinctly declared to be superior

to the ceremonial ones. The punishments of a future state are as much

directed against the offences which disturb society as against sins

affecting religion. One maxim, however, on this subject, is of a less

laudable tendency; for it declares that the men who receive from the

government the punishment due to their crimes go pure to heaven, and

become as clean as those who have done well.

It may be observed, in conclusion, that the morality thus enjoined by

the law was not, as now, sapped by the example of fabled gods, or by

the debauchery permitted in the religious ceremonies of certain sects.

From many passages cited in different places it has been shown that the

code is not by any means deficient in generous maxims or in elevated

sentiments; but the general tendency of the Brahman morality is rather

towards innocence than active virtue, and its main objects are to enjoy

tranquillity and to prevent pain or evil to any sentient being.[c]

_Soul Transmigration_

It is well known that the metempsychosis, or the transmigration of

the soul into various orders of being, reviving in one form when it

ceases to exist in another, is the tenet of the Hindus. The Brahmans

grafted upon it, in their usual way, a number of fantastic refinements,

and gave to their ideas on this subject a more systematic form than

is usual with those eccentric theologians. They describe the mind

as characterised by three qualities--goodness, passion, darkness.

According as any soul is distinguished by one or another of those

qualities in its present life, is the species of being into which it

migrates in the life to come.

Souls endued with goodness attain the condition of deities; those

filled with passion receive that of men; those immersed in darkness

are condemned to that of beasts. Each of these conditions, again, is

divided into three degrees--a lower, a middle, and a higher. Of the

souls distinguished by darkness, the lowest are thrust into mineral

and vegetable substances, into worms, reptiles, fishes, snakes,

tortoises, cattle, jackals; the middle pass into elephants, horses,

Sudras, Mlechcha (a word of very opprobrious import, denoting men of

all other races not Hindu), lions, tigers, and boars; the highest

animate the forms of dancers, singers, birds, deceitful men, giants,

and blood-thirsty savages.

Of the souls who receive their future condition from the quality of

passion, the lowest pass into cudgel-players, boxers, wrestlers,

actors, those who teach the use of weapons, and those who are addicted

to gaming and drinking; the middle enter the bodies of kings, men of

the fighting class, domestic priests of kings, and men skilled in

the war of controversy; the highest become gandharvas (a species of

supposed aerial spirits, whose business is music), genii attending

superior gods, together with various companies of apsaras, or nymphs.

Of the souls who are characterised by the quality of goodness, the

lowest migrate into hermits, religious mendicants, other Brahmans, such

orders of demigods as are wafted in airy cars, genii of the signs and

lunar mansions, and Daityas, another of their many orders of superior

spirits; the middle attain the condition of sacrificers, of holy sages,

deities of the lower heaven, genii of the Vedas, regents of stars,

divinities of years, Pitris, and Sadhyas, two other species of exalted

intelligence; the highest ascend to the condition of Brahma with

four faces, of creators of worlds, of the genius of virtue, and the

divinities presiding over the two principles of nature.

Besides this general description of the future allotment of different

souls, a variety of particular dooms are specified, of which a few

may be taken as an example. “Sinners in the first degree,” says the

ordinance of Manu, “having passed through terrible regions of torture,

for a great number of years, are condemned to the following births

at the close of that period. The slayer of a Brahman must enter the

body of a dog, a boar, an ass, a camel, a bull, a goat, a sheep, a

stag, a bird, a Chandala, or a Pucassa. He who steals the gold of a

priest shall pass a thousand times into the bodies of spiders, of

snakes, and chameleons, of crocodiles, and other aquatic monsters,

or of mischievous blood-sucking demons. He who violates the bed of

his natural or spiritual father migrates a hundred times into the

forms of grasses, of shrubs with crowded stems, or of creeping and

twining plants, carnivorous animals, beasts with sharp teeth, or cruel

brutes.” After a variety of other cases, a general rule is declared

for those of the four castes who neglect the duties of their order:

“Should a Brahman omit his peculiar duty, he shall be changed into

a demon, with a mouth like a firebrand, who devours what has been

vomited; a Kshattriya, into a demon who feeds on ordure and carrion;

a Vaisya, into an evil being who eats purulent carcases; and a Sudra,

who neglects his occupations, into a foul embodied spirit, who feeds

on lice.” The reward of the most exalted piety, of the most profound

meditation, of that exquisite abstemiousness which dries up the mortal

frame, is peculiar; such a perfect soul becomes absorbed in the Divine

essence, and is forever exempt from transmigration.

We might very easily, from the known laws of human nature, conclude,

notwithstanding the language held by the Hindus on the connection

between future happiness and the virtue of the present life, that

rewards and punishments, very distant and very obscure, would be wholly

impotent against temptations to crime, though at the instigation of the

priests they might engage the people in a ceaseless train of wretched

ceremonies. The fact corresponds most exactly with the anticipation. An

admirable witness has said, “The doctrine of a state of future rewards

and punishments, as some persons may plead, has always been supposed to

have a strong influence on public morals: the Hindus not only have this

doctrine in their writings, but are taught to consider every disease

and misfortune of life as an undoubted symptom of moral disease, and

the terrific appearance of its close-pursuing punishment. Can this fail

to produce a dread of vice, and a desire to merit the favour of the

Deity? I will still further,” he adds, “assist the objector; and inform

him that the Hindu writings declare that till every immoral taint

is removed, every sin atoned for, and the mind has obtained perfect

abstraction from material objects, it is impossible to be reunited to

the great spirit; and that to obtain this perfection, the sinner must

linger in many hells, and transmigrate through almost every form of

matter.” Our informant then declares: “Great as these terrors are,

there is nothing more palpable than that, with most of the Hindus,

they do not weigh the weight of a feather compared with the loss of a

rupee. The reason is obvious: every Hindu considers all his action as

the effect of his destiny; he laments, perhaps, his miserable fate, but

he resigns himself to it without a struggle, like the malefactor in a

condemned cell.” This experienced observer adds, which is still more

comprehensive, that the doctrine of future rewards and punishments has,

in no situation and among no people, a power to make men virtuous.[d]

Fate, as understood by the Hindus, is something very different from

that of other people. It is necessity, as the consequence of past acts;

that is, a man’s station and fortunes in his present life are the

necessary consequences of his conduct in his pre-existence. To them he

must submit, but not from despair. He has his future condition in his

own power, and it depends upon himself in what capacity he shall be

born again. He is not therefore the helpless victim of an irresistible

and inscrutable destiny, but the sufferer for his own misdeeds, or the

possessor of good which his own merits have secured him.[e]

BUDDHISM

When Buddhism was first made known to Europe, not so very many years

ago, by means of translations of philosophic writings dated six

centuries after Buddha, profound astonishment was felt at taking

cognisance of the fact that a religion which had brought three hundred

million souls under its law should acknowledge no god; should look upon

the world as vain illusion, and should offer nothing but annihilation

to the aspirations of man.

The examination of the bas-reliefs, with which the ancient monuments of

India are covered, proves that the religion of Buddha, as practised by

the Hindus during a period of one thousand years, differs completely

from the representation of it given us by written documents. Not in

books, in fact, but in a close study of the monuments themselves,

can be learned what Buddhism was in former days; and the message

these monuments deliver to us is a totally different one from that

contained in books. The monuments reveal that this religion, which

modern scientists have distorted into an atheistic belief, was, on the

contrary, the most polytheistic of all religions.

It is true that in the first Buddhist monuments, eighteen to twenty

centuries old, such as the balustrades of Bharhut, Sanchi, Buddha-Gaya,

etc., the reformer figures solely as an emblem. Worship is accorded

to the imprint of his feet, and to the image of the tree under which

he entered the state of supreme wisdom; but we shortly begin to see

Buddha represented as a god, having a place in all the sanctuaries.

At first he is represented as alone, or nearly so, as in the most

ancient temples of Ajunta; then gradually he appears in company with

Brahman gods: Indra, Kali, Sarasvati, etc., as is to be seen in the

Buddhist temples of the Ellora series of monuments. Completely lost a

little later in the crowd of gods that he had at first dominated, he

comes, after a few centuries, to be regarded as nothing more than an

incarnation of Vishnu. From that day Buddhism has been extinct in India.

The disappearance, or rather the transformation which has just

been indicated in a few lines, required a thousand years for its

accomplishment. The numerous monuments which retrace its history were

erected during the period extending from three centuries B.C. to the

seventh of our era. During this long interval of time Buddha was

constantly worshipped by his followers as an all-powerful god. Legends

show him to us appearing before his disciples and according them

favours. One of the men most deeply learned in Buddhist practices, the

pilgrim, Hwen Tsang, who visited the peninsula in the seventh century

and entered a long novitiate, relates having seen Buddha appear before

him in a sacred grotto. Legends and monuments are perfectly clear in

their teachings, and had the study of Buddhism been primarily based

upon them, an entirely different impression of the religion would

have gained ground from that which now prevails. Unfortunately, the

European writers on India had never visited that country, gaining all

their knowledge of Buddhism from books; and ill chance had directed

them upon the works of certain philosophical sects, written five or six

centuries after the death of Buddha, and containing little or nothing

of the religion as actually practised.

Neither did the metaphysical speculations, which so astonished Europe

by their depth, contain anything new. Now that the works of Indian

writers are better known, the same theories have been found in the

writings of the philosophical sects which developed during the

Brahmanic period. Atheism, the contempt for life, morality as existing

apart from religion, the world considered as illusion--all these had

already appeared in certain philosophical works known under the name of

Upanishads, of which there exist about two hundred and fifty, dating

from all the epochs. In some are found the same doctrines that are

presented in the philosophical writings of the Buddhists. Their authors

also profess the doctrine of Karma, the fundamental belief of Buddhism

as of all the religions of India--a doctrine according to which the

acts accomplished by man in this life determine his condition in a

future existence, this forming also the base of the code of Manu. The

ultimate purpose of these successive reincarnations is absorption in

the universal principle of things, the Brahma of which Manu speaks,

parent to the Nirvana of Buddhism. Then, and then only is the soul

absolved from reincarnation.

For the attainment of this final state of absorption, Buddhists and

Brahmanists lay down the same rules; namely, suppression of all desire,

renunciation of the things of this world, and a life passed in solitude

and contemplation.

The philosophical theories of the age of Buddhism were thus the same

as those held in the Brahmanic age which had preceded it. They are

theories which developed parallel with the religion that was taught

by the priests and practised by the people, yet they differed from

it essentially. To look upon these doctrines as being identical with

Buddhism would be to commit an error as great as though we were

to confound the theories of certain Upanishads with Brahmanism;

nevertheless it is these philosophical utterances of some of the

disciples of Buddha which have been received in Europe as Buddhism

itself.

It would seem to suggest itself at once as improbable that a religion

counting five hundred million believers could be founded solely on

cold philosophical reasoning; but perhaps an error of such a nature is

excusable in the case of learned men who, having passed their lives in

the study of books, have had no time to pursue the deeper study of men.

In two or three thousand years, when the centre of civilisation shall

have again shifted and our present languages and the books written in

them have been forgotten, it is quite probable that some professor

who has come upon the English language in his researches shall

translate the first works that come to his hand, such as Spencer’s

_First Principles_, or Darwin’s _Origin of Species_, and give them to

the world as the beliefs professed by the Christian peoples in the

nineteenth century.

It is only necessary to observe Hindus closely to perceive that they

are not the people to adopt the tenets of any religion that is without

divinity. The Hindu not believe in gods? Why, the world is full of them

for him. He addresses prayers to the tiger that devours his flocks,

to the railroad bridge constructed by the European, to the European

himself if occasion arises. Make him learn by heart the catechism

of the southern Buddhists, recently composed with the assistance of

Europeans, which teaches that the universe has no creator, that all is

illusion, and you will see that that will not prevent him from feeling

the need of still offering up worship to the great Buddha and all the

gods of his sanctuary. The most ancient of all books on Buddhism, the

_Lalita Vistara_ written some eighteen centuries ago, six centuries

later than Buddha himself, contains a number of dissertations on the

illusiveness and vanity of the things of this world. But to whom is

Buddha teaching these truths? To the gods, principally, to those

innumerable gods of whom mention is made on every page and who, Brahma

at their head, presided at the birth of the reformer who was to be god

in his turn, accompanied him wherever he went and finally came to offer

him worship. Naturally contradictions abound in this book; but they are

no contradictions to the Hindu. His thought is formed in an entirely

different mould from ours, for him our European logic does not exist.

Not a single one of his books, from the antique epics of the _Ramayana_

and the _Mahabharata_ to the philosophical works previously referred

to, is free from glaring contradictions. Doubtless logic is not always

lacking, but it is that feminine form which carries its deductions to

their extreme limit without concerning itself with contradictions.

It is quite necessary, if one wishes to comprehend Buddhism, to

consider alongside of the philosophical speculations superimposed upon

it the multitude of gods which no religion of India can do without.

Buddha no more tried to shake the foundations of the Brahmanic Pantheon

than he tried--an oft-repeated error notwithstanding--to set at naught

the laws of caste. Indeed there has never been a reformer powerful

enough to dislodge this corner-stone of India’s social constitution.

The preceding goes to make plainly apparent that Buddhism is simply

an evolution of Brahmanism, preserving its multiplicity of gods, and

altering merely its moral teachings. Nor was it until the expiration of

several centuries that it began to be clearly differentiated from the

ancient faith; probably at the outset it was not even looked upon as

in the nature of a new cult. There is nothing to indicate that Asoka

believed himself to be adhering to doctrines hitherto untaught; mention

is made but once or twice of Buddha in all the religious edicts which

this king spread over India and of which a great number remain to us.

He recommends the widest tolerance towards all religious sects, and

Buddhism must have presented itself to him simply as one of these, to

be esteemed principally on account of the spirit of charity displayed

by the king’s son who founded it.

We shall shortly prove that Buddhism disappeared from India by being

gradually absorbed into ancient Brahmanism. In the countries other than

India in which it became established, Cambodia, Burmah, the Brahmanic

Pantheon was a part of it; but the Brahmanic gods never having

previously been worshipped in these countries, there were no sects

interested in maintaining their supremacy, and Buddha always retained

there the dominant position which in India he was to lose.

Discussion was for a long time rife as to whether, by reason of the

commingling upon them of the emblems of Buddha and of Siva, the

celebrated monuments of Angkor were Buddhist or Brahmanic. No disputes

on this point would have arisen if the scientists who examined the

monuments of Cambodia had first studied those of India--of Nepal in

particular. On these they would have found the same intermingling

of the two sets of emblems; they would also have observed the same

peculiarity in a neighbouring country, Burmah. Mr. Wheeler, a former

English functionary there, calls attention to the fact that the

Burmans, Buddhists as is well known, also worshipped the Vedic gods,

notably Indra and Brahma; and that the king of Burmah had many Brahmans

at his court. He also makes a remark that the Mogul Khans of Asia,

those in the neighbourhood of Mount Altai, worship the Vedic gods to

this day.

The facts which we have brought forward show conclusively that the wide

gulf which was supposed, at a time when the first was known solely

through books, to separate Buddhism from Brahmanism has never existed,

and it is only the preconceived idea of this separation that has

prevented the close bond that in reality unites them from being seen.

One of the keenest European observers who has ever made his home in

India, Hodgson, in citing certain Sivaic images which are to be seen

in the Buddhist temples of India, goes to infinite pains to explain

their presence. Not for an instant is it to be admitted, he says, that

there could be fusion between cults as widely separated as heaven and

earth. Yet Hodgson was a resident in Nepal and had only to cast his

eyes about him to see, the point to which Brahmanic and Buddhist gods

were intermingled in the temples of the land in which he lived. At this

epoch the two religions were held to be so wholly distinct that it was

impossible that the idea of their having the least thing in common

should arise in any mind.

This instance, showing how a preconceived belief can blind to evidence,

is the more curious inasmuch as there exists a work (on the extreme

resemblance that prevails between many of the symbols of Buddhism

and Sivaism) in which the author shows, by numerous examples, how

frequently the Hindu writers and learned men themselves confound the

Buddhist and Brahmanic images contained in the ancient temples; a

confusion that is instantly made clear if one takes into account what

we have said regarding the final merging into one of Buddhism and

Brahmanism.

_Disappearance of Buddhism in India_

No one is ignorant of the fact that after having spread from India all

over the rest of Asia, China, Russian Tatary, Burmah, etc., Buddhism,

now the religion of three hundred million people, that is to say, of

one-fifth of the world’s inhabitants, disappeared almost entirely

towards the seventh or eighth century of our era from the country that

gave it birth. It still subsists in India only upon the two extreme

frontiers of that vast empire; Nepal in the north, and Ceylon in the

south. Hindu books being absolutely silent on the subject of this

disappearance, recourse has been had until now, in order to explain

it, to the hypothesis of violent persecution. Admitting the tolerant

character of the Hindus to be compatible with the idea of religious

persecution, also granting that the effect of persecution is to

destroy a religion instead of facilitating, as history teaches, its

propagation, there would still be this difficulty: why, in a country

divided as was formerly India into a hundred petty kingdoms, should all

the reigning princes have suddenly decided at the same time to renounce

the religion practised for centuries by their ancestors, and to force

upon their people the adoption of another?

One begins to perceive the cause of the transformation of Buddhism as

soon as one applies himself to the study of the monuments of India.

After having studied attentively the greater part of the important

monuments of India, one arrives at the conclusion that Buddhism

disappeared simply because it gradually became reabsorbed into the

religion from which it originally sprang.

This transformation was effected very slowly; but in a country which

has no history, where are to be encountered periods of five or six

centuries concerning which no knowledge has been handed down, there is

no possible way of knitting together the loose ends of phases which

appear to us alone and unconnected. In relation to these we are in the

situation of the ancient geologists who, seeing the transformations

that had taken place in the different layers of the earth and their

inhabitants, and knowing nothing of the periods that had intervened

between these transformations, supposed them all to be the result of

violent cataclysms. A more advanced science would have shown them

that it was by means of a series of insensible evolutions that these

gigantic changes had been wrought.

The monuments of India relate to us plainly, when we examine with care

the statues and bas-reliefs with which they are covered, the history

of the transformation of Buddhism. They show us how the founder, who

disdained all gods, finally became a god himself and figured, after

having been absent from all, in every sanctuary. How, after having been

the head of the crowd of Brahmanic divinities, he gradually became

confounded with them until he finally passed out of sight entirely

among their number.

In order to place beyond dispute the theory just advanced in

explanation of this transformation and disappearance of Buddhism from

India, it will be necessary to place ourselves back in the seventh

century of the Christian era, or to discover a country which is

undergoing a phase similar to that which India passed through at that

epoch. Nepal, one of the cradles of Buddhism, is the region which has

opposed the strongest resistance to the transforming forces by which

it was menaced as soon as it came in contact with ancient Brahmanism,

and has now reached the very moment of transformation at which Buddhism

has become mingled with Brahmanism without having been entirely

swallowed up. The Hindu and Buddhist gods are so closely intermingled

in the temples of Nepal, that it is often impossible to determine to

which religion a particular temple belongs. This peculiarity has been

remarked, though nothing has been offered in the way of explanation by

those English scientists who have made a study of Nepal. The fact, so

inexplicable when not made clear by a study of the ancient monuments

of India, is perfectly apparent when they have been given careful

examination. One notes, as was said a little earlier, that the same

confusion of divinities prevails everywhere at a certain period, and it

is easy to comprehend how ancient temples could be attributed, even by

learned Hindus, first to one religion and then to the other.

The same explanation makes clear to us the fact, so strange at a first

glance, of Buddhist-Jain and Brahmanic temples being constructed side

by side during the same period. Looking now on the phase when the

two intermingled religions were on the point of merging into one, it

will be at once comprehended how a sovereign can have distributed his

liberalities between them with as much impartiality as a king of the

Middle Ages displayed towards churches dedicated to different saints.

There remains to us but the account of a single traveller relative to

the epoch of which we speak, that of the Chinese pilgrim Hwen Tsang;

and in this we are told how a Hindu sovereign on the occasion of some

festival, divides his generosity equally between the two dominant

religions of that time; giving presents to Buddhist sectarians the

first day, to those of Brahmanism the second. The phase had already

been arrived at when the cults were entirely reconcilable, a phase

which preceded that of their being united into one. The study of the

religion of Nepal at the present time shows exactly how this fusion

came about.

The date of the introduction of Buddhism into Nepal is a very ancient

one. According to tradition Buddha himself visited the land. In

any case it is in the ancient monasteries of Nepal that have been

discovered the oldest known writings on Buddhism. To follow the same

tradition, Asoka, king of Magadha, who reigned three centuries before

Christ, made a pilgrimage to Nepal for the purpose of visiting the

temples of Symbhunatha, Pashupatti, etc. He is also said to have

founded the city of Patan, of which the Newar name is Lalita Patan,

a corruption presumably of Pataliputra, the name given in India to

the capital of Asoka. Several tumulus-formed temples have, from time

immemorial, been attributed to him.

In Nepal, one of its cradles, the religion of Buddha has reigned

for more than two thousand years. The isolation of this region of

India may have preserved Buddhism to it for a longer period than is

observable in the rest of the peninsula, but it has not prevented

its undergoing,--like causes producing always the same effects,--a

process of transformation analogous to that preceding its disappearance

elsewhere. By reason of certain circumstances the gradual absorption

has taken place more slowly in Nepal, and it is thanks to this slowness

that we are able to learn what Buddhism was in India during the seventh

or eighth century of our era, when its antique monastical institutions

had disappeared, when its sacerdotal functions had once more become

hereditary, and the ancient divinities had resumed their sway.

Buddhism and Brahmanism form to-day in Nepal, as they did in India in

the seventh century, two religions nominally distinct, but having one

for the other that tolerance which, according to the facts already

cited, must have existed in the rest of India before the disappearance

of Buddhism. This tolerance, explained sufficiently by the analogy

between the two beliefs, is carried to such a point that their

respective followers possess in common a certain number of pagodas,

divinities, and feasts.

Instead of holding, with certain philosophical Buddhist sects, that

the world is formed of matter alone, imperishable, possessing creative

power and constituting the sole divinity of the universe, the Buddhism

of Nepal offers for the worship of its followers a supreme trinity.

This comprises 1st, Ali-Buddha, who is its principal personage,

representing spirit; 2nd, Dharma, representing matter; 3rd, Sangha;

representing the visible world, produced by the union of spirit and

matter. This trinity, nearly enough related, as one sees, to that of

Brahmanism, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, has for symbol a triangle with

a point at its centre. This point is the emblem of Ali-Buddha, looked

upon definitively as the first cause.

Below this superior trinity are placed the gods of the old Brahmanic

pantheon--Vishnu, Siva, Ganesa, Lakshmi, etc. Simple emanations of

supreme power, they were created by it to govern the world. Fallen

somewhat from the elevated rank they occupied in the Brahmanic

religion, they are still sufficiently high to have the right to the

worship of mortals.

The theories of the Nepal Buddhists concerning the human soul, do not

differ sensibly from the old Brahmanic theories. It is looked upon,

as is also the soul of all animals, as an emanation of Ali-Buddha,

which, after numerous transmigrations, passes back to the bosom of the

supreme being who gave it life. Deliverance from this long series of

transmigrations by reabsorption into Ali-Buddha, is the supreme end

proposed as recompense to all believers. The number and the nature of

these transmigrations depend entirely on the conduct during life, the

acts of men determining irrevocably their future destiny.

As for the founder of Buddhism himself; he is looked upon as are all

the other Buddhas who have preceded him, as a holy personage purified

by long anterior existences, and on the point of attaining the supreme

absorption.

The most important of the temples of Nepal, notably that of

Symbhunatha, are dedicated to Ali-Buddha. In all, the Buddhist trinity

(Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) is represented in the form of a statue seated,

with legs crossed upon a lotus-leaf; Buddha having two arms, Dharma and

Sangha generally four. Of this trinity, Dharma alone, the goddess of

matter, is given the form of woman.

After the Buddhist trinity the most common objects of worship are the

images of the founder of Buddhism and of his predecessors, both mortal

and divine. Next came the gods of the Hindu Pantheon, Mahenkal, avatar

of Siva; Kali, wife of Siva; Indra, king of Heaven; Garuda, god of

birds, having a bird’s head; Ganesa, divinity of wisdom, having an

elephant’s head, etc. The last is the most venerated, his image being

found at the entrance to every temple, and it is with the worship

of this purely Brahmanic divinity that all the Buddhist ceremonies

commence.

The Hindu lingam has also been adopted by the Nepal Buddhists, but with

the complete alteration of its significance. Instead of looking upon it

as the male creative power of Siva, it is held to be the emblem of the

lotus in which Ali-Buddha manifested himself in the form of a flame.

Its shape is also modified. Four figures of Buddha are sculptured upon

its lateral parts, and its summit is surmounted in the manner of the

Buddhist chaityas.

It is to be seen from the preceding how intermingled with Brahmanism

is Buddhism in Nepal. The religion of that part of the population

which calls itself Brahmanic is equally tinged with Buddhism. Buddha

is frequently represented in the temples dedicated to Siva, and

several temples containing divinities common to the two religions are

frequented alike by Brahmans and Buddhists.

This fusion of the two religions to be observed in the temples is also

found in the legends with which the literature of Nepal abounds during

the religious festivals. In the case of some of these it is really

impossible to decide whether they are Buddhist or Brahmanic. Pilgrims

also visit with equal confidence the shrines of the two religions.

Such is Buddhism at present in Nepal, and it is easy to predict from

what has taken place in the past, that with the expiration of two or

three centuries it will have been swallowed up in Brahmanism. The

traveller of the future, ignorant of the phase of evolution through

which Nepal is now passing will attribute, as do modern writers who

treat of Buddhism in India, its disappearance to violent causes. The

temple ruins with which Nepal will at that time no doubt be strewn,

will also be invoked to attest the mercilessness of the persecutions.

But if the traveller whose existence we have supposed, has not confined

himself to the study of a single region in India, but has had the

patience to go over all the diverse lands of the immense peninsula, the

idea of a religious evolution having taken place will have penetrated

too deeply in his mind to allow him to commit such an error. In this

respect the study of India itself immeasurably exceeds in value the

perusal of history in books; it is the one country in the world

where by means of a simple passing from one place to another, can

be looked upon anew the successive forms that humanity has taken on

from prehistoric times to the present day. This living study reveals

rapidly to the observer the anterior transformations experienced by

institutions and beliefs, of which books but show us the extremest

phases.[f]

_New Light on Buddhism_

Recent discoveries and researches have greatly modified our notions

of early India. In the last few years nearly the whole of the works

composed in the earliest period of Buddhism have been edited in the

original Pali, chiefly through the Pali Text Society. A few works of

the second period have been edited in the original Pali or Sanskrit,

and a number of books of later Buddhism have appeared in the various

languages of eastern Asia. To appreciate the additions thus made

to our knowledge it is necessary to remember that the Buddha, like

other Indian teachers of his period, taught by conversation only. A

highly-educated man (according to the education current at the time),

speaking constantly to men of similar education, he followed the

literary habit of his day by embodying his doctrines in set phrases

(_sutras_), on which he enlarged, on different occasions, in different

ways. Writing was then widely known. But the lack of suitable writing

materials made any lengthy books impossible. Such sutras were therefore

the recognised form of preserving and communicating opinion. They were

catch-words, as it were, _memoria technica_, which could be easily

remembered, and would recall the fuller expositions that had been based

upon them.

In the Buddha’s time the Brahmans had their sutras in Sanskrit, already

a dead language. He purposely put his into the ordinary conversational

idiom of the day, that is to say, into Pali. When the Buddha died

these sayings were collected together by his disciples into what they

call the Four Nikayas, or “collections.” These cannot have reached

their final form till about fifty or sixty years afterwards. Other

sayings and verses, most of them ascribed, not to the Buddha, but to

the disciples themselves, were put into a supplementary Nikaya. We

know of slight additions made to this Nikaya as late as the time of

Asoka, third century B.C. And the developed doctrine, found in certain

portions of it, shows that these are later than the four old Nikayas.

For a generation or two the books so put together were handed down by

memory, though probably written memoranda were also used. And they were

doubtless accompanied from the first, as they were being taught, by a

running commentary.

About one hundred years after the Buddha’s death there was a schism

in the community. Each of the two schools kept an arrangement of the

canon--still in Pali, or some allied dialect. Sanskrit was not used

for any Buddhist work till long afterwards, and never used at all, so

far as is known, for the canonical books. Each of these two schools

broke up, in the following centuries, into others. Several of them had

their different arrangements of the canonical books, differing also in

minor details. These books remained the only authorities for about five

centuries, but they all, except only our extant Pali Nikayas, have been

lost in India. These then are our authorities for the earliest period

of Buddhism. Now what are these books?

We talk necessarily of Pali _books_. They are not books in the modern

sense. They are memorial sentences or verses intended to be learnt by

heart.

In depth of philosophic insight, in the method of Socratic questioning

often adopted, in the earnest and elevated tone of the whole, in the

evidence they afford of the most cultured thought of the day, these

dialogues constantly remind the reader of the dialogues of Plato. But

not in style. They have indeed a style of their own; always dignified,

and occasionally rising into eloquence. But it is entirely different

from the style of Western writings, which are always intended to be

read.

The striking archæological discoveries of the last few years have both

confirmed and added to our knowledge.

The principal points on which this large number of older and better

authorities has modified our knowledge are as follows:--1. We have

learnt that the division of Buddhism, originating with Burnouf, into

northern and southern, is misleading. He found that the Buddhism in

his Pali manuscript, which came from Ceylon, differed from that in his

Sanskrit manuscript which came from Nepal. Now that the works he used

have been made accessible in printed editions, we find that, wherever

the existing manuscript came from, the original works themselves

were all composed in the same stretch of country, that is, in the

valley of the Ganges. The difference of the opinions expressed in the

manuscript is due, not to the place where they are now found, but to

the difference of time at which they were originally composed. Not

one of the books mentioned above is either northern or southern. They

all claim, and rightly claim, to belong, so far as their place of

origin is concerned, to the Majjhima Desa, the middle country. It is

undesirable to base the main division of our subject on an adventitious

circumstance, and especially so when the nomenclature thus introduced

(it is not found in the books themselves) cuts right across the true

line of division. The use of the terms northern and southern as

applied, not to the existing manuscript, but to the original books, or

to the Buddhism they teach, not only does not help us, it is the source

of serious misunderstanding. It inevitably leads careless writers

to take for granted that we have, historically, two Buddhisms--one

manufactured in Ceylon, the other in Nepal. Now this is admittedly

wrong. What we have to consider is Buddhism varying through slight

degrees, as the centuries pass by, in almost every book. We may call it

one, or we may call it many. What is quite certain is that it is not

two. And the most useful distinction to emphasise is, not the ambiguous

and misleading geographical one--derived from the places where the

modern copies of the manuscripts are found; nor even, though that would

be better, the linguistic one--but the chronological one. The use,

therefore, of the inaccurate and misleading terms northern and southern

ought no longer to be followed in scholarly works on Buddhism.

2. Our ideas as to the social conditions that prevailed, during the

Buddha’s life-time, in the eastern valley of the Ganges have been

modified. The people were divided into clans, many of them governed

as republics, more or less aristocratic. In a few cases several of

such republics had formed confederations, and in four cases such

confederations had already become hereditary monarchies. The right

historical analogy is not the state of Germany in the Middle Ages, but

the state of Greece in the time of Socrates. The Sakyas were still

a republic. They had republics for their neighbours on the east and

south, but on the western boundary was the kingdom of Kosala, the

modern Oudh, which they acknowledged as a suzerain power. Gotama, the

Buddha’s father, was not a king. There were rajahs in the clan, but the

word meant at most something like consul or archon. All the four real

kings were called Maha-rajah. And Suddhodana, the teacher’s father, was

not even rajah. One of his cousins, named Bhaddiya, is styled a rajah;

but Suddhodana is spoken of, like other citizens, as Suddhodana the

Sakyan. As the ancient books are very particular on this question of

titles, this is decisive.

3. There was no caste--no caste, that is, in the modern sense of the

term. We have long known that the connubium was the cause of a long and

determined struggle between the patricians and the plebeians in Rome.

Evidence has been yearly accumulating on the existence of restrictions

as to intermarriage, and as to the right of eating together

(commensality) among other Aryan tribes, Greeks, Germans, Russians, and

so on. Even without the fact of the existence now of such restrictions

among the modern successors of the ancient Aryans in India, it would

have been probable that they also were addicted to similar customs.

It is certain that the notion of such usages was familiar enough to

some at least of the tribes that preceded the Aryans in India. Rules

of endogamy and exogamy; privileges, restricted to certain classes,

of eating together, are not only Indian or Aryan, but world-wide

phenomena. Both the spirit, and to a large degree the actual details,

of modern Indian caste-usages are identical with these ancient, and no

doubt universal, customs. It is in them that we have the key to the

origin of caste.

At any moment in the history of a nation such customs seem, to a

superficial observer, to be fixed and immutable. As a matter of

fact they are never quite the same in successive centuries, or even

generations. The numerous and complicated details which we sum up under

the convenient, but often misleading, single name of caste are solely

dependent for their sanction on public opinion. That opinion seems

stable. But it is always tending to vary as to the degree of importance

attached to some particular one of the details, as to the size and

complexity of the particular groups in which each detail ought to be

observed.

Owing to the fact that the particular group that in India worked its

way to the top, based its claims on religious grounds, not on political

power, nor on wealth, the system has, no doubt, lasted longer in India

than in Europe. But public opinion still insists, in considerable

circles, even in Europe, on restrictions of a more or less defined

kind, both as to marriage and as to eating together. And in India the

problem still remains to trace, in the literature, the gradual growth

of the system--the gradual formation of new sections among the people,

the gradual extension of the institution to the families of people

engaged in certain trades, belonging to the same group, or sect, or

tribe, tracing their ancestry, whether rightly or wrongly, to the same

source. All these factors, and others besides, are real factors. But

they are phases of the extension and growth, not explanations of the

origin of the system.

There is no evidence to show that at the time of the rise of Buddhism

there was any substantial difference, as regards the barriers in

question, between the peoples dwelling in the valley of the Ganges and

their contemporaries, Greek or Roman, dwelling on the shores of the

Mediterranean Sea. The point of greatest weight in the establishment of

the subsequent development, the supremacy in India of the priests, was

still being hotly debated. All the new evidence tends to show that the

struggle was being decided rather against than for the Brahmans. What

we find in the Buddha’s time is caste in the making. The great mass of

the people were distinguished quite roughly into four classes, social

strata, of which the boundary lines were vague and uncertain. At one

end of the scale were certain outlying tribes and certain hereditary

crafts of a dirty or despised kind. At the other end the nobles claimed

the superiority. But Brahmans by birth (not necessarily sacrificial

priests, for they followed all sorts of occupations) were trying to

oust the nobles from the highest grade. They only succeeded, long

afterwards, when the power of Buddhism had declined.

4. It had been supposed on the authority of late priestly texts, where

boasts of persecution are put forth, that the cause of the decline of

Buddhism in India had been Brahman persecution. The now accessible

older authorities, with one doubtful exception, make no mention of

persecution. On the other hand, the comparison we are now able to make

between the canonical books of the older Buddhism and the later texts

of the following centuries, shows a continual decline from the old

standpoint, a continual approximation of the Buddhist views to those

of the other philosophies and religions of India. We can see now that

the very event which seemed, in the eyes of the world, to be the most

striking proof of the success of the new movement, the conversion

and strenuous support, in the third century B.C., of Asoka, the most

powerful ruler India had had, only hastened the decline. The adhesion

of large numbers of nominal converts, more especially from the newly

incorporated and less advanced provinces, produced weakness rather

than strength in the movement for reform. The day of compromise had

come. Every relaxation of the old thoroughgoing position was welcomed

and supported by converts only half converted. And so the margin of

difference between the Buddhists and their opponents gradually faded

almost entirely away. The soul theory, step by step, gained again the

upper hand. The popular gods and the popular superstitions are once

more favoured by Buddhists themselves. The philosophical basis of the

old ethics is overshadowed by new speculations. And even the old ideal

of life, the salvation of the Arahat to be won in this world and in

this world only, by self-culture and self-mastery, is forgotten, or

mentioned only to be condemned. The end was inevitable. The need of a

separate organisation became less and less apparent. The whole pantheon

of the Vedic gods, with the ceremonies and the sacrifices associated

with them, passed indeed away. But the ancient Buddhism, the party of

reform, was overwhelmed also in its fall; and modern Hinduism arose on

the ruins of both.[g]

THE ACTUAL PIETY OF THE HINDUS AND THE HINDU SEPARATION OF RELIGION

FROM FINE MORALS

We have now examined the elaborate doctrines of the Hindus in some

detail. It remains to be seen how far they affected the real life of

the people.

The works of modern science have not yet been able to dispel the false

ideas that prevail concerning the religions of India. It is only after

studying the practice of these religions on the soil of the peninsula

itself that one can begin to have a conception of its contradictions

that seem to us so strange, and to comprehend that the word religion

has totally different meanings for the Hindu and the European. In the

buoyant, illogical, dreamy soul of the Hindu the most contrary beliefs

are associated in a manner quite incomprehensible to us. The same

man who will believe firmly in the speculations of the most daring

atheism will prostrate himself with equal conviction before thousands

of strange, grotesque, or terrible divinities, or respectfully kiss

the footprint of Buddha or Vishnu. In India, not only do all religions

dwell in perfect harmony, but the most contrary dogmas exist side by

side in the same religion.

The innumerable sects of Neo-Brahmanism or Hinduism all share in the

two dominant cults of Siva the destroyer and Vishnu the preserver, the

two great divinities worshipped by every pious Hindu, who, together

with the great creator Brahma, make up the Hindu trinity or _trimurti_.

Although Brahma is conceived as the most powerful of these three gods,

he has no special worshippers, and there is hardly a temple in all

India dedicated to him. While the symbols of Siva and the incarnations

of Vishnu, people the temples with a crowd of forms and images, Brahma

is not represented in visible form, and remains the great impalpable

soul that animates all creatures and in whose bosom the Hindu dreams of

being absorbed.

Siva, the god of destruction, or rather of transformation, the god of

birth and of death, whose symbol is the lingam or phallus and to whom

victims are sacrificed, the god of the seed that produces beings and of

the death that dissolves them--Siva is the true god of India, the true

creation of its racial genius.

The female counterpart of Siva is his spouse, Parvati or Kali, goddess

of life and death, the great mother of whom the universe was born,

and by whom it will finally be swallowed up again. No cult has been

the source of more monstrous scenes than that of the terrible Kali.

Her worship was a mixture of obscenity and cruelty. On her altars

flowed the blood of the last human sacrifices, which have now been

abolished forever among the Brahmanic populations. Scenes of debauchery

impossible to describe, gloomy or obscene mysteries are still practised

in her temples, especially in those frequented by the sect called

“Sivaites of the left hand.”

While Siva appeals rather to the intellect and represents the

particular form in which Hindu genius has conceived the universe,

Vishnu responds to the eternal needs of the heart. He is the god of

love and of faith. He is without question a monistic god; but in

order to manifest himself to mortals he has assumed so many different

forms that it would be quite impossible to define, or even simply to

enumerate them. These incarnations, called the avatars of Vishnu,

represent so many special divinities, the worship of each belonging to

a particular country, age, or social condition. While the principal

ones are only ten in number, there is no limit to the multiplication of

the others. One can fearlessly preach to the Hindus whatever god one

will, as sublime or as coarse as the imagination of man can conceive;

they will very likely adopt it, making it at once an avatar of Vishnu.

Thus, Christ, whose history has some analogy with that of Krishna, has

become one of these avatars; and to all the representations of the

missionaries the Hindus reply that they have nothing to learn from

them, being already more Christian than the Christians themselves.

As to external forms, they have always changed, and are still changing.

The prodigious imagination of the Hindu, which has so multiplied them,

is continually altering them. The Hindus love images and material

symbols; they are great formalists in the practice of their religion,

whatever it may be. Their temples are full of emblems, the principal

ones being the lingam and the yoni, symbols of the male and female

natures. Vows, penances, mortifications, the reading of sacred books,

litanies, prayers, pilgrimages, are regarded as very meritorious and

are very scrupulously observed. No other people has ever shown itself

so strict in the performance of religious duties.

The pilgrims of Benares, of Jagannath, and of the great pagodas of

the south of India, must still be estimated at hundreds of thousands

annually. The celebrated places of pilgrimage are most frequently

common to the two great sects. Vishnuites and Sivaites mingle on the

solemn day; even Mussulmans sometimes come, not through a motive of

curiosity, but for a pious end and to perform a meritorious work.

No place in India is more celebrated for its pilgrimages than Jagannath

(popularly known as Juggernaut) or Puri on the coast of Orissa;

nowhere, moreover, can one prove so well the singular fraternity of the

cults of India, and at the same time their enormous diversity. There

is not one of them that is not represented here. To whatever religion

a Hindu belongs, at whatever distance his residence, and whatever the

difficulties of the journey, he strives to go at least once in his

life to Jagannath. In the rites of this temple Vishnu [called here

Jagannath] shares with the gloomy and fatal Siva the adorations of the

multitude whose over-excited piety rises to the point of delirium. His

pagoda on wheels is drawn through the city, and such enthusiasm was

aroused in the bosoms of the noisy multitudes that fanatics used to

throw themselves beneath the wheels with cries of joy.[22]

There are many other places of pilgrimage in India, generally of less

importance than Benares and Jagannath. The shores of the Ganges are

sacred from source to mouth, and many of the faithful come from afar

to visit them. The water of the river is sacred and is carried at

great expense from one end of the peninsula to the other. The Hindus

attribute a sacred character to all watercourses, but none approaches

the holy Ganges in the veneration it inspires. This cult of waters,

like that of the clouds and the monsoons, goes back to a very remote

antiquity; it is entirely natural in a country of drought, where water

brings life and whole populations die of famine when it fails.

Between the religion and the morals of the Hindu there is an abyss

which it is difficult for the occidental mind to comprehend. It has

been truthfully said that the Hindus are the most religious of all

peoples. From the point of view of European ideas it might be said with

no less justice that they are perhaps the least moral.

To please the gods and gain their favour is the end that the Hindu has

ever before his eyes. But he would be greatly astonished if one should

try to persuade him that the gods have the least particle of interest

in the honesty of his relations with his fellowmen, the chastity of

his life or the integrity of his word and his conduct, or that these

all-powerful beings have the slightest disposition to be angry when he

steals his neighbour’s goods or practices infanticide.

Their vengeance will smite him severely if he neglects to say his

prayers, if he does not read the sacred books, if he is absent from

the religious ceremonies, if he kills a cow, or if he does not perform

the required purifications. These are the faults that arouse the anger

of the gods. They demand sacrifices, pilgrimages, penances, prayers,

the performance of a thousand external rites; they are concerned about

nothing else. The rest is man’s affair, the material, utilitarian,

practical side of life, quite beneath divine care.

If we turn to the laws of Manu, we find that the infraction of

apparently puerile rites constitutes for the Hindu a fearful crime

that can be atoned only by torture or even death, while robberies and

murders may be expiated by the lightest penances. With the exception

of adultery, which so deeply disturbs the constitution of families and

consequently that of the race, all the sins of the flesh are of little

importance to the Hindus. The voluptuous cults which they practice,

rather impel them to license, and love becomes criminal only when its

object is a being of an inferior caste. Murder derives its culpability

from the rank of the person upon whom it is committed. If the victim

is a cow or a Brahman, the crime is a grave one; in any other case it

becomes a peccadillo. Certain murders, like the infanticide of girls,

are not even faults.

The only great moral element that has penetrated the nature of the

Hindu is the spirit of Buddhist charity. This spirit has even crept

into the rigid code invented for the pleasure of fantastic and cruel

gods and not for the true good of mankind. It has softened it and added

precepts of love and liberality to its harsh and severe directions. The

Buddhist period was the most moral in the history of India, and its

beneficent influence still makes itself felt. The good qualities that

the Hindu possesses, such as gentleness, faithfulness to his masters,

love of family, an admirable spirit of tolerance, belong to his

character and are independent of his morals. The most of his virtues

are, moreover, altogether passive; he can obey, and he is never so good

as when he yields to the yoke of a master. Let him command in his turn

and he quickly becomes unjust, arrogant, and tyrannical. One could not

say of a single one of his virtues that it is the fruit of a morality

grounded upon the powerful base of religious faith and strengthened by

ages of development.

The Hindu is, then, an essentially religious being, but he is not a

moral being. His yielding and gentle nature is accustomed to submit to

the force of a climate that has sapped all his energy and to a long

slavery. If he had no curb but his moral conscience, he would perhaps

be one of the most fierce and dangerous peoples of the globe. His

character alone has made him one of the most inoffensive.[f]

FOOTNOTES

[21] [This picturesque account by Diodorus has already been given in

the history of Mesopotamia.]

[22] [On the matter of the famous “Juggernaut” procession which has

become a proverb of relentlessness and fanaticism, it is important to

note that Sir W. W. Hunter in his history of _The Indian Empire_ makes

a sweeping denial of the traditions concerning Jagannath, declaring

that his religion is opposed to suicide or slaughter and that the

deaths which happen at his festivals are few in number, less indeed

than at ordinary political parades, and are due to accident or hysteria

and not at all to religious frenzy.]

BRIEF REFERENCE-LIST OF AUTHORITIES BY CHAPTERS

[The letter [a] is reserved for Editorial Matter.]

CHAPTER I. LAND AND PEOPLE

[b] GEORG WEBER, _Allgemeine Weltgeschichte_.

[c] FERDINAND JUSTI, _Geschichte der Orientalischen Völker im

Alterthum_.

[d] The _Mahabharata_ and _Ramayana_.

[e] The _Vedas_.

[f] MAX DUNCKER, _Geschichte des Alterthums_.

[g] CHRISTIAN LASSEN, _Commentatio geographica atque historica de

Pentapotamia Indica_.

[h] HERODOTUS, _Histories_.

CHAPTER II. INDIAN HISTORY--LEGEND AND REALITY

[b] JAMES MILL, _History of British India_.

[c] SOLOMON LEFMANN, _Geschichte des alten Indiens_.

[d] GUSTAVE LE BON, _Les civilisations de l’Inde_.

[e] W. W. HUNTER, from the article “India” in the Ninth Edition of the

_Encyclopædia Britannica_.

[f] W. W. HUNTER, _Brief History of the Indian People_.

[g] J. FERGUSSON, “On the Sakaa and Samvat and Gupta Eras” (Journal R.

As. Soc., N. S. XII).

[h] CESARE CANTÙ, _Storia universale_.

[i] SIR WM. JONES, _Dissertations_.

[j] FA-HIAN and HWEN-TSANG, _Chronicles of Voyages in India_.

CHAPTER III. MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF THE ANCIENT HINDUS

[b] A. H. L. HEEREN, _Historical Researches into the Politics,

Intercourse, and Trade of the Principal Nations of Antiquity_ (Asiatic

Nations).

[c] MOUNTSTUART ELPHINSTONE, _The History of India_.

[d] JAMES MILL, _op. cit._

[e] H. H. WILSON, Editor of James Mill’s _History of British India_.

[f] H. P. COLEBROKE in _Asiatic Researches_, Vol. LIII.

[g] HANNO, _Periplus_.

[h] PLINIUS SECUNDUS, _Historia Naturalis_.

[i] ARRIAN, _Indica_.

[j] COLEBROKE, in _Transactions of the Asiatic Society_.

CHAPTER IV. BRAHMANISM AND BUDDHISM

[b] GEORG WEBER, _op. cit._

[c] MOUNTSTUART ELPHINSTONE, _op. cit._

[d] JAMES MILL, _op. cit._

[e] H. H. WILSON, _op. cit._

[f] GUSTAVE LE BON, _op. cit._

[g] T. W. RHYS DAVIDS, from the article “Buddhism” in the New Volumes

of the Ninth Edition of the _Encyclopædia Britannica_.

[h] EUGÈNE BURNOUF, _Introduction à l’histoire du bouddhisme indien_.

[i] W. W. HUNTER, _op. cit._

[j] B. H. HODGSON, _Essays on Indian Subjects_.

A GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF INDIAN HISTORY

BASED ON THE WORKS QUOTED, CITED, OR EDITORIALLY CONSULTED IN THE

PREPARATION OF THE PRESENT HISTORY

The following bibliography contains in the main only works relating to

ancient India, as the bibliography of modern India, and particularly of

India under British rule, will be specially treated in a later volume.

A few works, however, on modern India are here included, inasmuch as

they have a certain bearing on the historical, political, and religious

development of ancient India.

It will be observed that a large number of the works here cited have

referred to the social and religious conditions, rather than to the

history proper. This selection is a very natural outgrowth of the

conditions; the obscurity of the history on the one hand, and the

fascinating interest that attaches to the customs and the esoteric

religion of the Hindu on the other. Reference has already been made to

the classical historians, Megasthenes and Arrian. Of modern writers who

have interpreted for us the available reminiscences, the earliest was

James Mill, the famous author of the _Analysis of the Human Mind_, who

published in the year 1817 the _History of India_, upon which he had

been engaged for twelve years. The philosopher turned historian is no

less a philosopher still, and Mill’s _History of India_, together with

the author’s personal efforts in the governmental position to which he

was soon called, availed practically to revolutionise the method of

governing India. Notwithstanding the almost numberless books on the

subject that have since been written, the work of Mill has by no means

been superseded.

The next important contribution to the subject was that of Mountstuart

Elphinstone. If Mill treated the history of India from the standpoint

of a philosopher, Elphinstone viewed it from the point of view of the

statesman. His work had the peculiar merit of being written by one who

had the fullest first-hand knowledge of his subject, for Elphinstone

entered the civil service of the East India Company, when he was hardly

more than a boy, and continued to reside in India in one official

capacity or another throughout most of his life, having come finally

for a good many years to hold the position of governor of Bombay.

His history, therefore, was at once recognised as having a peculiar

authority, and even now there is no work to which one can turn with

greater confidence.

The general histories of Duncker and Heeren should also be consulted by

anyone wishing to familiarise himself with the subject. Heeren’s views

have a particular interest, because of his advocacy of the theory that

the Egyptian race was really of Indian origin. Without professing to be

able to demonstrate the truth of this theory, Heeren advances numerous

arguments, based partly upon the physiological characteristics of the

two races, and partly upon the similarity of their customs and their

religions. It may be added that no marked advances in the direction of

solving this problem have been made since Heeren wrote; the theory,

however, is not advocated by any recent authority. Among other works

on the history proper of India that have taken a high rank are the

books of Sir W. W. Hunter, and the admirably written works of Le Bon;

the latter however, refers rather to the civilisation based on the

monuments, than to the political history of the country.

Among older works having to do with the language and religions of

India, the writings of Eugène Burnouf and of W. Ward have very high

authority; among the more recent works those of Max Müller and Sir

Monier-Williams have perhaps been given wider currency and contributed

more to the general distribution of the knowledge of Brahmanism and

Buddhism than almost any others.

* * * * *

=Adams=, H. D., Episodes of Indian History, London,

1891.--=d’Alviella=, G., Ce que l’Inde doit à la Grèce, Paris,

1898.--=Anquetil-Duperron=, La religion des Indous, Paris,

1823.--=Anquetil-Duperron=, A. H., Recherches historiques et géograph.

sur l’Inde, Berlin et Paris, 1876.--=Arrian=, Ἀναβασις Ἀλεξάνδρον

to which is added Arrian’s Indian History--Ἰνδικα--(translated by

Mr. Rooke), London, 1729.--=Assmann=, W., Handbuch der Allgemeinen

Geschichte, Brunswick, 1853.

* * * * *

=Bajnáth=, Lala, Some Problems of Social Reform in Hindu Society,

Aligarh, 1891.--=Balfour=, E., Cyclopædia of India and of Eastern

and Southern Asia, Madras, 1857-1858, 2 vols.--=Barth=, A., Les

religions de l’Inde, Paris, 1879; The Religions of India, London,

1890.--=Bastian=, A., Die Weltauffassung der Buddhisten, Berlin, 1869;

Buddhism als religionsphilosoph. System, Berlin, 1893; Der Buddhismus

in seiner Psychologie, Berlin, 1882.--=Beal=, Samuel, Outline of

Buddhism from Chinese Sources, London, 1876; The Buddhist Tripitaka as

it is known in China and Japan, London, 1876.--=Bell=, J., Compendious

View of Universal History and Literature, London, 1820.--=Benfey=,

Th., Vedica und Verwandtes, Strassburg, 1887.--=Bergaigne=, A., La

religion védique d’après les hymnes du Rig-Véda, Paris, 1878-1883,

3 vols.--=Bettany=, G. T., The Great Indian Religions, London,

1892.--=Beyer=, C., Orientalische Novellen nach den schönsten Sagen aus

Indien und Iran, Leipsic, 1890.--=Bhandarkar=, E. G., Early History of

the Dekkan, Bombay, 1895.--=Bhattacharyya, Yogenda Nath=, Hindu Castes

and Sects, Calcutta, 1896.--=Bhimacharya=, Nyayakosa, or Dictionary of

the Technical Terms of the Nyaya Philosophy, Bombay, 1875.--=Bird=, J.,

On the Historical Geography of Hindustan and the Origin of the Social

State among the Hindus (in Journ. Asiat. Soc. of Bengal, Calcutta,

1840).--=Blavatsky=, Helena P., Die Grundlage der indischen Mystik,

Leipsic, 1893.--=Bohlen=, P. von, De Buddhaismi origine et ætate

definiendis tentamen, Regiomont, 1827; Das alte Indien, Königsberg,

1830, 2 vols.; Das alte Indien mit bes. Rücksicht auf Ægypten,

Königsberg, 1830-1831, 2 vols.--=Le Bon=, G., Les civilisations de

l’Inde, Paris, 1887; Les monuments de l’Inde, Paris, 1892.--=Brodbeck=,

A., Leben und Lehre Buddhas, Zürich, 1895.--=Brosse=, Et., L’Inde

inconnue, Lyons, 1898.--=Brunnhofer=, H., Iran und Turan. Histor.

geogr. und ethnolog. Untersuchungen über den ältesten Schauplatz der

indogerman. Urgeschichte, Leipsic, 1890; Urgeschichte der Arier in

Vorder- und Centralasien, Leipsic, 1893, 3 vols.--=Bühler=, G., A

Digest of Hindu Law, London, 1867-1869.--=Bühler=, G., and =Kirste=,

Indian Studies, Vienna, 1892, 2 vols.--=Burgess=, J., The Ancient

Monuments, Temples, and Sculptures of India, London, 1897.--=Burnouf=,

E., Essai sur le Pali, Paris, 1826; Vendidad-Sadé, l’un des livres

de Zoroastre, Paris, 1830; Commentaires sur le Yaçna, Paris, 1835;

Introduction à l’histoire du Bouddhisme indien, Paris, 1844; Le Lotus

de la Bonne Loi, Paris, 1852; Essai sur le Véda, ou études sur les

religions, la littérature et la constitution sociale de l’Inde, Paris,

1863.--=Burnouf=, E. (in collab. with E. V. S. =Jacquet=), L’Inde

française, Paris, 1827-1835, 2 vols.

* * * * *

=Caine=, W. S., Picturesque India, London, 1890.--=Caland=, W.,

Altindischer Ahnencult, Leyden, 1893.--=Carus=, P., Karma, a Story of

Early Buddhism; Nirvana, A Story of Buddhist Philosophy.--=Caunter=, J.

H. Tableaux pittoresques de l’Inde (trad, de l’anglais par A. Urbain),

Paris, 1836, 3 vols.--=Chaboseau=, A., Essai sur la Philosophie

Bouddhique, Paris, 1891.--=Colebrooke=, II. T., On the Philosophy

of the Hindus (in Miscellaneous Essays), London, 1873; Essay on the

Religion and Philosophy of the Hindoos, London, 1858.--=Copleston=,

B. P., Buddhism, Primitive and Present, in Maghada and Ceylon,

London, 1892.--=Cranfurd=, Q., Sketches chiefly relating to the

History, Religion, Learning, and Manners of the Hindoos, London, 1791;

Researches concerning the Laws, Theology, Learning, Commerce, etc., of

Ancient and Modern India, London, 1817, 2 vols.--=Ctesias=, Fragments

of Ἰνδικα, his Opera, Frankfort, 1824.--=Cunningham=, Sir A., The Bilsa

Topes, or Buddhist Monuments of Central India, London, 1854; The Stupa

of Barhut, London, 1879; Coins of Ancient India from the Earliest Times

down to the Seventh Century, A.D., London, 1891.

* * * * *

=Dahlmann=, J., Buddha, Ein Culturbild des Ostens, Berlin, 1898; Das

altindische Volkstum und seine Bedeutung für die Gesellschaftskunde,

Köln, 1899.--=Le Dain=, L’Inde Antique, Paris, 1895.--=Daniell=,

T., Oriental Sceneries, Antiquities of India, London, 1795-1808,

4 vols.; Hindoo Excavations in the Mountains of Ellora, London,

1804; A Picturesque Voyage to India by the way of China, London,

1810.--=Davids=, T. W. Rhys, Buddhist Birth Stories, London, 1880;

Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by

Indian Buddhism, London, 1881; Buddhism, London, 1899; Buddhism,

article in the _New Volumes_ of the Ninth Edition of the _Encyclopædia

Britannica_; joint-author of Vinaya Texts, 1881-1885; Digaha Nikaya,

1890; Sumangala Vilasini, 1886; Sacred Books of the Buddhists;

Dialogues of the Buddha, 1899.--=Deussen=, P., Das System des Vedanta,

Leipsic, 1883; Die Sutras des Vedanta, Leipsic, 1884; Philosophie

des Veda bis auf die Upanishads, Leipsic, 1894.--=Diestel=, C.,

Buddhismus und Christentum, Brunswick, 1885.--=Diodorus Siculus=,

Βιβλιοθήκη ἱστορική, London, 1700.--=Dosabhai=, Khan B. E., A History

of Gujurat from the Earliest Period to the Present Time, Ahmedabad,

1884.--=Dows=, Alex., History of Hindostan from the Earliest Account

of Time to the Death of Akbar (translated from the Persian of Muhammad

Kasim Ferishta), London, 1768; Dissertation concerning the Customs,

Manners, Language, Religion, and Philosophy of the Indoos, London,

1773.--=Dubois=, J. A., Hindu Manners, Customs, and Ceremonies, London,

1899.--=Dutt=, C. M., The Chronology of India from the Earliest Times

to the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century, London, 1899.--=Dutt=, M.

N., Heroines of India, Calcutta, 1893; Prophets of India, Calcutta,

1894.--=Dutt=, R. C., Ancient India, 2000 B.C. to 800 A.D., Calcutta,

1893; A History of Civilisation in Ancient India, based on Sanskrit

Literature, Calcutta, 1894; The Civilisation of India, London, 1900.

* * * * *

=Ehni=, J., Der vedische Mythus d. Yama, verglichen mit d. analogen

Typen der persischen, griechischen und germanischen Mythologie,

Strassburg, 1890.--=Eitel=, E. J., Handbook of Chinese Buddhism,

London, 1888.--=Elphinstone=, Mountstuart, The History of India; the

Hindoo and Mohammedan Periods, London, 1859, 2 vols.

* * * * *

=Falke=, Robert, Buddha, Mohammed, Christus, Gütersloh,

1897.--=Fergusson=, J., History of India and Eastern Architecture,

London, 1891; On the Sakaa and Samvat and Gupta Eras (Journal

R. As. Soc., N. S. xii.)--=Fontane=, M., Histoire Universelle,

Paris, 1881-1889, 6 vols.--=Frank=, V., Vjasa über Philosophie,

Mythologie, Litteratur und Sprache der Hindus, Leipsic and Würzburg,

1826.--=Frazer=, R. W., A Literary History of India, London, 1898.

* * * * *

=Garbe=, R., The Philosophy of Ancient India, Chicago, 1897; Die

Samkhya-Philosophie. Eine Darstellung des indischen Rationalismus,

Leipsic, 1894.--=Gheyn=, J. van den, Le Panthéisme dans l’Inde, Ghent,

1890.--=Gómara=, F. L. de, La historia general de las Indias, Antwerp,

1554.--=Gomes=, F. L., The Brahmans (translated from the Portuguese

by J. de Silva), Bombay, 1889.--=Gough=, A. E., The Philosophy of the

Upanishads and Ancient Indian Metaphysics, London, 1882.--=Gribble=, D.

B., A History of the Deccan, London, 1895.--=Guyon=, l’Abbé, Histoire

des Indes orientales anciennes et modernes, Paris, 1744.

* * * * *

=Haak=, J., Plantenkunde van Indie, Amsterdam, 1892.--=Halévy=,

J., Considérations critiques sur quelques points de l’histoire

ancienne de l’Inde, Paris, 1899.--=Hall=, Rational Refutation of

the Hindu Philosophical Systems, Calcutta, 1862.--=Happel=, J., Die

religiösen und philosophischen Grundanschauungen der Inder. Aus den

Sanskritquellen vom völkergeschichtlichen Standpunkte des Christentums

aus dargestellt und beurteilt, Giessen, 1902.--=Hardy=, E., Manual

of Buddhism, London, 1860, 2nd edition; Eastern Monachism, London,

1868; Die vedisch-brahmanische Periode der Religion des alten Indiens,

Munich, 1893; Indische Religionsgeschichte, Leipsic, 1898.--=Hearn=,

E., Gleanings in Buddha Fields, New York, 1897.--=Hecker=, M. F.,

Schopenhauer und die indische Philosophie, Köln, 1897.--=Heeren=,

A. H. L., Commentatio de Græcorum de India notitia et cum Indis

Commerciis, Gottingiæ, 1791; Historical Researches, Oxford, 1834-1846,

5 vols.--=Hillebrandt=, A., Vedische Mythologie, Breslau, 1891;

Alt-Indien. Culturgeschichtl. Skizzen, Breslau, 1899.--=Hodges=,

William, Travels in India in 1780-1783, London, 1793.--=Hodgson=, B.

H., On the Aborigines of India, Calcutta, 1847, 3 vols.--=Holwell=, J.

Z., Interesting Historical Events Relative to the Provinces of Bengal

and the Empire of Hindustan, London, 1766.--=Hopkins=, E. W., The

Religions of India, Boston, 1895.--=Hunter=, W. W., A Brief History

of the Indian Peoples, London, 1892; Rulers of India, Oxford, 1890;

Atlas of India, London, 1893; India article in the Ninth Edition of the

_Encyclopædia Britannica_.

* * * * *

=Ihering=, R. von, Les Indo-Européens avant l’histoire, Paris,

1895.--=Ith=, J., Sittenlehre der Braminen, oder die Religion der

Indier, Bern and Leipsic, 1794.

* * * * *

=Jennings=, H., The Indian Religions; or, Results of the Mysterious

Buddhism, London, 1890.--=Jones=, W., and others, Dissertations and

Miscellaneous Pieces Relating to the History and Antiquities, the Arts,

Sciences, and Literature of Asia, London, 1792-1798, 6 vols.--=Julien=,

St., Voyages des pélerins bouddhistes, Paris, 1853-1857, 2 vols;

=Justi=, Ferdinand, Geschichte der orientalischen Völker im Alterthum,

Berlin, 1884.

* * * * *

=Karageorgevitch=, Prince B., Enchanted India, New York, 1899;

Notes sur l’Inde, Paris, 1900.--=Keene=, H. G., History of India

from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, London, 1893, 2

vols.--=Kern=, J. H. C., Der Buddhismus und seine Geschichte,

Leipsic, 1882-1884, 2 vols.--=Kistner=, Buddha and his Doctrines,

London, 1859.--=Klingemann=, C., Buddhismus, Pessimismus und moderne

Weltanschauung, Essen, 1898.--=Knight=, A. E., India, from the Aryan

Invasion to the Great Sepoy Mutiny, London, 1892.--=Köppen=, C. F., Die

Religion des Buddha und ihre Entstehung, Berlin, 1857; Die Lamaische

Hierarchie und Kirche, Berlin, 1859.--=Kunte=, M. M., The Vicissitudes

of Aryan Civilisation in India, Bombay, 1880.

* * * * *

=Lafont=, G. de, Le Bouddhisme, Paris, 1895.--=Lamairesse=, E.,

L’Inde avant le Bouddha, Paris, 1891; La vie du Bouddha, suivie du

Bouddhisme dans l’Indo-Chine, Paris, 1892.--=Lane-Poole=, Stanley, The

History of the Moghul Emperors of Hindustan, London, 1892.--=Lassen=,

C., Zur Geschichte der griechischen und indoskytischen Könige in

Baktrien, Kabul und Indien, Bonn, 1838; Indische Alterthumskunde, Bonn,

1844-1861, 4 vols.--=Latif=, Syad Muhammed, History of the Panjab from

the Remotest Antiquity to the Present Time, Calcutta, 1891.--=Lefmann=,

S., Geschichte des alten Indiens, Berlin, 1890.--=Lethbridge=, Sir

R., A Short Manual of the History of India, London, 1881; The Golden

Book of India, London, 1893.--=Levi=, S., Le théatre Indien, Paris,

1891.--=Lillie=, A., Buddha and his Parables, London, 1891.--=Lloyd=,

A., The Higher Buddhism in the Light of the Nicene Creed, Tokio, 1893;

Sketches of Indian Life, London, 1890.--=Lyall=, Sir A., Natural

Religion in India, London, 1891.

* * * * *

=Macdonell=, A. A., A History of Sanskrit Literature, London,

1900.--=Macnaghten=, W. H., Principles of Hindu and Mohammedan Law,

London, 1884.--=McRindle=, J. W., The Invasion of India by Alexander

the Great, as described by Arrian, Q. Curtius, Diodorus, Plutarch,

and Justin, London, 1893.--=Majer=, Fr., Brahma, oder die Religion

der Indier als Brahmismus, Leipsic, 1818.--=Manning=, Mrs. C.,

Ancient and Mediæval India, London, 1869.--=Mariano=, R., Buddismo e

Christianesimo, Napoli, 1890.--=Marrat=, J., The Land of the Ganges,

or Sketches of Northern India, London, 1892.--=Marshman=, F. C.,

Abridgement of the History of India, London, 1893.--=Maurice=, Th., The

History of Hindostan, London, 1795.--=Ménant=, D., Les Parsis, Histoire

des communautés Zoroastriennes de l’Inde, Paris, 1898.--=Mill=,

Jas., History of British India.--=Milloué=, de, Le Bouddhisme

dans le monde, Paris, 1893.--=Minayeff=, J. P., Recherches sur le

bouddhisme, Paris, 1894.--=Monchoisy=, L’Inde et les Hindous, Basle,

1892.--=Monier-Williams=, M., Brahmanism and Hinduism, London, 1891;

Indian Wisdom, London, 1893, 4th edition; Indian Epic Poetry: Substance

of Lectures, London, 1863; A Sanskrit Manual, London, 1868; Buddhism in

its Connection with Brahmanism and Hinduism, London, 1889.--=Moses=,

H., Sketches of India, London, 1850.--=Muir=, J., Original Sanscrit

Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India, their Religion

and Institutions, London, 1858-1872, 5 vols.; Religious and Moral

Sentiments Metrically rendered from Sanskrit Writers, London, 1875;

Natapariksha, or Examination of Religions, Calcutta, 1854.--=Mullens=,

Religious Aspects of Hindu Philosophy, London, 1860.--=Müller=, Max,

History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, London, 1860; India, What

can it Teach Us? London, 1883; The Six Systems of Indian Philosophy,

London, 1899.--=Müller=, N., Glauben, Wissen, und Kunst der alten

Hindus, Mainz, 1822.

* * * * *

=Oldenberg=, H., Buddha, sein Leben, seine Lehre, seine Gemeinde,

Berlin, 1890; Die Hymnen des Rigveda, Berlin, 1888; Die Religion des

Veda, Berlin, 1894.

* * * * *

=Philostratus=, τὰ ἐς τὸν Τυανέα Ἀφολλώνιον, Venice, 1502.--=Picard=,

Ch., Sémites et Aryens, Paris, 1893.--=Pischel=, R., and =Geldner=, K.

F., Vedische Studien.--=Polier=, Mythologie des Indous, Rudolstadt et

Paris, 1809.--=Poor=, Sanskrit and its Kindred Literatures, London,

1890.--=Pope=, G. M., A Textbook of Indian History, London, 1880.

* * * * *

=Raffles=, Thomas Stamford, The History of Java, London,

1817.--=Rajendralala=, Mitra, Indo-Aryans. Contributions towards the

Elucidation of their Ancient and Mediæval History, Calcutta, 1881, 2

vols.--=Rea=, South Indian Buddhist Antiquities, Madras, 1894, and

London, 1895.--=Reed=, E. A., Hindu Literature or the Ancient Books

of India, Chicago, 1891.--=Reinach=, L’origine des Aryens, Paris,

1892.--=Rickards=, R., India, London, 1829-1832, 2 vols.--=Risley=,

The Tribes and Castes of Bengal, Calcutta, 1891, 2 vols.; Ethnographic

Glossary, Calcutta, 1891.--=Robertson=, W., An Historical Disquisition

Concerning the Knowledge which the Ancients had of India, London,

1791.--=Robson=, J., Hinduism and its Relation to Christianity, London,

1893.

* * * * *

=Saint-Hilaire=, J. B., The Buddha and his Religion, London,

1895.--=Saizau=, M., Le Bouddha et le Bouddhisme, Paris,

1890.--=Samuelson=, F., India, Past and Present, Histor., Social,

and Political, London, 1890.--=Schlegel=, F., Über die Sprache und

Weisheit der Inder, Heidelberg, 1808; Indische Bibliothek, Bonn,

1820.--=Schrader=, O., Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples,

London, 1890.--=Schröder=, L. von, Pythagoras und die Inder, Leipsic,

1884; Indiens Litteratur und Cultur in historischer Entwicklung,

Leipsic, 1887; Buddhismus und Christentum, Reval, 1893.--=Scott=,

A., Buddhism and Christianity, Edinburgh, 1890.--=Senart=, E., Sur

quelques termes buddhisques, Paris, 1877; Les inscriptions de Piyadasi,

Paris, 1881-1888, 2 vols.; Essai sur la légende de Buddha, son

caractère et ses origines, Paris, 1882; Les castes dans l’Inde, Paris,

1896.--=Sherring=, M. A., Hindu Tribes and Castes, Calcutta, 1881, 3

vols.--=Simon=, R., Beiträge zur Kenntniss der vedischen Schulen, Kiel,

1890.--=Smith=, G., The Conversion of India from Plantænus to Present

Time, A.D. 193-1893, London, 1893.--=Strabo=, Geography, London,

1800.--=Strachey=, Sir J., India, London, 1894.--=Strong=, D. M.,

Metaphysic of Christianity and Buddhism: a Symphony, London, 1899.

* * * * *

=Tassy=, Garcin de, Histoire de la littérature hindouie et hindoustani,

Paris, 1839-1847, 2 vols.; La langue et la littérature hindoustanies,

Paris, 1850-1869--=Trotter=, L. J., The History of India from the

Earliest Times to the Present Day, London, 1890.

* * * * *

=Ujfalvy=, C. de, Le berceau des Aryas, Paris, 1884; Les Arriens au

Nord et au Sud de l’Hindoukouch, Paris, 1897.

* * * * *

=Vallee Poussin=, L. de la, Bouddhisme. Études et matériaux.--=Vicwa

Mitra=, Les Chamites. Indes Pré-Aryennes, Paris, 1892.--=Vinson=, J.,

L’évolution du Bouddhisme, Paris, 1892.

* * * * *

=Waddell=, L. A., The Buddhism of Tibet or Lamaism, London,

1898.--=Ward=, W., A View of the History, Literature, and Religion

of the Hindoos, including a Minute Description of their Manners

and Customs and Translations from their Principal Works, London,

1817-1820, 4 vols.--=Wassiljew=, W., Der Buddhismus, Seine Dogmen,

Geschichte und Litteratur, Petersburg, 1860.--=Weber=, A., Indische

Litteraturgeschichte, Berlin, 1852; Indische Skizzen, Berlin, 1857;

Indische Streifen, Berlin, 1868-1879, 3 vols.; Die Kastenverhältnisse

in den Brahmanen und Sutra (in “Indische Studien,” Berlin and

Leipsic).--=Weber=, G., Allgemeine Weltgeschichte, Leipsic,

1857-1880.--=Weeks=, G. M., Indian Idyls, London, 1865.--=Westergard=,

N. L., Über den ältesten Zeitraum der indischen Geschichte mit

Rücksicht auf die Litteratur, Breslau, 1862.--=Wiese=, F. A., Indien

oder die Hindus, Leipsic, 1836, 2 vols.--=Wilson=, H. H., Editor of

James Mill’s History of British India.--=Wimpffen=, Max von, Kritische

Worte über den Buddhismus, Wien, 1890.--=Windisch=, E., Über die

Bedeutung des indischen Altertums, Leipsic, 1895.--=Wurm=, Geschichte

der indischen Religion, Bâle, 1874.

* * * * *

=Yasuda=, M., Die Bedeutung der allgemeinen Sittenlehre des Buddhismus,

Jena, 1893.

* * * * *

=Ziegenbein=, Beschreibung der Religion und Gebräuche der

malabrarischen Hindus, Berlin, 1791.--=Zimmermann=, J. Ch., De India

antiqua dissertatio historica, Erlangæ, 1811.

PART VIII

THE HISTORY OF ANCIENT PERSIA

BASED CHIEFLY UPON THE FOLLOWING AUTHORITIES

CTESIAS, A. H. L. HEEREN, HERODOTUS, G. C. C. MASPERO, EDUARD

MEYER, THEODOR NÖLDEKE, H. C. RAWLINSON

WITH ADDITIONAL CITATIONS FROM

THE HOLY BIBLE, BEROSUS, MAX DUNCKER, VICTOR FLOIGL, JAS.

MORIER, POLYÆNUS, R. K. PORTER, J. V. PRASEK, R. W.

ROGERS, A. H. SAYCE, XANTHUS, XENOPHON

COPYRIGHT, 1904,

BY HENRY SMITH WILLIAMS.

_All rights reserved._

PART VIII.--ANCIENT PERSIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

PERSIAN HISTORY IN OUTLINE 559

CHAPTER I. LAND AND PEOPLE 565

CHAPTER II. THE MEDIAN OR SCYTHIAN EMPIRE 573

CHAPTER III. THE EARLY ACHÆMENIANS AND THE ELAMITES, CYRUS

AND CAMBYSES 587

CHAPTER IV. THE PERSIAN DYNASTY: DARIUS I TO DARIUS III 605

CHAPTER V. PERSIAN CIVILISATION 634

BRIEF REFERENCE-LIST OF AUTHORITIES BY CHAPTERS 662

A GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PERSIAN HISTORY 663

PERSIAN HISTORY IN OUTLINE

A PRELIMINARY SURVEY COMPRISING A CURSORY VIEW OF THE SWEEP OF EVENTS,

AND A TABLE OF CHRONOLOGY

THE MEDIAN OR SCYTHIAN EMPIRE

The Scythians or Manda, a people whom the Greeks confused

with the Mada or Medes, were a part of the nomadic

Indo-Europeans that migrated into Western Asia from southern

Russia. They descended upon and quite obliterated the

ancient kingdom of Ellipi, east of Assyria and stretching to

the Caspian Sea. In the Ellipian capital of Ecbatana they

seem to have effected quickly the organisation of a state

recognised as a danger to Assyria as far back as the reign

of Esarhaddon.

Of the early rulers at Ecbatana we have no accounts except

those of Herodotus and Ctesias. From these we must assume:

700 B.C. =Deioces=, the first leader or prince mentioned by the

Greeks. He lives at a time of great Assyrian power and seems

to have been a vassal of the kingdom, but he was probably

the founder of his empire. Apparently he did not rule at

Ecbatana, for the kingdom of Ellipi was still in existence.

647 =Phraortes= (=Frawarti=) succeeds. He extends the power

of the Manda, and in his reign the kings of Persia and Elam

are made his vassals.

625 =Cyaxares= succeeds. About this time the Scythians first

invade Assyria. They burn Calah, but are unable to take

Nineveh. They sweep over the land as far as the border of

Egypt, where Psamthek pays them to turn back.

610 Sin-shar-ishkun, king of Assyria, attacks Nabopolassar

of Babylon. The latter calls upon the Manda to help repel

the invaders. The Manda immediately respond and attack

Nineveh.

607 Fall of Nineveh before the Manda. They take possession

of the old kingdom of Assyria as far as the Babylonian

frontier, and begin conquest of the countries of the north.

Cyaxares makes war on the Lydians, the people of Urartu,

Media, Minni, and others.

585 =Ishtuvegu= (=Astyages=) succeeds. His empire extends in

the north and west as far as the river Halys.

553 For some reason, not yet clear, Ishtuvegu proceeds

against his vassal Cyrus, king of the Elamite province of

Anshan.

550 Ishtuvegu is betrayed by his soldiers to Cyrus and made

prisoner. The Elamite king takes Ecbatana, and becomes

king of the Manda.

End of the Median or Scythian empire.

THE PERSIAN EMPIRE

The country of Parsua or Persia was first settled by

Iranian tribes of Indo-European origin. The leading ones

were the Pasagadæ, Maraphians, and Maspians. These lived by

agriculture, cattle raising, and horse breeding, but in the

mountains and desert steppes there were many nomadic tribes

such as the Mardans, Kossæans, and Sagartians. Our earliest

knowledge of Persian history is obtained from the Assyrian

monuments, and the country seems to have been in vassalage

to the mightier conquerors and to have recovered, in a

measure at least, its independence whenever a weaker monarch

ascended the Ninevite throne. The first historical dynasty,

according to Greek historians, is the Achæmenian, and of its

origin we know nothing; the founder, Achæmenes, is probably

a mythical character.

FIRST PERIOD--THE EARLY ACHÆMENIANS AND THE ELAMITE DYNASTY (730-521

B.C.)

730 The first historic king, =Teispes=, rules about this

time. His attainment to power is probably connected with

some relaxation of the Assyrian grip. His successors,

according to Herodotus, are _Cambyses_, =Cyrus=, and

=Teispes II=. The last seems to have conquered the Elamite

province of Anshan, which on his death went to his son

Cyrus, and the throne of Persia to =Ariaramnes=. From the

latter half of the seventh century B.C. reign, independent

of each other, the two lines of the Achæmenians of which

Darius speaks--one in Anshan, where by conquest the

entire ancient kingdom of Elam was absorbed, the other

in Persia. Both houses become vassals of the emperor of

Ecbatana. Ariaramnes is succeeded by =Arsaces=, and then

by =Hystaspes=, and in Elam, =Cyrus I=, according to the

accounts of his grandson, by =Cambyses=, the father of Cyrus

the Great.

559 =Cyrus the Great= succeeds Cambyses on the throne of

Elam.

553 He is attacked by his suzerain, Ishtuvegu (Astyages).

550 Ishtuvegu is betrayed to Cyrus and made prisoner. The

Elamite takes Ecbatana and obtains possession of the Median

or Scythian empire.

His career of conquest begins.

549 Cyrus enters Assyria and takes a district belonging to

Babylonia.

547 King Crœsus of Lydia, fearful of Cyrus’ power,

determines to attack him, and forms a coalition with Aahmes

II of Egypt, Nabonidus of Babylon, and the Spartans.

546 Cyrus meets Crœsus in Cappadocia. The latter, defeated

in two battles, retreats to Sardis and sends for his allies,

who do not appear. Sardis falls in the autumn. Cyrus now

calls himself king of Persia. Hystaspes probably remains his

vassal, as he had been that of Ishtuvegu.

545 The whole of Asia Minor is in Cyrus’ hands. It

is divided into satrapies with strongly organised

governments. Greek cities in Asia Minor gradually subjected.

549-539 Cyrus annexes Bactriana, and makes numerous

successful expeditions in the East.

539 Cyrus starts for Babylon. He is opposed at Upi, but is

victorious and moves southward.

538 Babylon opens her gates to Cyrus. Nabonidus flees. The

Syrio-Phœnician provinces submit. Cyrus gives permission

to the Hebrew exiles to return. The new territory is

reorganised.

529 Death of Cyrus in battle. =Cambyses=, the heir apparent,

has his brother Smerdis put to death.

526 Warlike preparations for conquest of Egypt begin.

Phœnicia furnishes a fleet.

525 Battle of Pelusium. Defeat of Psamthek III. Egypt

becomes a Persian province. Polycrates, of Samos, also

submits. Cambyses plans attack on Carthage, but his army is

lost in the Libyan desert.

524-523 Expedition against Ethiopia, which seems to have

overthrown the kingdom of Napata. The army suffers great

loss in the return march. Cambyses, enraged by this,

outrages the Egyptian gods and the Apis bull.

522 He starts for home, but in Syria is informed that

=Gaumata=, a Magian, has impersonated the murdered Smerdis

and seized the throne. Cambyses commits suicide.

521 The Achæmenian, Darius Hystaspes, of Persia, and six

other princes form a conspiracy against Gaumata, who is

murdered.

SECOND PERIOD--THE PERSIAN DYNASTY (521-331 B.C.)

521 =Darius= made king. The throne now passes to the

“second line” of Teispes II’s descendants. Darius marries

Atossa, wife of Cambyses, and daughter of Cyrus. The end

of the Elamite Dynasty is the signal for revolt in all

the provinces. Babylon rebels, and a son of Nabonidus is

proclaimed king as Nebuchadrezzar III. Susiana rises. Darius

has to begin the reconquest of Cyrus’ empire.

519-518 Babylon besieged, captured, and the usurper put to

death. Another usurper is also put to death. The Scythian

provinces, Parthia, Hyrcania, Urartu, and Margiana are

quieted. Another false Smerdis in Persia is overthrown.

Orœtes, in Sardis, becomes too independent, and is put to

death. In Egypt, the governor, Aryandes, proves disloyal,

and is executed. Darius shows favour to the Egyptian priests.

515 By this date the empire is thoroughly reorganised,

divided into satrapies, and taxes regulated. The Asiatic

Greeks intrigue with those of Europe. Expedition of Darius

into Scythia. He crosses the Bosporus with 800,000 troops,

and his generals reduce towns in Thrace and make the king of

Macedonia pay tribute.

512 Darius marches to the Indus, subjugating the tribes on

the right bank north of the Kabul. The region is formed into

a satrapy.

506 The overthrown Athenian tyrant, Hippias, appeals

to Artaphernes, satrap of Sardis, for restoration. The

Athenians refuse to comply with a request for restoration.

499 Aristagoras, satrap of Miletus, revolts, and is

supported by the Greeks on the Ægean Sea. The Persians

attack Naxos. The Ionians revolt.

498 Sardis burned by Aristagoras. The Ionian war begins.

494 Ionians defeated off Lade. Fall of Miletus and end of

the war.

492 Mardonius sets out to reconquer Greece. He captures some

towns in the archipelago, but his fleet is wrecked off Athos.

491 Persian forces concentrated in Cilicia for the second

attack on Greece.

490 Invasion of Greece under Datis and Artaphernes. Naxos

and Eretria taken. Defeat at Marathon. Darius begins

collection of another army, but his plans are suddenly

486 stopped for Egypt revolts, the Persians are expelled,

and Khabbash placed on the throne.

485 Death of Darius and is succeeded by his son =Xerxes I=.

484 Defeat of Khabbash in a naval battle. Achæmenes, brother

of Xerxes, made satrap of Egypt.

481 Revolt in Babylon crushed; her temples pillaged.

480 Invasion of Greece. The Persians victorious at

Thermopylæ and Artemisia.

Athens occupied. Battle of Salamis. Defeat of Persians.

Athens evacuated.

479 Invasion of Attica under Mardonius. Defeat of Platæa.

Persian fleet also defeated at Mycale.

479-478 Ionia and the islands lost to Persia.

476 Persians expelled from Thrace.

470 Fall of Eion.

465 Cimon’s victory over the Persians at the mouth of the

Eurymedon. Xerxes is assassinated by Artabanus in league

with Artaxerxes, who also puts his elder brother Darius to

death.

464 =Artaxerxes I= takes the throne.

462 A rising in Bactria is quelled after two battles.

460 Rebellion in Egypt under Inarus, king of Libya, assisted

by the Athenians.

459 Victory of Inarus at Papremis. He besieges the Persians

in Memphis.

455-454 Megabyzus with a large army finally subdues Egypt at

Prosphitis. Thannyras is made king of Libya in his father’s

place. Some Egyptians proclaim Amyrtæus king in the Saïd.

449 Persians attempt to recover Cyprus. Cimon of Athens

opposes them. Death of Cimon. Persian fleet and army

defeated at Salamis in Cyprus. Callias concludes a treaty of

peace between Persia and Athens.

448 Megabyzus, governor of Syria, rebels. He is subdued and

pardoned.

424 Death of Artaxerxes. His eldest son =Xerxes II= reigns

forty-five days, and is murdered by Artaxerxes’ illegitimate

son =Sogdianus=, who after six months’ rule is in turn

423 killed by another bastard son Ochus, who assumes the name

of =Darius II= (=Nothus=) and marries his aunt Parysatis.

The king’s brother Arsites, and Artyphius, son of Megabyzus,

rebel. They are overcome, and Arsites put to death.

418 Revolt of Pissuthenes, satrap of Lydia. It is put down

by Tissaphernes.

412 Amorges, son of Pissuthenes, who has continued the

revolt in Caria, is finally overcome. Treaty with Sparta

recognising Darius’ suzerainty over Greek cities in Asia

Minor. Cities in Ionia and Caria recovered. The Spartans

intrigue with Tissaphernes.

408 Cyrus, the king’s son, made satrap of Lydia, Phrygia,

and Cappadocia. Tissaphernes retains the coast cities only.

Cyrus burns for revenge on the Athenians.

405 Cyrus allies himself with the Spartans and is accused of

treason. He aims to procure the throne for himself.

Amyrtæus (Amen-Rut) proclaims the independence of Egypt.

404 Death of Darius. Cyrus attempts to kill Arsaces, the

eldest son and heir, but fails. Arsaces ascends the throne

as =Artaxerxes II=.

401 Cyrus sets out for Persia with an army, but is met and

defeated at Cunaxa by the imperial forces. Cyrus dies in the

battle. Retreat of the ten thousand Greeks, his mercenaries.

Alliance of Persia and Athens against Sparta.

399 Amyrtæus (Amen-Rut) in Egypt succeeded by Niafaarut I.

Egypt recovers her old-time activity; she intrigues with

Syria and Cyprus against Persia.

Artaxerxes is compelled to send an army raised for the

suppression of Egypt into Asia Minor.

394 Conon at the head of the Persian fleet defeats the

Spartans at Cnidus.

391 Artaxerxes and Evagoras of Cyprus at open war.

387 Peace of Antalcidas. The Asiatic Greeks are given back

to the Persian power.

386-385 War between Cyprus and Persia. Defeat of Evagoras.

Haker of Egypt allies himself with the Pisidians.

Artaxerxes’ campaign against the Cadusians.

383 Surrender of Evagoras to Persia.

378 Nectanebo I ascends throne of Egypt. Chabrias, the

Athenian, reorganises the Egyptian army.

374 Failure through mutiny of the mercenaries of the Persian

expedition against Nectanebo.

370-365 The satraps of Asia Minor break out in revolt. This

weakens the empire greatly.

364 Tachus succeeds Nectanebo I in Egypt.

361 Tachus invades Syria.

359 His nephew Nectanebo II seizes the Egyptian throne and

Tachus is obliged to take refuge with the Persians.