Water-man or Water-jar (Aquarius or Amphora) may, however, be found in
the fact of the very great brilliancy of the star Altair in the Eagle.
It is a star of the first magnitude. In the Water-man there is no star
above the third. The Persians, we are told, had a tradition that four
brilliant stars marked the four cardinal points (_i.e._ the colures).
In Taurus, Leo, and Scorpio we find stars of the first magnitude:
there was therefore no temptation for Mithraic calendar makers and
mythologists to seek for an extra-Zodiacal star to mark and represent
the spring, summer, or autumn seasons; but for the winter solstice the
only stars of the first magnitude within at all suitable distance were
Aquila, to the north-west, or Fomalhaut to the south of Aquarius. For a
nation dwelling as far to the north as the Medians are supposed to have
done, Fomalhaut (when the winter solstice was in Aquarius very far to
the south of the equator) would have been rarely visible. The choice by
a Median astronomer and symbolic artist in search of a very brilliant
star mark for the solstice would therefore have been restricted to the
constellation of the Eagle, containing the conspicuous Altair, a star
of the first magnitude.
The very constant association, not only in Persian and Median, but
also in the mythologic art of other nations, of the Lion and the
Eagle, seems to confirm the view here put forward, _i.e._ that the
constellations of Leo and Aquila rather than of Leo and Aquarius were
sometimes chosen to symbolise the summer and winter solstices.
The Griffin, a fabulous animal sacred to the sun, composed of a _Lion_
and an _Eagle_, is a well-known figure in ancient classic art.
In Babylonian and Assyrian sculptured and glyptic art Merodach is often
represented as in conflict with a Griffin. Merodach has been claimed
by Jensen and other writers as a personification of the sun of the
spring equinox. The for ever recurring triumph of spring over winter is
probably figured in Merodach’s triumph over the Griffin.
The association of Eagle and Lion is to be noticed in the arms of the
city of Lagash; they were “a double-headed Eagle standing on a Lion
passant or on two demi-lions placed back to back.”[38] In Lagash, as
was pointed out in a former paper, the new year’s festival appears
to have been held at the winter solstice: such a supposition would
furnish an astronomical interpretation for the arms of Lagash.[39]
[38] Maspero, _Dawn of Civilization_, p. 604.
[39] In this connexion the following passage from Sayce’s _Hibbert
Lectures_, p. 261, is interesting:--
A text copied for Assur-banipal, from a tablet originally written
at Babylon, contains part of a hymn which had to be recited “in the
presence of Bel-Merodach ... in the beginning of Nisan,”--
“... O Zamama,
Why dost thou not take thy seat?
Bahu, the Queen of Kis, has not cried to thee.”
He adds in a note that Zamama was the Sun-god of Kis, and was
consequently identified with Adar by the mythologists. On a
contract-stone he is symbolized by an eagle, which is said to be “the
image of the southern sun of Kis.”
It was claimed in a former paper (Feb. 1896) that “_the Southern
sun_” was “_the sun of the winter solstice_,” and that Gula (=
Bahu) was the name of the constellation, or of some stars in the
constellation Aquarius (V. p. 50). In these lines Bahu, as I have
supposed, Aquarius, and Zamama, symbolised by the _Eagle, the image
of the Southern sun or winter solstice_, are closely associated.
Mythological references to the Eagle alone are also to be met with
which point to the Celestial Eagle (Aquila) marking the winter solstice
in lieu of the constellation Aquarius, as for instance the Babylonian
legend of the ambitious storm-bird, Zu,[40] who stole the tablets of
destiny, and thus sought to vie in power with “the great gods.” Here
we may find allusions to the substitution (deemed by some, no doubt,
unauthorized) of an extra-Zodiacal for a Zodiacal constellation.
[40] Maspero, _Dawn of Civilization_, p. 666.
Again, in Grecian mythology the Eagle is sent by Zeus to carry Ganymede
up to heaven, and in Grecian astronomy Ganymede is placed in the
constellation Aquarius. It does not therefore seem unreasonable to
suppose that the Eagle associated in the Persepolitan bas-reliefs
with the Lion, the Bull, and the Scorpion (as at Plate IV.), is the
constellational Eagle, symbolizing the winter solstice, and that the
compound animal is emblematic of the four seasons of the year, and
also, it may be, of the four quarters of the world.
If to the composite monster of the bas-reliefs we ascribe an astronomic
motive, we shall be ready to grant the same to other Tauric symbolisms
prominent in the Persepolitan ruins.
With full conviction we shall recognize in the demi-bulls which crowned
the columns in Persepolis and Susa representations of the demi-bull
of the Zodiac. The resemblance is so striking that words are scarcely
required to point it out when once the outlines of the two figures
have been compared (Plate V.). In the spirited description of these
capitals, quoted here from Perrot and Chipiez,[41] are some lines,
marked with italics, which might be applied with exactness to the
demi-bulls of the Zodiac.
[41] _Histoire de l’Art dans l’antiquité_, Perse, p. 519.
[Illustration: PLATE V.
THE CONSTELLATION TAURUS
CAPITAL FROM SUSA
[_To face p. 70._]
“On ne saurait cependant ne point admirer le grand goût et l’art
ingénieux avec lequel, dans ses bustes de taureau, il [l’artiste
perse] a plié la forme vivante au nécessités de la décoration
architecturale. Il a su la simplifier sans lui enlever l’accent de
la vie; les traits caractéristiques de l’espèce sur laquelle s’est
porté son choix restent franchement accusés, quoique les menus
détails soient éliminés; ils auraient risqué de distraire et de
troubler le regard. Les poils de la nuque et du dos, de l’épaule,
des fanons, et des flancs sont réunis en masses d’un ferme contour,
auquelles la frisure des boucles dont elles se composent donne un
relief plus vigoureux; en même temps le collier qui pend au col,
orné de rosaces et d’un riche fleuron qui tombe sur la poitrine,
écarte toute idée de réalité; ce sont là des êtres sacrés et presque
divins, que l’imagination de l’artiste a comme créés à nouveau et
modelés à son gré pour les adapter à la fonction qu’elle leur donnait
à remplir. Cependant, tout placé qu’il soit en dehors des conditions
de la nature, l’animal n’a pas perdu sa physionomie propre. Dans le
mouvement de _la tête, légèrement inclinée en avant et sur la côté_,
on sent la force indomptée qui anime ce corps ample et puissant.
Hardiment indiquées, la construction et la musculature des _membres
inférieurs, repliés sous le ventre_, laissent deviner de quel élan le
taureau se lèverait et se dresserait en pied, s’il venait à se lasser
de son éternel repos. J’en ai fait plusieurs fois l’expérience au
Louvre, devant la partie de chapiteau colossal que notre musée doit à
M. Dieulafoy: parmi les visiteurs qui se pressaient dans cette salle,
parmi ceux mêmes qui semblaient le moins préparés à éprouver ce genre
d’impressions, il n’en est pas un qui n’ait; subi le charme, qui de
manière ou d’autre, n’ait rendu hommage à la noblesse et à l’étrange
beauté de ce type singulier.”
For the exquisite columns crowned by these Tauric capitals the same
writers have claimed a distinctively Median origin. This claim they
sustain at great length, and with much architectural learning.
They show that in their proportions, and in every detail of their
ornamentation, the Persepolitan differed from the Ninevite, Grecian, or
Egyptian column. They also point out that nowhere except at Persepolis
and at Susa is the demi-bull of the capital to be met with; and yet
they express the opinion that this feature, so far as is known proper
to Persia, was mainly derived from, or helped at least by, the models
of Assyria.
Very close resemblances can indeed be traced in Medo-Persian to
Assyrian art, and as the Medo-Persian buildings, whose ruins are at
Persepolis and Susa, were erected certainly at a later date than the
palaces of the Assyrian kings discovered on the site of Nineveh, it is
natural to attribute, as Perrot and Chipiez, and nearly all writers on
the subject attribute, such resemblances to imitations of Assyrian art
and symbolism on the part of the Medo-Persians.
There are, however, some considerations which make it difficult to
adopt this view. In the first place, the symbolism supposed to have
been copied by the Medo-Persians was religious symbolism, and the
religion of the Aryan Medo-Persians was very different from that of the
Semitic Assyrians.
The Achæmenid kings who built their palaces at Persepolis claimed
constantly that they were worshippers of the one great Lord Ahura
Mazda, of whom Mithras was the friend and representative. That these
kings should have adopted from the polytheistic Assyrians not only the
Tauric symbolism above described, but also, as it is suggested, the
emblem of their one great Lord Ahura Mazda from that of Assur (see
Plate VI. figs. 1, 2, 3), would in itself be strange, but that they
should have done so when Assur and all his followers had been utterly
vanquished by the victorious worshippers of Ahura Mazda, seems still
more improbable.
From the state in which the ruins of Nineveh were when discovered by
Layard it is easy to see that, from the very day of the sacking of
the city, it had for the most part been left just as it fell. It may
have been rifled of its material wealth, but its literary and artistic
treasures were left uncared for and undesired. A few hundred years
later the very site of Nineveh was unknown.
The great city would not have been treated with such neglect had the
Medo-Persian artists turned to it for inspiration and for themes of
symbolic art with which to decorate the palaces of Persepolis.
[Illustration: PLATE VI.
FIG. 1.
The Assyrian god Assur.
FIG. 2.
The Assyrian god Assur.
FIG. 3.
The Median god Ahura Mazda.
FIG. 4.
Western portion of Constellation Sagittarius and the Constellation
Corona Australis.
[_To face p. 74._]
The resemblance, however, between Medo-Persian and Ninevite art is in
many instances so striking that some way of accounting for it must
be sought, and those who are dissatisfied with one explanation will
naturally look about to find some alternative suggestion.
The alternative suggestion I would now propose is that _the progenitors
of the Assyrians at an early period of the world’s history borrowed
Tauric and other religious symbolisms from the ancestors of the Medes_.
In support of this theory the following considerations are put forward:
Tauric symbolism, if it is at all astronomic, points us back to a
very remote date for its first institution, to a date considerably
earlier than that at which the existence of the Assyrian people as an
independent nation is generally put. The symbolism already discussed
must, at the latest, have been originated about 2,000 B.C. Of the
Assyrians as a nation we have no monumental proof earlier than 1,700
B.C.
But further, in the symbol of Ahura and Assur, I believe an astronomic
reference may be traced to the position of the colures amongst the
constellations, a reference which points us back not merely to a date
between 4,000 and 2,000 B.C., but rather, and with curious precision,
to the furthest limit of the time mentioned, namely to 4,000 B.C.
To penetrate into the meaning of this symbol of Ahura we must study
both the Median and Assyrian representations of the figure presiding
over the winged disc, and we may also seek for further light to be
thrown upon it by other references in Assyrian art to the god Assur.
Ahura presiding over the winged circle holds in his hand a ring or
crown; Assur in some examples is similarly furnished; but more often he
appears armed with bow and arrows. In this figure, variously equipped,
I believe that the heavenly Archer, the Zodiacal Sagittarius (Plate VI.
fig. 4), is to be recognized--Sagittarius, the constellation in which
the autumnal equinoctial point was situated, speaking in round numbers,
from 6,000 to 4,000 B.C.
The fact that a crown or wreath or ring often replaces the bow and
arrows in the hand of Ahura and of Assur might at first sight make us
doubtful as to the connexion of the figure with the constellation
Sagittarius, but a glance at the celestial globe will rather make this
fact tell in favour of the astronomical suggestion here made: for
there we find close to the hand of the Archer the ancient Ptolemaic
constellation Corona Australis (the Southern Crown), actually
incorporated with the Zodiacal constellation Sagittarius.
Not only do Assur’s bow and crown remind us of Sagittarius, but his
horned tiara, resembling so closely that worn by the man-headed
Assyrian bulls, inclines us to look for some astronomic and Tauric
allusion in this Assyrian and Median symbol.
True it is that, speaking generally, Gemini and not Taurus is the
constellation of the Zodiac opposed to Sagittarius, but owing to the
irregularity in the shape and size of the portions assigned in the
ecliptic to the Zodiacal constellations, the extreme western degrees
of Sagittarius are opposed to the extreme eastern degrees of Taurus.
Therefore about 4,000 B.C. the equinoctial colure passed through the
constellations of the Archer and the Bull.
[Illustration]
In the Assyrian Standard (depicted in Layard’s _Monuments of Nineveh_,
Plate XXII.) we see the figure of an Archer above that of a galloping
Bull, and in another Assyrian Standard, that of Sargon II., we find
not only the Archer and the Bull, the two constellations which 4,000
B.C. marked the _equinoctial_ colure, but we may also clearly trace a
reference to the two constellations which at the same date marked the
_solstitial_ colure, namely, those of the Lion and the Water-man (Plate
VII.).
[Illustration: PLATE VII.
Standard of Sargon II., King of Assyria, 722-705 B.C.
Perrot et Chipiez. _Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité_, Tome v.
opposite page 508.
[_To face p. 79._]
Here the _Archer_ dominates over a circle in which symmetrically
duplicated _Bulls_ appear, and duplicated _Lions’_ heads emerge out of
what appears to be a hollow vessel resembling a _water jar_; the wavy
lines that traverse the disc suggest streams that unitedly pour their
waters into this jar. Below the jar again are to be seen halved and
doubled heads, partly Lion and partly Bull.
This Standard of Assur may (like the Persepolitan monster earlier
described) be considered as an astronomic monogram representing the
four constellations which marked the four seasons of the year, and the
four quarters of the earth.
The monogram of the Standard refers us back, however, to an earlier
date for its origin than does the monogram of the composite animal in
the Persepolitan bas-relief, for in the Standard the Archer is opposed
to the Bull, in the bas-relief the Scorpion takes the place of the
Archer, and the Eagle takes the place of the Water-man.
The precession of the equinoxes advances from east to west amongst
the stars. Therefore the Scorpion marked the colure at a later date
than did the Archer. The Eagle, as has already been pointed out, is
considerably to the west of Aquarius, and could scarcely have been
chosen as a substitute for that constellation when the colure was in
its extreme eastern degrees.
At Plate VIII. is given the position of the colures at 4,000 B.C.; not
much earlier or much later than this date can we place the _origin_ of
the symbolism in the Standard shown at Plate VII. Earlier _not_ Leo
and Aquarius, but Virgo and Pisces, would have marked the solstitial
colure. Later _not_ Sagittarius, but Scorpio, would have in opposition
to Taurus marked the equinoctial colure.
At this date, 4,000 B.C., suggested with such curious accuracy by this
Assyrian Standard, we have absolutely no trace of the existence of the
_Semitic nation of the Assyrians_ in Northern Mesopotamia. In Babylonia
two hundred years later the Semitic Sargon I. ruled at Accad. In the
astrological work drawn up, if not for Sargon yet, as we may judge from
internal evidence, for some king of Accad, no mention is made of the
Assyrian nation.
[Illustration: PLATE VIII.
Position of Colures amongst the Constellations at the dates 4,500-4,000
and 3,500 B.C.
[_To face p. 80._]
The Phœnicians, the Hittites, the Kings of Gutium, and the “Umman
Manda” are then the dreaded foes of Accad. Of the Manda we read as
follows: “The Umman Manda comes and governs the land. The mercy seats
of the great gods are taken away. Bel goes to Elam.”
Professor Sayce is opposed to the view that the Manda are necessarily
identical with the Medes; but he admits that Herodotus, following the
authority of Medo-Persian writers, claimed as Median the victories of
the Manda.[42]
[42] _Proceedings_, vol. xviii. Part vi. pp. 176, 177.
If now on the authority of Herodotus and the Medo-Persian writers we
assume, at least as a possibility, that these Manda were Medes, we
should expect to find them worshippers of Ahura Mazda. Ahura, it is on
all hands admitted, is the Iranian form of the Vedic Asura, just as
Mithras is the Iranian form of the Vedic Mitra. At whatever date the
separation between Iranian and Vedic Aryans took place, the worship of
Ahura (still probably under the form Asura) must have existed amongst
the Iranians; indeed, many have supposed that the monotheistic reform
which placed one great Ahura or Asura above all other Asuras, and above
the Devas, occasioned the separation of these two great Aryan races.
It is for the Lord Ahura, called, as here supposed, Asura, in early
times, by the Aryan Manda, that I would claim the astronomical symbol
of the Archer presiding over the circle of the ecliptic, or, in other
words, over the circle of the year, and of a year beginning at the
spring equinox--a year, as has already been pointed out, distinctively
Median.
According then to this supposition, a powerful Median race was
established in the vicinity of Babylonia early in the fourth millennium
B.C.--a race who worshipped one great Lord, first under the name of
Asura, afterwards under that of Ahura.
It is for these Aryan Manda or Medes that I would claim, at the date
of 4,000 B.C., the original conception of the astronomic monogram in
which so plainly may be read an allusion to the four constellations
of the Zodiac, which at that date marked the four seasons and the four
cardinal points, _i.e._ Sagittarius and Taurus, Aquarius and Leo. This
monogram was used as a Standard thousands of years later by the Semitic
Assyrians.
To the Manda or Medes, also, I would, as has been suggested, attribute
the first imagining of the astronomic emblem common to Ahura and
Assur--that of the divine Being presiding over the circle of the
ecliptic.
Berosus mentions a Median dynasty as having reigned in Babylon for one
or two hundred years. Let us now suppose that the Manda for more than a
thousand years held power in _Northern_ Mesopotamia, but that at last
the tide of conquest turned, and after many struggles with the Semites
in the south the Aryans were finally driven from the land now known as
Assyria, and a Semite race firmly settled in the regions from whence
in Sargon’s time the Umman Manda had threatened the inhabitants of the
Kingdom of Accad. That this was the case about 2,200 B.C. may perhaps
be gathered from the monuments of Ḫammurabi, the Semitic king of
Babylon, for he refers in his letters to his troops in _Assyria_, and
in a lately discovered inscription of this king he speaks of restoring
to the city of _Assur_ its propitious genie, and of honouring Istar in
the city of Nineveh.
To account for the existence of the Assyrian nation, their close
resemblance in language and race to the ruling Semitic class in
Babylon, and yet to explain the great difference in the religion of
these two peoples, has always been a difficulty.
The Assyrians worshipped, and worshipped with enthusiasm, all the
Babylonian gods; but high above the whole Babylonian Pantheon they
placed as their supreme and great Lord Assur--Assur whose very name is
not to be met with in Babylonian mythology. This difficulty I would
explain in the following manner.
When the Medes had, by Ḫammurabi or his successors, been driven out
of Northern Mesopotamia, they were replaced by Semitic settlers who
(like the settlers sent into Samaria more than a thousand years later
by a king of Assyria) adopted, to a certain extent, the religion of
the nation whom they had dispossessed. In 2 Kings xvii. we read
that in this parallel instance “the king of Assyria brought men from
Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from
Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the
children of Israel: and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities
thereof.” Later in the same chapter we read that in order to appease,
as they believed, the wrath of the “God of the land,” these idolatrous
settlers, retaining in full the worship of all their own gods, added to
it a worship of the Lord of the dispossessed Israelites.
I would suppose then that the polytheistic Semites, who in Ḫammurabi’s
time were settled in Northern Mesopotamia, had acted in a similar
manner. Coming into a region where for nearly 2,000 years the
monotheistic Medes or Manda had been established, they, to avert
the wrath of the _god of the land_, adopted to a certain extent his
worship. In fact, like the Samaritans, “they feared the Lord [Asura],
and served their own gods.”
This explanation of the difference in religion between the Babylonians
and the Assyrians seems to yield also an explanation of the
resemblances between the Assyrian and Median religions, or rather of
the resemblances between the religious art of the two peoples; and thus
we return to the problem proposed for discussion earlier in this Paper,
namely, the inadequacy of the generally held opinion which accounts for
the resemblances in Persepolitan and Ninevite symbolic art by supposing
that the Medes borrowed from the Assyrians.
In support of the alternative suggestion put forward at p. 75, that
_the progenitors of the Assyrians at an early period of the worlds
history borrowed Tauric and other religious symbolisms from the
ancestors of the Medes_, I would claim that the Assyrians borrowed not
only religious symbolisms, but even the very name of their god Assur
from the Medes. For I look upon Assur as a “loan word” adopted from the
Aryan Asura.
To the Medes or Manda, who were, as has been argued, in power in
Northern Mesopotamia about 4,000 B.C., I have attributed the origin
of the astronomic Assyrian and Ahurian emblem. To them, on the same
grounds, I attribute the first imagining of the astronomic Assyrian
Standard, and the devising of the man-headed and winged monsters
so well known as “Assyrian Bulls”; and to them I would, with full
conviction, leave the honour of having invented, and not borrowed, the
idea of the magnificent Tauric capitals that crowned the columns of
Persepolis and Susa.
To all these conclusions I have been led by a consideration of the
distinctively equinoctial character of the Median calendar, taken in
connexion with the importance given in Median art to the constellation
Taurus.
V
ASTRONOMY IN THE RIG VEDA
[Reprinted from the Report of the _Actes_ of the Twelfth Oriental
Congress held at Rome]
Not much more than a hundred years ago the Sanscrit language began
to yield to the study of Europeans some of its literary treasures.
Almost on the moment, a controversy arose as to the antiquity of the
science of astronomy in India; for scholars were amazed to find in
this already long dead language many learned astronomical treatises,
besides complete instructions for calculating, year by year, the Hindu
calendar, as also for calculating horoscopes.
Some then proclaimed the wonderful facts revealed, and extolled the
antiquity and accuracy of this Indian science, while others, noticing
the many points of resemblance between European and Indian methods,
supposed, and warmly advocated the opinion, that much of the astronomy
contained in Sanscrit works had been borrowed from the Greeks.
Sir William Jones was amongst the first to enter the lists against this
Grecian theory; and he thus throws down his glove in defence of the
antiquity and originality of the science of astronomy in India.
“I engage to support an opinion (which the learned and industrious
M. Montucla seems to treat with extreme contempt) that the _Indian_
division of the Zodiack was not borrowed from the _Greeks_ or _Arabs_,
but, having been known in this country (India) for time immemorial,
and being the same in part with that used by other nations of the old
_Hindu_ race, was probably invented by the first progenitors of that
race before their dispersion.”[43]
[43] _On the Antiquity of the Indian Zodiack. Complete Works_, vol.
i. p. 333.
Since Sir William Jones wrote this challenge, and supported it with
whatever linguistic and scientific resources were at his command,
volumes of heated controversy by many authors have been devoted to the
same subject.
Just at present, however, an almost indifferent calmness has taken
the place of the excited interest formerly manifested. The majority
of scholars, both European and Indian, appear to have accepted, as an
axiom, the opinion that much of Indian astronomy, and certainly the
Indian acquaintance with the twelve-fold division of the Zodiac, is to
be attributed to Grecian influence.
A minority of writers still hold the view advocated by Sir William
Jones about a hundred years ago, and thus reiterated by Burgess
(the translator of the Indian standard astronomical work the
_Sûrya-Siddhânta_) in 1860. “The use of this (twelve-fold) division,
and the present names of the signs, can be proved to have existed in
India at as early a period as in any other country.”[44]
[44] _Journal of the American Oriental Society_, vol. vi. p. 477.
The minority who hold this view are so few at present that, as has been
said, the majority rest in their opposed opinion in all the calmness of
conviction.
I will now as briefly as possible state the chief arguments put
forward, for and against, this conviction.
I. In favour of the comparatively late introduction into India of the
twelve-fold division of the Zodiac, it is contended that the divisions
of the Indian Solar Zodiac so closely resemble those of the Grecian
(the Zodiac which we to this day depict on celestial globes), that it
is not possible to believe that two nations or two sets of astronomers
could independently of each other have imagined the same fanciful and
apparently inconsequent series.
History does not tell of communication between Greece and India,
sufficient to account for this similarity of astronomical method, till
after the date of Alexander’s conquest--about 300 B.C. The Greeks could
not at that late date have first become acquainted with the figures of
the Zodiac, for in Grecian literature of a much earlier age the figures
of the Zodiac and other constellations are alluded to as already
perfectly well known. As the Greeks therefore could not have learnt all
their astronomic lore from the Indians, the Indians must have learnt
theirs from the Greeks at some date later than Alexander’s Eastern
conquests.
A corroboration of this opinion is drawn from the consideration that,
in the most ancient Sanscrit work in existence--the purely Indian
Rig Veda, containing no Grecian taint--the twelve-fold divisions of
the Zodiac appear to be unknown. This opinion as to the Rashis or
constellations of the Solar Zodiac is so generally adopted, that the
age of any Sanscrit work in which mention of these Rashis occurs is at
once--no matter what its claims to antiquity may be--set down as not
earlier than the comparatively modern date of 300 B.C.
II. As regards the Indian Lunar Zodiac. The Indians make use at present
for calendrical purposes, not only of the twelve-fold Solar Zodiac,
they have also a series of 27 Nakshatras, or Lunar mansions (this
is for convenience sake designated by European writers as the Lunar
Zodiac). It is admitted on all hands that the Nakshatra series was not
derived from Grecian sources. But it is contended that the fixation of
the initial point of this Lunar Zodiac (a point at the end of Revatī
and the beginning of Aswinī, 10 degrees west of the first point of our
constellation Aries) was due to an astronomical reform of the Hindu
calendar, probably carried out under Grecian auspices at a date not
much earlier than 600 A.D. A very clear statement of this opinion is
thus given by Whitney (the editor of Burgess’ translation of the _Sûrya
Siddhânta_):--
“The initial point of the fixed Hindu sphere from which longitudes
are reckoned, and at which the planetary motions are held by all
schools of Hindu astronomy to have commenced at the creation, is
the end of the asterism Revatî, or the beginning of Açvinî. Its
situation is most nearly marked by that of the principal star of
Revatî ... that star is by all authorities identified with ζ Piscium,
of which the longitude at present, as reckoned by us, from the Vernal
Equinox, is 17° 54´. Making due allowance for the precession (of the
equinoxes), we find that it coincided in position with the vernal
equinox, not far from the middle of the sixth century, or about A.D.
570. _As such coincidence was the occasion of the point being fixed
upon as the beginning of the sphere_, the time of its occurrence
marks approximately the era of the fixation of the sphere, and of the
commencement of the history of modern Hindu astronomy.”[45]
[45] _Journal of the American Oriental Society_, vol. vi. p. 158.
In further corroboration of this view--deduced from the astronomical
supposition (to which I have drawn attention by italics) put forward
in this extract--ancient Sanscrit literature is appealed to. Hymns and
lists referring to the Nakshatras are to be met with in the Yajur and
Atharva Vedas, in which Krittikā, now the third Nakshatra, holds the
first place.
The Nakshatra Krittikā contains the group of stars known to us as the
Pleiades. The most brilliant stars in the Nakshatra Aswinī are the
two stars in the head of the constellation Aries (the Ram), known to
astronomers as α and β Arietis.
The vernal equinoctial point coincided about 2,000 B.C. with the
constellation Krittikā. It is considered to be most probable that on
account of this coincidence, at the early date when the hymns and list
in question were composed, Krittikā was chosen as the leader of the
Nakshatra series, and hence a similar reason for the later choice of
Aswinī as leader relegates it to a date not much earlier than 570 A.D.
These very briefly, as far as I have been able to gather them, are the
chief arguments in favour of--
(1) The Grecian introduction of the twelve-fold Zodiac into India about
300 B.C.
(2) The date of 570 A.D. for the fixation of the initial point of the
Indian Zodiacs, and for the commencement of the history of Indian
astronomy.
These propositions are based on cogent reasonings, and are maintained
by very high authorities. The opponents of the modern theory have
brought and bring forward the following considerations:--
“The _Bráhmans_ were always too proud to borrow their science from
the _Greeks_, _Arabs_, _Moguls_, or any nation of _Mléchch’has_, as
they call those who are ignorant of the _Védas_, and have not studied
the language of the Gods; they have often quoted to me (Sir William
Jones) the fragment of an old verse, which they now use proverbially
(_na níchò yavanátparah_), or, ‘_no base creature can be lower than
a Yavan_,’ by which name they formerly meant an _Ionian_ or _Greek_,
and now mean a _Mogul_.”[46]
[46] Sir William Jones, _The Antiquity of the Indian Zodiack,
Complete Works_, vol. i. p. 345.
Again the same writer points out that the resemblance between the
Indian and the Greek Zodiac is--
“not more extraordinary than that, which has often been observed
between our _Gothick_ days of the week and those of the _Hindus_,
which are dedicated to the same luminaries, and (what is yet more
singular) revolve in the same order: _Ravi_, the Sun; _Sóma_, the
Moon; _Mangala_, Tuisco; _Budha_, Woden; _Vrihaspati_, Thor; _Sucra_,
Freya; _Sani_, Sater; yet no man ever imagined that the _Indians_
borrowed so remarkable an arrangement from the _Goths_ or _Germans_.”
These considerations put forward by Sir William Jones are further
emphasized by the reflection that not only does the Grecian theory
entail the improbability of the proud and jealous Brahmins adopting
into their science and their mythology the teachings of foreigners;
but that it also entails the greater improbability of the two rival
Hindu sects, Brahmins and Buddhists, having at the same date and with
equal enthusiasm adopted into their science and religious symbolism and
calendars the same innovations.
Again the opinion of the Greek writers at the beginning of our era
may be quoted as showing the high estimation in which, at that time
of the world, Indian astronomy was held: as for instance in the life
of Apollonius of Tyana (written about 210 A.D. by Philostratus), the
wisdom and learning of Apollonius are set high above those of all
his contemporaries; but from the sages of India he is represented as
learning many things, especially matters of astronomy.[47]
[47] _Apollonius of Tyana_, Book iii. chapter 13.
This high opinion held by Greeks in regard to Indian astronomy may
be contrasted with the very moderate praise bestowed on the Grecian
science by Garga, a Hindu writer of, it is supposed, the first century
B.C. He says:--
“The Yavanas (Greeks) are Mlechchas (non-Hindus, or barbarians),
but amongst them this science (astronomy) is well established.
Therefore they are honoured as Rishis (saints); how much more then an
astronomer who is a Brahman?”[48]
[48] Romesh Chunder Dutt, _Ancient India_, p. 136.
Somewhat to the same effect speaks a Hindu author of a later date,
Varāhamihira, who wrote an astronomical dissertation treating of five
different works known to him on the science of astronomy. He says:--
“There are the following Siddhântas: The Pauliśa, the Romaka, the
Vâsisṭha, the Saura, and the Paitámaha. Out of these five, the first
two (the Pauliśa and Romaka, which appear to have been European
treatises) have been explained by Lâṱadeva. The Siddhânta made by
Pauliśa is accurate, near to it stands the Siddhánta proclaimed by
Romaka; more accurate is the Sávitra (Saura)[49] (_Sūrya Siddhānta_,
the _Hindu_ standard work); the two remaining ones are far from the
truth.”[50]
[49] This opinion of Varāha has been confirmed by modern European
scholars. Burgess (from whose translations of the _Sūrya Siddhānta_
we have already quoted) remarks, “in regard to ... the amount of the
annual precession of the equinoxes, the relative size of the sun and
moon as compared with the earth, the greatest equation of the centre
of the sun, the Hindus are more nearly correct than the Greeks.”
(_Journal of the American Oriental Society_, vol. vi. p. 480.)
[50] _The Pañchasiddhântikâ._ Edited by G. Thibaut, ch. i. § 3.
This moderate, and, as it reads, judicial opinion of Varāhamihira,
touching the superiority of the native _Sūrya Siddhānta_ over the
Pauliśa and Romaka Siddhāntas, may be appealed to as not conveying the
impression that when Varāha wrote his co-religionists and scientists
were accepting, wholesale and with avidity, Grecian astronomic methods
in place of their own already well-established native science. It is
true that in Varāha’s work many words evidently of Grecian origin are
to be met with; and some scholars have claimed that these “Greek terms
occurring in Varāhamihira’s writings are conclusive proofs of the
Greek origin of Hindu astronomy.” That such terms should occur in a
work professedly a _resumé_ of five astronomic treatises--some of them
Indian, and some European--can scarcely be considered as conclusive
proof that in the writer’s time no purely Indian astronomic science
existed. Varāha’s writings suggest an author interested in comparing
the resemblances and the differences to be met with in home and foreign
methods, rather than one introducing for the first time important
astronomic truths to the notice of his readers.
It may be further urged that the claims to antiquity in Sanscrit
astronomical works are so well known, that those who adopt the Grecian
theory must necessarily throw discredit in a very wholesale manner
on all their authors. Bentley’s furious diatribes may be quoted as
an extreme example of the way in which the evidence of such Sanscrit
claimants to antiquity is sometimes dealt with; and it may be pointed
out that such violent denunciation cannot be looked on as convincing
argument.
“The fact is,” writes Bentley, “that literary forgeries are now so
common in India, that we can hardly know what book is genuine, and
what not: perhaps there is not one book in a hundred, nay, probably
in a thousand, that is not a forgery, in some point of view or other;
and even those that are allowed or supposed to be genuine, are found
to be full of interpolations, to answer some particular ends: nor
need we be surprised at all this, when we consider the facilities
they have for forgeries, as well as their own general inclination and
interest in following that profession; for to give the appearance of
antiquity to their books and authors increases their value, at least
in the eyes of some. Their universal propensity to forgeries, ever
since the introduction of the modern system of astronomy and immense
periods of years, in A.D. 538, are but too well known to require
any further elucidation than those already given. They are under no
restraint of laws, human or divine, and subject to no punishment,
even if detected in the most flagrant literary impositions.”[51]
[51] _A Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy_, etc., p. 181.
It is unnecessary now to further pursue the pros and cons of what
has hitherto been said and written on the vexed questions as to the
originality and antiquity of astronomy in India, and especially as to
the Indian acquaintance with the twelve-fold divisions of the Zodiac,
and the date of the fixation of the initial point in their Zodiac. We
have seen that by the majority the Grecian and modern theory is the
favoured one.
Within the last quarter of a century, however, an unexpected
reinforcement has come into the field, in aid of the disheartened and
nearly silenced minority, who still believe in a great antiquity for
the science of astronomy in India.
The researches of archæologists in Western Asia have of late brought
to our knowledge vast hoards of information concerning the ancient
inhabitants of Babylonia and Assyria, and the surrounding highlands
and plains; amongst other matters, concerning the science of astronomy
possessed by these peoples.
In 1874, a Paper entitled _The Astronomy and Astrology of the
Babylonians_ was read by Professor Sayce before the “Society of
Biblical Archæology,” and since that date other Papers, by various
authors, dealing with the subject have appeared in the same Society’s
_Proceedings_. Also in the _Zeitschrift für Assyriologie_, articles
have been contributed by such writers as Epping and Strassmaier,
Oppert, Mayer, Mahler, Jensen, Lehmann, and others, in which the
calendars and astronomical methods in use in Mesopotamia are discussed.
Epping and Strassmaier’s _Astronomisches aus Babylon_ and Jensen’s _Die
Kosmologie der Babylonier_, are important volumes devoted to these same
matters.
Whatever else concerning the subject of all these writings remains
uncertain and open to discussion, some facts are clearly established.
We now know that the inhabitants of Babylonia in a remote age
(certainly as early as the fourth millenium B.C.) were acquainted with
the twelve divisions of the Zodiac, and that these divisions were
imagined under figures closely resembling in almost every instance
those now depicted on our celestial globes. The calendar used by
the Accadians, and later by the Semitic Babylonians and Assyrians,
was indeed based on the observance of the Zodiacal constellations
and of the journeyings through them of the sun and moon. The varying
positions of the planets, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn
are also noted by references to the Zodiacal asterisms: and not only
Zodiacal, but several of the extra-Zodiacal ancient constellations are
represented on the monuments.
All this information gained from the cuneiform tablets concerning
the science of astronomy in Western Asia must undoubtedly affect the
judgment of enquirers into the history of the same science in India.
Now that it is clearly proved that 3,000 B.C. and earlier the
twelve-fold fanciful signs of the Solar Zodiac were known to the
inhabitants of Babylonia, it cannot any longer be asserted dogmatically
that the inhabitants of India must have waited till 300 B.C. to learn
this twelve-fold division from Grecian astronomers after the date of
Alexander’s conquest.
But again as regards the fixation of the initial point of the
distinctively Indian Lunar Zodiac, or circle of the Nakshatras, at the
“end of Revatî, and the beginning of Açvinî,” that is to say, at a
point not far from the first degree of Aries--cuneiform tablets teach
us the important fact that long before the equinoctial point coincided
with any of the degrees of Aries, that constellation was the leader of
the Zodiacal series--inasmuch as the month Bar zig-gar (Accadian) the
“Sacrifice of righteousness,” that is, the month when the sun was in
conjunction with Aries, always in the tablets appears as the 1st month
of the year.[52]
[52] This fact is admitted (see art. “Zodiac,” sub-heading “first
sign,” _Encyclopædia Britannica_). But it is a fact opposed to
the hitherto received opinion touching the necessary connexion of
the equinoctial point and of the initial point of the Zodiac. “A
prehistoric reform” of the calendar is supposed, and corrections of
the ancient texts to suit this reform, are suggested. Until traces
of such reform and corrections can be shown to exist, the evidence
of the tablets may still be cited as pointing to a year counted
from the sun’s entry into Aries, in the earliest ages of Babylonian
civilization.
These late revelations of archæology seem to strike at the root of the
main arguments relied on by the advocates of the Grecian and modern
origin of astronomic science in India; and this being the case, it
is possible to turn with unbiassed minds to a consideration of the
teachings of Sanscrit literature, and endeavour to learn from them what
is the real truth as to the acquaintance of ancient Indian authors with
the figures of the Zodiac and other astronomic phenomena.
The opinion has been very generally adopted, as has been said, that
in the Rig Veda there is no mention of any of the twelve figures of
the Solar Zodiac. Some few writers have contended that occasional
references to these figures are to be met with, and this question
has been argued on etymological grounds. My entire ignorance of the
Sanscrit language prevents me from at all following the arguments
employed in this discussion. And here it may be said, and said with
good reason, that for the discussion of points connected with Vedic
literature, writers ignorant of the language in which the Vedas were
composed are but ill equipped for the task. At every step I keenly feel
my own disqualifications; but many translations and commentaries on
the Rig Veda are in existence; and without entering into etymological
questions, it has seemed to me that broad astronomic explanations
of some of the myths might be supplied, if only the possibility of
the Vedic Rishis having been acquainted with the strange figures of
the celestial sphere should be admitted. In this paper I am anxious
to draw the attention of those who can study Vedic texts in their
original language to these possible explanations. Those only who know
Sanscrit are really qualified to judge finally whether the suggestions
here made can be sustained on further enquiry into the Vedas. If the
interpretations of Vedic myths here proposed are correct--no doubt
corroboration will be found for them in the Sanscrit names and epithets
of mythic personages. If no such corroborations are to be met with,
the probabilities in favour of the correctness of the astronomic
interpretations will be greatly diminished.
But to return to our subject. It is sometimes argued that the Vedic
bards could not have been acquainted with the twelve-fold division
of the Zodiac, as otherwise these great constellations would surely
have claimed at their hands clear and outspoken notice. With this
argument I cannot fully agree. Even before pointing out the important
place which I believe astronomical phenomena hold in the Rig Veda,
I would draw attention to the fact that according to the generally
received and non-astronomic explanation of the myths, it is necessary
to suppose that still more striking and important natural phenomena
than those connected with the constellations of the Zodiac--phenomena
with which the Vedic bards must certainly have been acquainted--were
almost entirely ignored by the authors of the Rig Veda. It is true that
some great scholars claim on linguistic grounds a solar origin for
much Vedic imagery and nomenclature; yet when the hymns are examined
in translations, and the notes and commentaries which accompany these
translations are studied, the impression left on the mind of any reader
unacquainted with Sanscrit must be that very little attention or honour
is given to sun, moon, or stars, in comparison to that so freely
lavished on the elements of fire, air and water, and on the mysterious
properties of the juice of the Soma plant.
The beauty of the dawn is almost the only celestial glory that appears
to appeal with any insistence to the imaginations of the Vedic Rishis.
If out of the more than one thousand hymns of the Rig Veda, not one is
addressed to the moon, and on the most liberal calculation considerably
less than a hundred to the sun, under any aspect, it need not be cause
for wonder if the constellations of the Zodiac are not remembered.
The poets of the Rig Veda, however ignorant of astronomy, and at
whatever age they lived, must have sometimes lifted their eyes above
the sacrificial fire and its smoke, above the rain and storm-clouds,
above their altars and libations of Soma. They must have often seen
“the sun when it shined” and “the moon walking in brightness,” and if
they so rarely hymned these great luminaries with whose appearance
and existence they so certainly were acquainted, it would prove no
ignorance on their part of the twelve-fold division of the Zodiac and
its quaintly imagined figures, were it indeed the case that all mention
of these figures is absent from the Rig Veda.
But as has been stated above, my desire is to draw attention to
possible astronomic interpretations of many of the Vedic myths,
and the adoption of such interpretations would necessarily entail a
reversal of the dictum that all mention of the twelve-fold Zodiac is
absent from the Rig Veda.
Those who have studied this wonderful and mysterious collection of
hymns most constantly and deeply are obliged to confess that it is
still very imperfectly understood, and though it is agreed unanimously
that the Gods of the Veda are personifications of the phenomena of
nature, yet as to the exact phenomena underlying the various Vedic
myths there is among scholars much difference of opinion. It is
impossible not to feel in reading the hymns and the many speculations,
notes, and comments appended to them, that notwithstanding all the
labour and research bestowed on the work, much of this ancient Veda
still remains a cypher, for the right understanding of which the modern
reader does not possess the key.
Guided by the teachings of archæology, I now make the suggestion that
the key to this cypher may perhaps be found in crediting the authors
of the Veda with a somewhat advanced knowledge of astronomy, and an
acquaintance with the, to us, apparently fanciful constellations of the
celestial sphere and Zodiac; and in assuming that the figures of the
“ancient constellations” often supplied the basis of Vedic imagery.
To pursue this possible clue towards the understanding of the myths, it
were much to be desired that all students should be acquainted with the
names and positions in the heavens of the forty-five constellations--so
well distinguished by the epithet “ancient”--and that they should
master some of the more easily observed conditions of their diurnal
and annual apparent movements, as also those of the sun and moon,
and further that they should have learnt what changes in the scenery
of the heavens have been brought about by the slow movement known to
astronomers as the “precession of the equinoxes.”
Classical and philological scholars have however so rarely time and
attention to spare from their own intensely interesting and important
studies that as a rule astronomical phenomena are not much observed or
considered by them. The accompanying diagrams drawn from a celestial
precessional globe may, it is hoped, enable those, who have not as
yet devoted thought to such subjects, to judge for themselves of the
reasonableness or otherwise of the following astronomic suggestions
concerning the most important of the Vedic gods.
According to A. A. Macdonell--who in his late work _Vedic Mythology_
has summed up clearly and compendiously the opinions of a host of
scholars on the nature of the Vedic gods--Indra is the favourite
national god of the Rig Veda; he is celebrated in 250 hymns, a greater
number than that “devoted to any other god, and very nearly one-fourth
of the total number of hymns in the Rig Veda.”[53]
[53] Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 54.
What may be called the central myths related of Indra, stripped of all
epithet and ornament, relate that, invigorated by copious draughts of
Soma, Indra fights with, overcomes, and drives from heaven and earth
a demon called Vritra or Ahi, who is represented under the form of a
dragon, serpent or water snake. Indra also searches for, finds, and
releases cows which had been stolen from the gods (or according to
some commentators, from the angirasas, or priests). Indra bestows on
his worshippers all the blessings of plenty, especially he is the
dispenser of rain.
According to the usual non-astronomic explanations of these myths,
Indra, an “atmospheric god,”[54] is “primarily the thunder god” who
conquers “the demons of drought or darkness,” or again, “Indra[55] is
a personification of the phenomena of the firmament, particularly in
the capacity of sending down rain. This property is metaphorically
described as a conflict with the clouds which are reluctant to
part with their watery stores until assailed and penetrated by the
thunder-bolt of Indra; ... the cloud is personified as a demon named
Ahi or Vritra ... a popular myth represents him (Indra) also as the
discoverer and rescuer of the cows, either of the priests or of the
gods which had been stolen by an _Asura_ named Pan̂i or Vala.”
[54] Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 66.
[55] Wilson, _Rig Veda_, Introduction, pp. xxx.-xxxi.
Macdonell, alluding to the same incident, observes:[56] These “cows
released by Indra may, in many cases, refer to the waters, for we
have seen that the latter are occasionally compared with lowing
cows. Thus Indra is said to have found the cows for man when he slew
the dragon.... But the cows may also in other cases be conceived as
connected with Indra’s winning of light, for the ruddy beams of dawn
issuing from the blackness of night are compared with cattle coming out
of their dark stalls. Again, though clouds play no great part in the
Rig Veda under their literal name (_abhra_, etc.), it can hardly be
denied that, as containing the waters, they figure mythologically to
a considerable extent under the name of cow (_go_), as well as udder
(_ūdhar_) ... thus the rain-clouds are probably meant when it is said
that the cows roared at the birth of Indra.”
[56] _Vedic Mythology_, p. 59.
At the close of the section devoted to Indra, Macdonell refers to
the probably pre-Vedic origin of the Indra myths. He says:[57] “The
name of Indra occurs only twice in the Avesta. Beyond the fact of his
being no god, but only a demon, his character there is uncertain.
Indra’s distinctive Vedic epithet _vrtrahan_ [Vritra-slayer] also
occurs in the Avesta in the form of _verethraghna_, which is, however,
unconnected with Indra or the thunderstorm myth, designating merely
the God of Victory. Thus it is probable that the Indo-Iranian period
possessed a god approaching to the Vedic form of the Vrtra-slaying
Indra. It is even possible that beside the thundering god of heaven,
the Indo-European period may have known as a distinct conception a
thunder-god, gigantic in size, a mighty eater and drinker, who slays
the dragon with his lightning bolt.”
[57] _Vedic Mythology_, p. 66.
In reading the Indra hymns in the Veda, and in trying to fit them to
the explanation given in the passages quoted, a constant and very
disagreeable strain is put on the imagination; it must, for instance,
attempt to grasp and hold, at the same time, two very far apart
opinions as to the nature of the demon Vritra. Vritra is to be thought
of as a demon of darkness, and as a demon of drought; the cows are
clouds, they are also ruddy beams of light!
Darkness and drought are not to be easily bracketed together. Drought
is in all lands, India not excepted, connected with a long continuance
of bright and stainless skies. The appearance then of a little cloud
“like a man’s hand” is the joyously hailed precursor of “the sound of
abundance of rain.”
Again, the driving away of a snake-like cloud is no forcible simile by
which to describe in myth the advent of rain in India--rain which to be
of any use is no mere refreshing shower, but a long-continued downpour
from clouds not hastily dispersed.
Indra’s action first in driving away the cloud-demon Vritra, and then
in seeking for the beneficial cloud cows, is also contradictory.
For the reconciling of many of these contradictions the astronomic
interpretation of the Indra-Vritra myths is as follows:--Indra may
still retain all his atmospheric attributes of sending down rain
but--_Indra is primarily and essentially a personification of the
summer solstice_.
The summer solstice in India is an all-important agricultural epoch; it
brings with it “the rainy season,” the real spring of the Indian year.
Before this season all the land is parched and arid, and vegetation is
at a standstill.
The punctuality of the rains in many parts of India is so exact that
the farmer foretells their arrival not only to the day, but to the
hour. In good years heavy and almost incessant rain lasts for two or
even three months. Indra, as a personification of the season which
so punctually brings the rain, is an atmospheric god, the enemy of
the demon of drought. But Indra is more than this: many praises are
bestowed on Indra in the Rig Veda for deeds which cannot easily be
explained on the simple atmospheric theory. “Indra is the highest
of all” is the refrain of many Vedic verses; “Indra placed the sun
high in the sky,” “Indra tore off one wheel of the sun’s chariot,”
“Indra stopped the tawny coursers of the sun.” Now all these phrases
are at once and clearly to be interpreted if we think of Indra as
the personification of the summer solstice, and especially of the
solstice in India, where at that season of the year the sun attains to
the very zenith, and thus Indra associated with the _sun_ under one
figure of speech is spoken of as “highest of all,” and in a slightly
varied figure associated with the _season_, is said to have “_placed_
the sun high in the sky.” Or again translating into myth the very
meaning of the word solstice or “_the sun being made to stand_,” we
read that Indra “tore off the wheel of the chariot of the sun,” and
“stopped his tawny coursers.” Indra is, I cannot but believe, not
merely an atmospheric god; he is the god of the summer solstice. And
if this should be the case, what then may Vritra be? Is the demon of
the solstitial Indra personified as only a snake-like cloud? It is
impossible to think so. The astronomic interpretation of the myth I
would propose is that--_a snake-like constellation_, not a snake-like
cloud, is the representation of the demon Vritra.
On the celestial sphere many serpents and dragons are represented, but
the far-reaching constellation Hydra exceeds all the others in its
enormous length from head to tail. No very brilliant stars mark the
asterism, nor in the grouping of its stars is there anything especially
snake-like. For some reason other than its appeal to the eye did
astronomers of old invest with all the horrors of the Hydra-form the
monotonous length of this space on the vault of the skies.
This reason may be arrived at, with almost certainty, in studying, with
the help of a precessional globe, the position in the heavens of this
constellation in different ages of the world’s history. So studying, we
shall find that 4,000 B.C.--or to be more precise, one or two hundred
years earlier--Hydra extended its enormous length for more than 90°
symmetrically along one astronomically important (though invisible)
mathematical line--the line of the heavenly equator--and was at the
same date accurately bisected by another equally important mathematical
line, namely the colure of the summer solstice (see Plate IX.).
Almost irresistibly, as it appears to me, the conviction forces itself
on the mind, in considering the position held by the constellation
Hydra 4,000 B.C., that it was at that date that this baleful figure was
first traced in imagination on the sky, there fitly to represent the
power of physical (and may we not suppose also, of moral?) darkness--a
great and terrible power--but a power ever and ever again to be
conquered by the victorious power of light. In astronomic myth this
power was represented as that of the sun at the season of its highest
culmination, the season of the summer solstice. For an observer in the
temperate northern zone all through the long nights of mid-winter, the
whole length of the dreadful Hydra was at the date named visible above
the horizon. The dark midwinter season was therefore the time of the
Hydra’s greatest glory. At every season of the year, except at that
of midsummer, some portion of the monster’s form was visible during
some part of the night. But at the summer solstice no star in the
constellation might show itself for ever so short a time.[58]
[58] Plate IX. represents the constellations above the horizon, _but
invisible at noon at the midsummer solstice_. It therefore represents
those above the horizon, _and visible at midwinter midnight_.
[Illustration: PLATE IX.
Position of the Sun amongst the Constellations at Summer Solstice,
4,000 B.C. Observer in Lat. 40° N. Constellations between the lines H Z
and Z H invisible all through the night of Summer Solstice.
[_To face p. 118._]
The supposed latitude of the observer in Plate IX. is 40° N., a
latitude considerably to the north of any part of India; but it is to
be remembered that the Indra-Vritra myth cannot be claimed with any
certainty as a purely and originally Indian myth, for, as Macdonell
points out (as quoted above), there is a probability that “the
Indo-Iranian period possessed a god approaching to the Vedic form of
the Vrtra-slaying Indra,” and that “it is even possible that beside the
thundering god of heaven, the Indo-European period may have known as a
distinct conception a thunder-god, gigantic in size, a mighty eater and
drinker, who slays the dragon with his lightning bolt.”[59]
[59] V. p. 114.
For the _origin_ of this world-wide myth, therefore, we should not
look to the tropical Indian Zone; but it is in Indian latitudes that
we should look for an explanation of the physical phenomena _hymned by
Vedic bards in the distinctly Indian development of the Indra-Vritra
myth_. I believe that in thus tracing the course of the Indra story
from temperate to tropical latitudes, we shall find a reason for the
contradictory attributes assigned to the demon Vritra, namely those of
darkness and drought.
In northern latitudes winter is distinctly the _dark_ season; in
tropical India there is little or no perceptible difference between
the darkness of winter and summer. But in India winter is distinctly
the dry season. Midsummer is the all-important season of the rains.
Indra’s conquest over Vritra, or the arrival of solstitial rains,
marked by the disappearance of the constellation Hydra from the sky,
was mythologically in the Vedas described as Indra’s conquest over the
demon of _drought_, but still traditionally--for the power of tradition
is great--even in India Indra retained the attributes of the conqueror
over the demon of _darkness_.
[Illustration: PLATE X.
Portion of Sun at Summer Solstice, 3,000 B.C. Observer in Lat. 23° N.
Constellations between the lines H H Z and Z H H invisible all through
the night of Summer Solstice.
[_To face p. 121._]
At Plate X. a drawing is given of the southern heavens and of the
constellations--invisible at midsummer and visible at midwinter, above
the horizon of an observer in latitude 23° N. at the date 3000 B.C.,
a thousand years later than the date referred to in Plate IX. For
reasons which will appear more clearly when we come to the discussion
of the Soma myth, it is to about this date that I would attribute the
composition of many of the Vedic hymns.
But if Indra is to be considered as representing the summer solstice,
and Vritra as representing the constellation Hydra, we must surely
expect some astronomic interpretation for Soma--Soma by which the
mighty Indra is invigorated and enabled to triumph gloriously over
the demon. According to non-astronomic explanations, “the concrete
terrestrial plant and the intoxicating juice extracted therefrom” are
considered to be the basis of the mythology of Soma. It is admitted
that in post-Vedic literature Soma is a regular name of the moon, which
is regarded as being drunk up by the gods, and so waning. Some writers
point to the possibility that even in the Rig Veda, “in the Soma hymns
there may occasionally lurk a veiled identification of ambrosia and the
moon, ... but on the whole, with the few exceptions generally admitted,
it appears to be certain that to the seers of the Rig Veda the god Soma
is a personification of the terrestrial plant and juice.”[60]
[60] Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 113.
One German writer, Hillebrandt, very strongly upholds the view that
Soma in the Rig Veda “often personifies the moon,”[61] and especially
according to him is this the case in the 114 hymns of Maṇḍala IX.,
all addressed to Soma pavamāna, or “purified Soma,” prepared for and
quaffed by Indra to invigorate him for the Vritra combat.
[61] _Vedic Mythology_
That Soma in the Rig Veda is primarily the moon, and that the moon is
symbolized and always more or less directly referred to in the Vedic
hymns to Soma, fits in, as must be evident to the readers of this
paper, with the astronomic theories advocated in it. If we consider
that Indra’s conquest over Vritra represents the god of the summer
solstice, with his bright weapons, conquering, and driving from heaven
and earth the constellation Hydra, we can easily understand how in this
contest Indra might be strengthened by copious draughts of Soma, _i.e._
by the bright light of the full moon flooding the heavens with radiance
and enfeebling all but the brightest stars.
But a further confirmation of the lunar character of Soma, and an
elucidation of the imagery of the Soma pavamāna hymns of Maṇḍala
IX., are to be found if--still crediting the Vedic Rishis with a
knowledge of the ancient constellations--we study the position of these
constellations at the date 3,000 B.C. (see Plate XI.)[62] At that
date the full moon of the midsummer or solstitial season was always to
be observed in the constellation Aquarius. With this thought in our
mind as we read the mystical hymns of Maṇḍala IX., in which Soma is
so often described as rushing impetuously to the vase or pitcher, and
as surrounded by celestial waters, with many other such expressions,
we easily recognise an allusion to the _midsummer full moon in the
constellation Aquarius_; and when further we read the legend so
often repeated, that the eagle brought the Soma to Indra, or to the
sacrifice, we have only to look at the celestial globe to see the eagle
(Aquila) directing its flight towards the pitcher of Aquarius--and to
remember that the very night before the moon attained the celestial
vase, it would have been on the same meridian as the constellation
Aquila; and the imaginative Vedic bard might then describe it as borne
along by the eagle,--one of the most glorious constellations in that
part of the sky.
[62] Lunar dates are variable. The full moon _nearest_ to the summer
solstice might have been observed somewhat to the east or the west of
its position in the diagram, but always in the constellation Aquarius.
[Illustration: PLATE XI.
Position of Moon amongst the Constellations at Summer Solstice, and of
the Sun at Winter Solstice, 3,000 B.C. Observer in Lat. 23° N.
[_To face p. 124._]
In one hymn especially devoted to the legend of the Soma-bearing eagle
(or hawk), allusion to the small but well-marked-out constellation
Sagitta (the arrow) may be detected. In Wilson’s translation of Maṇḍala
IV. 27 (vol. iii. p. 174), we read: “When the hawk screamed (with
exultation) on his descent from heaven, and (the guardians of the
_Soma_) perceived that the _Soma_ was (carried away) by it, then, the
archer Kriṣánu, pursuing with the speed of thought, and stringing his
bow, let fly an arrow against it.”
Now to turn to another important Vedic deity, Agni.
Agni is classed, according to Macdonell, amongst terrestrial gods,
but he points out that in some passages he is to be identified with
the sun. Wilson describes Agni as comprising[63] “the element of
_Fire_ under three aspects: 1^{st}, as it exists on earth, not only as
culinary or religious fire, but as the heat of digestion and of life,
and the vivifying principle of vegetation; 2^{nd}, as it exists in
the atmosphere, or mid-heaven, in the form of lightning; and 3^{rd},
as it is manifested in the heavens, as light, the sun, the dawn, and
planetary bodies.” And--having enumerated various deities who in the
hymns appear as manifestations of the sun--he adds, “still, however,
the sun does not hold that prominent place in the _Vaidik_ liturgy
which he seems to have done in that of the ancient Persians, and he is
chiefly venerated as the celestial representative of Fire.”
[63] Wilson, _Rig Veda_, Introduction, vol. i. pp. xxvii.-xxviii.
The classification of Agni as a terrestrial god, given by Macdonell,
and the order of his “aspects,” as given by Wilson, are not in
accordance with the theory here advocated, nor, according to Macdonell,
is it the classification or order always adhered to by Vedic
authorities.
For some very puzzling myths concerning Agni, I believe an astronomic
interpretation may be given, and thereby the position of Agni in the
_first_ place, rather than in the _last_, as a celestial god, may be
established.
The Vedic deity Apām Napāt--the son of Waters, is classed by
Macdonell as an atmospheric god, and he says,[64] “In the last
stanza of the Apām napāt hymn, the deity is invoked as Agni, and
must be identified with him,” and again,[65] “Agni’s origin in the
aerial waters is often referred to. The ‘son of waters’ has, as has
been shown, become a distinct deity.” Then turning to other legends
regarding Agni he says, “In such passages the lightning form of
Agni must be meant. Some of the later hymns of the Rig Veda tell a
legend of Agni hiding in the waters and plants, and being found by
the gods.... In one passage of the Rig Veda also it is stated that
Agni rests in all streams; and in the later ritual texts, Agni in the
waters is invoked in connexion with ponds and water-vessels. Thus,
even in the oldest Vedic period, the waters in which Agni is latent,
though not those from which he is produced, may in various passages
have been regarded as terrestrial.... In any case the notion of Agni
in the waters is prominent throughout the Vedas.”
[64] _Vedic Mythology_, p. 70.
[65] _Ibid._, p. 92.
To explain this legend, Wilson makes other suggestions. He writes:[66]
“The legend of his (Agni’s) hiding in the waters, through fear of the
enemies of the gods, although alluded to in more than one place, is
not very explicitly related ... the allusions of the _Súktas_ (hymns)
may be a figurative intimation of the latent heat existing in water,
or a misapprehension of a natural phenomenon which seems to have made
a great impression in later times--the emission of flame from the
surface of water either in the shape of inflammable air, or as the
result of submarine volcanic action.”
[66] Wilson, _Rig Veda_, Introduction, vol. i. p. xxx.
It cannot but be admitted that these myths are puzzling, and that to
account for the notion so prominent throughout the Vedas of “Agni
in the waters,” the various suggestions of “lightning,” “latent
heat existing in water,” “the emission of flame from the surface of
the waters, either in the shape of inflammable air or as the result
of submarine volcanic action,” are inadequate to explain the fact
that Agni, whose very name “is the regular designation of fire”[67]
should in the hymns be so closely associated with water. Nor are the
difficulties concerning “Agni in the waters” to be overcome by the
tempting and poetic suggestion, put forward by some writers, that in
these passages reference is made to the sun rising in the morning out
of the ocean, and again hiding itself beneath the waves at sunset. The
composition of the Rig Veda is attributed to Aryan settlers “scattered
over the Punjaub and regions lying to the west of the Indus”: by such
settlers the sun could never have been seen _rising_ out of the ocean,
for no ocean bounded their horizon on the east. Even the phenomenon of
the sun hiding itself at evening in the water, could only have been
observed by those who lived on the western _coast_, and it is therefore
not easy to imagine why sunrise and sunset should in India have been so
closely and constantly associated with a sea horizon.
[67] Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 88.
But if once the acquaintance of the originators of the Agni myths with
the Zodiacal figures is admitted, the astronomic interpretation of
those relating to Agni in the waters is not difficult; it is as follows:
Agni is the personification of fire, but his chief personification is
as the fire of the sun. _“Agni in the waters” is especially the fire of
the sun in the celestial waters of Aquarius._ 3,000 B.C. the sun was
in conjunction with Aquarius at the time of the _winter solstice_.[68]
Those hymns therefore which dwell upon the myths of Agni hiding himself
in, being born in, and rising out of the waters, may be considered as
hymns referring to _the sun at the winter solstice in conjunction with
the constellation Aquarius_, and therefore as hymns especially suitable
for use on the occasion of a great yearly festival held at that season
of the year.
[68] The position of the sun at the _winter solstice_ 3,000 B.C. was
identical with that represented at Plate XI. as the position of the
full moon at the _summer solstice_.
European writers often describe the mid-winter sun as _hiding_ itself,
or as every day withdrawing itself more and more from view. In poetic
similes, the snows of winter often crown the head of the aged out-going
year, while the in-coming year is represented as a _babe_ or _infant_.
The appropriateness of such similes is due to the fact, that our
calendrical new year is fixed within a few days of the winter solstice.
Again, in sober prose, the sun at the time of the winter solstice is
said, having attained its lowest point, _to rise_ or _begin its upward
course_ on the ecliptic. It is therefore not difficult to understand
how the Vedic Rishis, who appear to have combined the characteristics
of poets and of scientific observers of the heavens, should have 3,000
B.C. described _the fire of the solstitial sun, as hiding in, being
born in, and rising out of the celestial waters of the constellation
Aquarius_.
In this Agni myth, as in that of Indra, we may perceive traces of a
pre-Vedic origin. The latitudes in which the Rig Veda was composed are
not those in which attention is forcibly drawn to the diminution of the
strength and visibility of the sun at the winter season. In the Rig
Veda, however, Indra’s conquest over darkness as well as over drought
is celebrated, and the same _traditional_ cause may be assigned for the
description of Agni hiding himself at the time of the winter solstice
in the waters of Aquarius.
Indra, Soma, and Agni no longer hold the important place in the Hindu
Pantheon which they appear to have held in Vedic times, and on the
astronomic theory, this fact may partly be accounted for by noticing
how slow but inevitable changes in the scenery of the heavens, produced
by the precession of the equinoxes, gradually obscured more and more
completely the meaning of the _imagery_ employed in the hymns to these
deities. Indra, if he represents the summer solstice, is indeed still
as powerful as ever, and still triumphs over the demon of drought,
but no longer is that demon well represented by the snake-like
constellation Hydra; for on the night of the summer solstice, after the
sun has set, the whole of Hydra is still above the horizon. No longer
does the mid-summer full moon bathe its brightness in the celestial
waters of Aquarius, nor does the mid-winter sun hide itself in them.
The hymns remain, the phenomena they referred to, exist no longer.
But leaving now the subject of the “ancient constellations” and of
reference to them in the Rig Veda, let us turn to the second section
of the argument in favour of the modern origin of Hindu astronomy as
stated above.[69] It is a claim made for the very modern date of 570
A.D. as that for the fixation of the initial point of the Indian Zodiac
at the “end of Revatî and the beginning of Açvinî.”--This claim I
desire to oppose.
[69] V. p. 92.
It has been admitted by scholars, but almost with a sort of reluctance,
that mention is made of some of the Nakshatras in a few of the Rig Veda
hymns. The matter is rather avoided than cordially enquired into. It
is, however, a question of great and important interest to ascertain,
if possible, whether the circle of the Nakshatras was known to the
Vedic Rishis, and if it were known, whether the initial point was fixed
there, where as we have read, _all schools of Hindu astronomy agree in
declaring that the planetary motions commenced at the creation_.[70]
[70] V. p. 93.
We have learnt from Babylonian archæology that we are no longer forced
to assume that only at the date of about 570 A.D. could this initial
point have been fixed by Indian astronomers. It therefore need no
longer be looked upon as an unreasonable quest to search in the ancient
pages of the Rig Veda for indications that this important astronomical
point had been fixed, even before Vedic times, as the starting-point of
a calendrical and sidereal year--and if we should find such indications
in the Rig Veda, they may well out-weigh arguments against the
antiquity of this fixation, based upon passages in later works, such as
the Yajur and Atharva Vedas.
From the Yajur Veda itself, arguments may be drawn in favour of a year
beginning in the month Chaitra,[71] at or before the date of the
composition or compilation of that Veda.
[71] Chaitra is the month which begins, as closely as a luni-solar
month may, at the sun’s arrival at the initial point of the Hindu
Zodiac--the beginning of Aswinī.
In the Taittirîya Sanhitâ (contained in the Yajur Veda) a passage
occurs[72] which is translated and commented upon by B. G. Tilak (_The
Orion, or Antiquity of the Vedas_, p. 46 _et seq._). In this passage
is discussed the superior suitability of three different days on which
worshippers might consecrate themselves for the yearly sacrifice. Not
any one of these three days has any connexion with the _spring equinox_
or the sun’s conjunction with Krittikā. The choice of date for the
yearly sacrifice appears to lie between, first, the “Ekâṣhṭakā (day)”
of some month not named,[73] but one in the “distressed,” or “reversed”
period of the year, _i.e._ the mid-winter season; second, the full moon
of Phalgunī; and third, the Chaitra full moon. B. G. Tilak, after some
pages of comment on the passage referred to, states in his summing up,
amongst others, the following conclusions which he has arrived at.
[72] Taittirîya Sanhitâ, vii. 4. 8.
[73] At p. 48 he quotes authorities in favour of the Ekâṣhṭakā (day)
in this passage meaning the 8th day of the dark half of Mâgha.
“1^{st}, that in the days of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ the winter
solstice occurred before the eighth day of the dark half of Mâgha ...
and that throughout the whole passage the intention of sacrificing
at the beginning (real, constructive, or traditional) of the year is
quite clear: ... 2^{nd}, that the year then commenced with the winter
solstice”: “3^{rd}, that as there can not be three real beginnings
of the year, at an interval of one month each, the passage must be
understood as recording a tradition about the Chitrâ full moon and the
Phalgunī full moon being once considered as the first days of the year.”
This is B. G. Tilak’s conclusion; merely judging from the
_translation_, the passage might, as it seems to me, be understood as
unreservedly recommending the full-moon of Chaitra as the most suitable
for the beginning of the sacrifice, for in the text of the Taittirîya
Sanhitâ it is said of it, “It has no fault whatsoever.”
But in whichever sense the words are understood, this passage from the
Yajur Veda may be set against the hymns and lists in the Yajur and
Atharva Vedas, above alluded to,[74] in which Krittikā is celebrated in
the first, and Aswinī in the twenty-seventh place.
[74] V. p. 94.
The fact that the evidence as to the beginning of the year “in the
days of the Taittirîya Sanhitâ,” is, as it seems, so uncertain, and
so contradictory to the opinion based on the hymn in the Taittirîya
Brāhmana concerning Krittikā being the leader of the Nakshatras,
seems to add interest to the question whether there are, or are not,
indications in the Rig Veda that the Indian year was counted from the
same point on the ecliptic as at present?[75]
[75] At present the month Chaitra in most parts of India is the first
month of the Hindu year. The beginning of the year is measured by the
return of the sun to the same point in the Zodiac: at present the
beginning of the Lunar Mansion Aswinī. (See _Indian Calendar_, p. 45.)
And at once, as it seems to me, on turning to the Rig Veda, on page
after page, such indications are to be met with.
The first Nakshatra in the Indian series is named Aswinī (Aswins).
The two chief stars in that Nakshatra are the twin stars, as they may
fairly be called, α and β Arietis--stars of almost equal radiance. The
joyous hymns addressed to the twin heroes, the Aswins, I would claim as
new-year hymns composed in honour of these _stars_, whose appearance
before sunrise heralded the approach of the great festival-day of the
Hindu new year.
The Hindu year is a sidereal year. It is counted at present in most
parts of India from a fixed point on the ecliptic, not from a season.
It is a calendrical not a cosmic year. Only one apparently small change
in the method of counting the years would now require to be made, and
again the Aswins might be hymned by the Hindus as the “wondrous,” and
“not untruthful,” _stars_, marking by their heliacal rising a new
year’s festival--a festival to be held on the 15th, or full moon’s day.