Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c3: Preface
Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c3
- Language
- English
Preface
c3.1
The views about ancient India now held by scholars are based upon an examination of the Veda and Vedic literature, to the neglect of Purāṇic and epic tradition; that is, ancient Indian history has been fashioned out of compositions, which are purely religious and priestly, which notoriously do not deal with history, and which totally lack the historical sense. The extraordinary nature of such history may be perceived, if it were suggested that European history should be constructed merely out of theological literature. What would raise a smile if applied to Europe has been soberly accepted when applied to India. This contrast is full justification for a consideration of what historical tradition has to tell us, and the results obtained from an examination of Purāṇic and epic tradition as well as of the Rigveda and Vedic literature are set out in the following pages.
c3.2
Nothing herein has been the outcome of preconceived ideas, speculation, or haste. It began with a study of the epics and Purāṇas for geographical information about ancient India thirty years ago, during the translation of the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa, in order to elucidate its geographical chapters. Geography included political divisions, and led to an examination of ancient kingdoms, and so on to their dynastic genealogies and traditions—subjects that were generally regarded as of little or no historical value, and were practically neglected. With no views about ancient Indian historical tradition, and a desire merely to see whether there was any substance in it, it was collected, compared, and studied, and inferences were drawn therefrom, revised continually with fresh material, and discarded freely if they proved untenable—which is simply the scientific process of collecting and testing facts copiously before forming any opinion or theory. At length some substance and order seemed to manifest themselves, and certain results gradually took shape; and some of these have been published in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society during the last fourteen years. These results developed with further study in
c3.4
various directions, especially on the religious side, and all have been revised and recast repeatedly, as their mutual relations became more complex, with fresh material from all sources.
c3.5
The outcome of all these inquiries is set out here. No conclusion is put forward but what is based upon definite statements, and the authorities for every statement are cited. The results are totally different from the views now held by scholars as noticed above; yet there is nothing in them, as far as I am aware, really inconsistent with the most ancient book we possess, namely, the Rigveda, and they throw much new light thereon, and on all problems concerning ancient India. It remains however to be seen how far Professor M. Bloomfield’s recent book, *Rig-Veda Repetitions*, which should lead to some solid chronological results, will support what tradition indicates regarding the order of rishis.
c3.6
No pains have been spared to verify the references and make them complete and accurate. Unfortunately a few errors escaped notice in the proof-reading, and a considerable number of typographical blemishes have crept into the finally printed page, mostly the loss of diacritical marks which have failed or broken off in the printing, such as the stroke over the capital palatal sibilant, and the long mark over capital vowels. All these are exhibited in the list of Corrigenda at the end. I trust there are none others overlooked, yet feel sure that, if there are any, whether in the text or in the map, they can be readily corrected, and will not create any doubt as to what is intended.
c3.7
My sincere thanks are given to the University of Oxford and the Government of India for generous help towards lightening the cost of this book for the benefit of readers.
c3.8
OXFORD, March, 1922.