Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Cosmography and Geography in Early Indian Literature c5: Evidence of the Vedic Literature

Cosmography and Geography in Early Indian Literature c5

Language
English

Contents

Evidence of the Vedic Literature

1. Cosmography and Cosmogony

c5.s1.1

On the cosmographic and cosmogonic conceptions of the *Rgveda*, a distinguished authority has said, "Absolute definiteness or consistency in the statements of different poets or even the same poet could not reasonably be expected in such matters."¹ Another point to be remembered is that the hymns contained in the *Rgveda* were composed in a period covering several centuries,² so that whatever is mentioned in it may not be earlier than anything known from the other *Samhitās* and even the earlier *Brāhmaṇas*.

c5.s1.2

¹ Macdonell, *Vedic Mythology*, p. 10.

c5.s1.3

² Cf. Sircar, *The Śākta Pīṭhas*, p. 100. The *Rgveda* is assigned by some scholars to 1200-800 B.C., the other three *Samhitās* to 1000-800 B.C. and the *Brāhmaṇas* to 800-600 B.C. (*Camb. Hist. Ind.*, Vol. i, p. 697).

c5.s1.4

The *Rgveda* indicates the earth by various words such as *mahī* (the great), *pṛthivī*, *pṛthvī* or *urvī* (the broad), *uttānā* (the extended) and *apārā* (the boundless). The universe was conceived as consisting of either two or three units, i. e. of either the earth and the sky (heaven), or the earth, the air (atmosphere) and the sky. Often each of these constituents was regarded as having three parts or layers, so that there were either six units of three earths and three heavens or nine units of three earths, three atmospheres and three skies.³ The highest of the three earths was believed to have been inhabited by men just as the third or highest heaven was occupied by the gods, the fathers and Soma.⁴ The conception of three earths and of the highest earth is based on the belief about the existence of a nether world. The *Yajurveda* and *Atharvaveda* speak of the earth, air, heaven and the world of light, i.e. the vault of the sky.⁵

c5.s1.5

³ *Ved. Myth.*, p. 9.

c5.s1.6

⁴ Cf. *Vedic Index*, Vol. ii, p. 16 ; see *RV*, i. 34.8, etc. ; *AV*, vi. 21. 1, etc.

c5.s1.7

⁵ *VS*, xvii. 67 ; *AV*, iv. 14.3.

c5.s1.8

The earth and the sky (heaven) were sometimes conceived as circular like was void and nothing existed at the beginning; the undifferentiated waters were enveloped in darkness and space; heat produced the one primordial substance; then arose desire, the first seed of mind.²⁸ This is the bond between the existent and the non-existent, and the gods came into being by this emanation. The *Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa*²⁹ says that nothing existed formerly—neither heaven nor atmosphere, which ‘being non-existent resolved to come into being.’ Here the creator is Prajāpati, the anthropomorphic representation of the Ṛgvedic ‘desire, the first seed of mind’. According to the *Chāndogya Upaniṣad*,³⁰ the non-being became being which changed into an egg that split after a year and became heaven and earth, while the sun, which is Brahman, was also produced.

c5.s1.9

²⁸ x. 129 ; cf. x. 82. 6 (wherein we have also the germ of the story of Brahman, the creator, appearing on the lotus springing from Śeṣaśāyi-Viṣṇu’s navel) ; 121. 7 ; AV, ii. 8.

c5.s1.10

²⁹ ii. 2. 9. 1ff

c5.s1.11

³⁰ ii. 19. 1-4. The *Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad* (v. 6. 1) says that it was all waters at the beginning and they produced *satya* from which sprang Brahman, thence Prajāpati and thence the gods.

c5.s1.12

The starting point in these speculations is either Prajāpati desiring offspring and creating, or the primeval waters, on which floated the cosmic golden egg (*hiraṇyagarbha*) whence the spirit desiring and creating the universe is produced. “This fundamental contradiction as to the priority of Prajāpati or of the waters appears to be the result of combining the theory of evolution with that of creation.”³¹ The theory of creation is further developed in post-Vedic literature.³²

c5.s1.13

³¹ *Ved. Myth.*, p. 14.

c5.s1.14

³² Cf., e.g., *Manusmṛti*, i. 5ff. The world is stated here to have originally existed in the form that was unperceived, undifferentiated, incognitable and incognizable. It was brought into view by the self-born, unmanifest and inconceivable Supreme Being Hiraṇyagarbha who appeared by himself and, by mere willing, produced water out of his own body and threw in it the seed that became the golden egg. Hiraṇyagarbha himself was born in the egg as Brahman (also called Nārāyaṇa), the grandfather of the world. Brahman is the being produced by the unmanifest and eternal cause which partakes of the nature of the existent and the non-existent. The supreme Lord dwelt in the golden egg for a year and, by

c5.s1.15

forth the sun. Aditi’s eighth son, Mārtāṇḍa, was cast away by his mother who brought him up to be born and to die (i. e. to rise and to set).

c5.s1.16

Although the *Ṛgveda* knows the sea and refers to the treasures of the ocean (probably pearls or the gains of trade) and to marine navigation in the story of Bhujyu,³³ the important cosmogonic myth relating to the raising of the earth from the primeval waters by a boar, which later developed into the story of the Varāha avatāra of the god Viṣṇu, was conceived at a later period.³⁴ The idea appears to be connected with the conception of the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*³⁵ describing the earth as girdled by the ocean. The notion of the earth being encircled by waters has not been traced in the Saṃhitās, even though it was the dominant cosmographical conception of the later ages as we shall presently see.³⁶

c5.s1.17

³³ *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. ii, p. 432.

c5.s1.18

³⁴ Cf. *JRAS*, Vol. xxvii, 1895, pp. 178 ff. Prajāpati assumed the form of a boar in raising the earth from the waters.

c5.s1.19

³⁵ viii. 20.

c5.s1.20

³⁶ The conception of the earth having oceans on all its four sides later developed into that of India (often mentioned as ‘the earth’) being bounded by oceans on the east, west, south and north, even though there is no sea in the north of the country. In the *Ṛgveda* (vi. 58. 3 ; x. 98. 12 ; cf. *Nirukta*, ii. 10), the word *samudra* (sea) is used in the sense of *antarikṣa* or *dyauḥ*, so that the *catuḥ-samudra* idea may have originated from the four quarters of the sky. But the ocean to the north of India may have also been suggested by the deserts of Central Asia (e.g. the Gobi), called the *vāluk-ārṇava* or sea of sands in the *Mahābhārata* (xvii. 2. 1-2 ; cf. *Rājatarangiṇī*, iv. 172, 279, 294 ; viii. 2763). See Raychaudhuri, *Studies in Indian Antiquities*, 1958, p. 57, notes ; Stein, *Kalhaṇa’s Rājatarangiṇī*, vol. i, p. 138, note.

c5.s1.21

It is difficult to say whether the *Ṛgvedic* Aryans had any definite knowledge of the planets, although ‘the seven Ādityas’, ‘the five Adhvaryus’ and ‘the five Ukṣāṇaḥ (bulls)’ are regarded by different scholars as planets.³⁷ The *Taittirīya Saṃhitā*³⁸ regards Bṛhaspati (Jupiter) as the regent of Tiṣya, while the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*³⁹ applies the epithet *graha* to the sun. The *Maitrāyaṇī Upaniṣad*⁴⁰ uses the word in the sense of ‘a planet’ and the late *Taittirīya Āraṇyaka*⁴¹ seems to use the expression *sapta sūryāḥ* (seven suns) for the planets.

c5.s1.22

³⁷ *Ved. Ind.*, s. v. *graha* (Vol. i, p. 243).

c5.s1.23

³⁸ iv. 4. 10. 1.

c5.s1.24

³⁹ iv. 6. 5. 1.

c5.s1.25

⁴⁰ vi. 16.

c5.s1.26

⁴¹ i. 7.

c5.s1.27

his own thought, broke it into two parts out of which he formed heaven and earth and, between the two, the space, the quarters and the oceans.

c5.s1.28

A passage in the later strata of the *Ṛgveda*⁴² speaks of Soma on the lap of the nakṣatras probably meaning ‘the lunar mansions’. The *Taittirīya*⁴³ and *Kāṭhaka*⁴⁴ Saṃhitās mention Soma as married to the nakṣatras whose number in given in lists as 27 (beginning with Kṛttikā) or 28 (counting Abhijit).⁴⁵

c5.s1.29

⁴² x. 85. 2. The *Ṛgveda* also mentions Tiṣya, the Aghās (Maghās—plural) and Arjunī (Phalguni—dual). See V. 59. 13 ; X. 64. 8 ; X. 85. 13.

c5.s1.30

⁴³ ii. 3. 5. 1-3.

c5.s1.31

⁴⁴ xi. 3.

c5.s1.32

⁴⁵ 4 . The *Taittirīya Saṃhitā* (vii. 4. 8. 1-2) and the Brāhmaṇas regard the full-moon in Phalguni as the mukha (i.e. beginning) of the year.

2. Geographical Ideas

c5.s2.1

The *Ṛgveda* generally mentions tribes or clans and not geographical areas particularly. But the expression Sapta Sindhavaḥ, literally meaning ‘the Seven Rivers’, is also used, in one instance at least, as the designation of a definite country no doubt comprising the valleys of the rivers in question.⁴⁶ The seven rivers are often taken to be the five Punjab streams (viz. the Jhelam, Chenab, Ravi, Satlaj and Beas) together with the Indus and the Sarasvatī, though some scholars are inclined to substitute the Sarasvatī by the Kabul or the Oxus, there being also a view that no importance need be attached to ‘seven’ which was a favourite conventional number both in the *Rgveda* and in later works.⁴⁷ A hymn of the latest stratum of the *Rgveda* seems to exhibit the knowledge of the eastern and the western sea, i.e. the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea.48

c5.s2.2

⁴⁶ viii. 24 ; cf. i. 32. 12 ; 34. 8 ; etc. Hillebrandt’s attempt to trace certain Iranian tribes and rivers in the *Ṛgveda* has not convinced scholars while Raychaudhuri’s reference to *praīn-aukas* in *RV*, x. 30. 9 is meaningless since it does not mean ‘the original home’ of the Aryans outside India (cf. *Stud. Ind. Ant.*, pp. 53ff). Even the tradition about Indra bringing the Yadu and Turvaśa from a distant land is of little importance in this connection since the Gandhāri and Bālhika were also distant peoples according to the later Saṃhitās. We do not attach any importance to H. K. Deb’s philological speculations, viz. Asita-Dhānva=Esarhaddon, Matsyasāmmada=Mesesimordakos, and Tārkṣya=Tearkon. See *JRASB*, Letters, Vol. xiv, 1948, pp. 121-43 ; Vol. xv, 1949, pp. 125 ff. It may be pointed out here that Phoenician trade with South India has been traced from the fact that peacocks brought by Hiram’s ships to Solomon are called *tuki* derived from Tamil *togai*. It is said that the trade between Egypt and Yemen began about 2300 B.C. and between Yemen and India about 1000 B.C. Indian teak wood is believed to have been found in Babylonian

c5.s2.3

⁴⁷ *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. ii, p. 424.
48. x. 136. 5
49. i. 7. 3. 8.
50. xi. 4. 1. 1 ; cf. *Gopatha Brāhmaṇa*, i. 3. 6.

c5.s2.4

A division of the country into zones, i.e. one in the central area and the others on its borders in the different directions, developed in the later Vedic ages. The *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*49 mentions the Prācyas or the peoples of the eastern country and also the Bāhīkas as the people of the west. The same work further refers to the Udīcya Brāhmaṇas (i.e. the Brāhmaṇas of Uttarāpatha or the North).50 Post-Vedic literature applies the name Bāhīka to the tribes of the Punjab called Pañcanada in the *Mahābhārata*.⁵¹ The *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*52 mentions the Madhyamā Diś, ‘the Central or Middle Region’, as well as the regions in the east (Prācya), south (Dakṣiṇa), west (Pratīcya) and north (Udīcya). Amongst the peoples of the outer zones, mention is made of the Sātvats ruled by kings styled Bhoja in the south (probably in the Berar region) and of the Uttara-Kurus and Uttara-Madras beyond the Himavat in the north. More interesting is the reference to the central zone.

c5.s2.5

⁵¹ Sircar, *Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind.*, pp. 184 ff.
52. viii 14.
53. viii. 14. 3.

c5.s2.6

The geographical name Madhyadeśa is post-Vedic; but the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*53 indicates the same name by the expression *dhruvā madhyamā pratiṣṭhā diś*, ‘the firmly established Middle Region’, and the Kurus (probably of the tract comprising the Ambala, Delhi and Meerut regions), the Pañcālas (probably of the region comprising the Bareilly and Farrukhabad areas), the Vaśas and the Uśīnaras

c5.s2.7

remains of the 3rd millennium B.C. The form of the Indian oblong sarcophagi is said to be similar to that of similar objects at Gahrarch near Bagdad. The custom of urn-burial of the whole body (not merely of the cremated ashes) in large jars has been traced at places from Sind to Tiruelveli and similar jars occur in Babylonia. Hall thinks of the possibility of the Sumerian civilization being developed in India. See Taylor, *Alphabet*, Vol. ii, pp. 313, 315 ; Hall, *Hist. N. East*, 7th ed., pp. 171, 173-74 ; *Ind. Ant.*, Vol. v, p. 255 ; *JBORS*, Vol. vi, p. 194 ; etc. But we are concerned here with geographical knowledge as revealed by Indian literature and not with India’s contact with the outside world as suggested by archaeological evidence. See also below.

c5.s2.8

are mentioned as inhabiting the said tract. This Middle Land seems to have been regarded as bounded in the east by the countries of the Kośalas and the Videhas and in the west by the desert, i. e. the Maru or Marwar region or the present Rajputana desert. Among the later Saṃhitās and Brāhmaṇas which are believed by scholars to have been composed in the said region, the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa⁵⁴ alludes to the Aryanisation of the Kośala-Videha territory from the Kuru-Pañcāla country, while both the Śatapatha⁵⁵ and the Aitareya⁵⁶ mention the tribes of the western region with disapproval. The Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra⁵⁷ mentions the same Middle Region as Āryāvarta (the land primarily inhabited by the Aryans and dominated by Aryan culture) and defines it as the territory lying to the east of Adarśana (Vinaśana where the Sarasvatī lost herself in the sands near Kurukṣetra),⁵⁸ to the west of Kālaka-vana (probably near Allahabad), to the south of the Himavat (Himālaya) and to the north of the Pāriyātra or Pāripātra (the western Vindhyas with the Aravali range). According to a different view quoted in the same work,⁵⁹ Āryāvarta lay between the Gaṅgā and the Yamunā while, in the same context, the Bhāllavins are said to have regarded the holy land lying between the region of the sunrise and the Sindhu as well as the Visaraṇi (or Vidhāvanī, etc.) as Brahmavarcasa.⁶⁰ It is interesting to note that Āryāvarta of the Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra later became famous as Madhyadeśa, ‘the Middle Country’, the Manusmṛti⁶¹ defining it as the land betwen the Himavat in the north and the Vindhya in the south and between Vinaśana in the west and Prayāga (Allahabad) in the east. In their eagerness to include the land of the Buddha’s birth and activities in the holy territory of the Madhyadeśa, some Buddhist writers give its boundaries as Kajaṅgala (near modern Rajmahal) in the east, the river Śarāvatī in the south-east, the town of Śvetakarṇika in the south, the town and district of Sthūṇa in the west and Mount Uśīradhvaja in the north,⁶² while others would make them Puṇḍravardhana (modern Mahasthan in the Bogra District) in the east, the river Śarāvatī in the south, the Brāhmaṇa villages Sthūṇa and Upasthūṇa in the west and the Uśīragiri in the north.⁶³ But medieval works like Rājaśekhara’s Kāvyamīmāṃsā state that the countries of the East (Pūrva-deśa), South (Dakṣiṇāpatha), West (Paścād-deśa), and North (Uttarāpatha) lay respectively beyond Vārāṇasī, Māhiṣamatī (on the Narmadā), Devasabhā (modern Dewas) and Pṛthūdaka (modern Pehoa), all lying on the borders of Madhyadeśa.⁶⁴

c5.s2.9

⁵⁴ i. 4. 1.

c5.s2.10

⁵⁵ ix. 3. 1. 8.

c5.s2.11

⁵⁶ iii. 44. 3.

c5.s2.12

⁵⁷ i. 1 .2. 9ff. This work regards the Avanti, Aṅga, Magadha, Surāṣṭra, Dakṣiṇāpatha, Upāvṛt, Sindhu and Sauvira, who apparently lived on the borders of Āryāvarta, as saṅkīrṇa-yoni, i.e. exhibiting an admixture of Aryan and Non-Aryan blood and culture (i. 2. 14-16). The same section prescribes purification by the performance of Punastoma or Sarvapṛṣṭhā for people visiting the lands of the Āraṭṭa, Kāraskara, Puṇḍra, Sauvira, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga and Prāṇūna. A gāthā, further quoted in the work, also disapproves visit to the Kaliṅga country. Cf. Sircar, Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind., pp. 172, 178.

c5.s2.13

⁵⁸ Vinaśana is mentioned in the Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa (xxv. 10. 6), Jaiminīya Upaniṣad Brāhmaṇa (iv. 26) and some other works of later Vedic literature. The Mahābhārata (iii. 82. 111) applies the name Vinaśana to the place where the Sarasvatī disappears while medieval lexicons identify Vinaśana, the western boundary of Āryāvarta according to the Manusmṛti, with Kurukṣetra. The Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (viii. 21. 12) mentions the maru (deserts) as the utkara (i.e. mound of earth thrown up from the excavation of an altar) of Kurukṣetra.

c5.s2.14

⁵⁹ i. 1.2. 10. (Vasiṣṭha, i. 12). For the Tantric conception of Āryāvarta covering only the eastern Districts of U. P., see Sircar, Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind., p. 99.

c5.s2.15

⁶⁰ i. 1. 2. 11-12 (Vasiṣṭha, i. 14-15). According to Śaṅkhalikhita, Brahmavarcasa lay to the east of Sindhu and Sauvīra, to the south of the Himavat, to the west of Kāmpilya and to the north of the Pāriyātra, while Paiṭhinasi seems to refer to the same holy land as stretching as far as the Himavat, the Kumārī, the Sindhu and Vaitaraṇī (i.e. Visaraṇī, etc.) and the land of the sun-rise (Sircar, op. cit., p. 172, note 3).

c5.s2.16

⁶¹ ii. 21. The same work further says that the holy Brahmarṣi-deśa was the name of the land comprising Kurukṣetra and the territories of the Matsyas, Pañcālas and Śūrasenakas, while the tract called Brahmāvarta is defined by it as the holiest area lying between the rivers Sarasvatī and Dṛṣadvatī (ii. 17 and 19). The said four tracts are said to have produced the best warriors (vii. 193). The Brāhmaṇas of the Kuru-Pañcāla country are famous in the Upaniṣads (Ved. Ind., Vol. i, p. 165) and those of Kānyakubja, Śrāvasti and Kolāñca (Kroḍāñca) enjoyed high social prestige in Eastern India during the early medieval period (Sircar, Stud. Soc. Ad. Anc. Med. Ind., pp. 12ff).

c5.s2.17

⁶² Cf. Mahāvagga, v. 12. 13.

c5.s2.18

⁶³ Divyāvadāna, ed. Cowell and Neil, p. 22.

c5.s2.19

⁶⁴ G.O.S. ed., pp. 93-94. See below.

c5.s2.20

The mention of a river called Śarāvatī at the eastern or south-eastern boundary of the Madhyadeśa reminds us of the well-known tradition according to which Northern India was divided by the Śarāvatī into two parts, viz. Prācya to its south-east and Udīcya to its north-west. This division was apparently known to Pāṇini and the later grammarians, while the Amarakosa gives it in clear terms. Medieval lexicons like Yādavaprakāśa’s Vaijayantī also say the same thing, but add that the Madhya-deśa stood between Prācya and Udīcya, even though the two statements are conflicting. That the identity of the Śarāvatī was gradually forgotten is clear from Sarvānanda’s commentary on the Amarakosa, according to which it ran from the North-Eastern Bhārata-varṣa to the Western Ocean (Arabian Sea). There is really no such river in India.⁶⁵

c5.s2.21

⁶⁵ See Sircar, Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind., pp. 209ff. ; Pāṇini, 4. 1. 157, etc., and 4. 1, 17, etc. Amara (ii. 1. 6-7) has—Śarāvatyās=tu yo’=vadheḥ | deśaḥ Prāg-dakṣiṇaḥ Prācya Udīcyaḥ paścim-ottaraḥ || The Vaijayantī (Bhūmi, iii. 22) says—prāg-dakṣiṇaḥ Śarāvatyāḥ Prācyo’=syāḥ paścim-ottaraḥ | Udīcyo Madhyadeśas=tu deśo yo madhyamas=tayoḥ ||

c5.s2.22

An interesting geographical name is Kurukṣetra or the field of the Kuru people. It is mentioned in the later Vedic texts as a particularly sacred territory.⁶⁶ It was the country watered by the Sarasvatī, Dṛṣadvatī and Āpayā and probably by another stream called Pastyā. There was in Kurukṣetra the Śaraṇyāvat which was probably a lake like the Anyataḥplakṣa known from the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. According to the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, Kurukṣetra was bounded by the Khāṇḍava on the south, the Tūrghṇa on the north and the Parīṇaḥ on the west. It corresponded roughly with modern Sirhind or the Karnal-Ambala region of the Eastern Punjab.⁶⁷ Like the kṣetra of the Kurus, a plain called Varṣiṣṭhīya, on which Śibi Auśīnara performed sacrifices, is mentioned in the Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra.⁶⁸

c5.s2.23

⁶⁶ Ved. Ind., Vol. i, p. 169. According to the epico-Puranic tradition, the Paurava or Bhārata king Kuru, son of Saṃvaraṇa, cultivated the field and settled therein, so that it became famous as king Kuru’s field. But this tradition appears to be opposed to the evidence of the Vedic literature.

c5.s2.24

⁶⁷ Cf. ibid., p. 170.

c5.s2.25

⁶⁸ xxi. 104. 3.

c5.s2.26

The conception regarding the divine character of the Sarasvatī and the holiness of Kurukṣetra leads us to the question of tīrtha-yātrā or pilgrimage to holy places for the sake of religious merit. We have elsewhere suggested that tīrtha-yātrā was a Nonaryan religious institution which took some time in being fully approved by the Brahmanical society.⁶⁹ The Nirukta (12. 19) of Yāska, who is assigned to a date between 500 and 700 B.C., while explaining the Ṛgvedic passage tredhā nidadhe padam, quotes an earlier authority named Aurnavābha as saying that Viṣṇu plants his foot at Samārohaṇa, Viṣṇupada and Gayaśiras, the last of the three holy spots being no doubt identical with modern Gayā in Bihar. We have seen above how the Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra prescribes expiation for visit to the lands of the Āraṭṭa, Kāraskara, Puṇḍra, Sauvīra, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga and Prāṇūna peoples. Another traditional verse apparently of a later date, however, says that punaḥ-saṃskāra is not required if one visits the Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Saurāṣṭra and Magadha countries for the purpose of pilgrimage.⁷⁰ This would refer to a date earlier than the Manusmṛti which, as we have seen, includes most of the said territories in Āryāvarta. A khila verse placed in the Ṛgveda (x. 75) mentions Prayāga, i.e. the holy confluence of rivers which was often selected for the performance of sacrifice (prayāga), the Gaṅgā-Yamunā-saṅgama near Allahabad being regarded as the most celebrated among such confluences in the later days.

c5.s2.27

⁶⁹ Sircar, Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind., p. 229.

c5.s2.28

⁷⁰ Ibid., p. 178, note.

c5.s2.29

The conception of the Cakravarti-kṣetra, i.e. the sphere of influence of an Indian Cakravartin or emperor, fully developed in the post-Vedic age apparently after the growth of the first historical empire of India under the Bimbisarians, the Śaiśunāgas, the Nandas and the Mauryas.⁷¹ This sphere was regarded as co-extensive with the whole land bounded by the Himalayan region in the north and the seas on the other three sides and was often mentioned as ‘the whole earth.’⁷² The germ of the conception can, however, be traced in the later Vedic literature since the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa⁷³ quotes a gāthā to the effect that king Bharata, who was the son of Duṣyanta and is represented in the Mahābhārata⁷⁴ as a Cakravartin and Sārvabhauma (universal monarch), celebrated more than a thousand Aśvamedha sacrifices ‘after having conquered the whole earth’. The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa⁷⁵ has a similar statement in respect of Janamejaya, son of Parikṣit. In the inscriptions of Aśoka, the Maurya king of the third century B. C. sometimes refers to his empire as pṛthivī (the earth) or as Jambu-dvīpa which later came to be a name of India or the earth.⁷⁶ The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa speaking of Samrāṭs in the eastern country, apparently referring to monarchs enjoying a higher political status than the Rājan and also overlordship over the Rājans,⁷⁷ probably gave rise to the epico-Puranic story of king Jarāsandha of Magadha represented as the emperor of Eastern India.⁷⁸ But the Aitareya also refers to the possibility for a king to attain supremacy over all kings, to possess the entire earth bounded by the ocean—from one end to the other, and to become the Ekarāṭ (sole monarch), and there may be an echo, in the passage, of the expansion of the kingdom of Magadha in Eastern India, under king Śiśunāga (c. 414-396 B.C.) for the first time, over the whole land between the Bay of Bengal in the east and the Arabian Sea in the west.⁷⁹

c5.s2.30

⁷¹ In the present state of our knowledge, it is not possible to believe in the historicity of an earlier Magadha empire under Jarāsandha many centuries before the beginning of Magadhan expansion in the age of the Buddha (566-486 B.C.) under Bimbisāra and Ajātaśatru.

c5.s2.31

⁷² Cf. Sircar, Stud. Geog. Anc. Med. Ind., pp. 2ff.

c5.s2.32

⁷³ xiii. 5. 4. 13—para-sahasrān=Indrāy=aśvān=medhyān=ya āharad=vijitya pṛthivīm sarvām.

c5.s2.33

⁷⁴ i. 73. 129.

c5.s2.34

⁷⁵ viii. 21—samantaṃ sarvataḥ pṛthivīṃ jayan pariyāy=āśvena ca medhyen=eje. Cf. also viii. 23 for a similar statement regarding the Pañcāla king Durmukha.

c5.s2.35

⁷⁶ See Select Inscriptions, 2nd ed. p. 23 (note 6) and p. 48.

c5.s2.36

⁷⁷ The Aitareya (viii. 14) says, “Whatever kings there are of the eastern peoples, they are anointed for overlordship (sāmrājya).” The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa (v. 1. 1. 12-1) also says how rājya (office of a Rājan) is lower than sāmrājya (office of a Samrāṭ) and how one who has been a Rājan by offering rājasūya wants to become a Samrāṭ by offering vājapeya. The Samrāṭ enjoying a higher status than the Rājan is also known from the Ṛgveda (Ved. Ind., Vol. ii, p. 433).

c5.s2.37

⁷⁸ Cf. Mahābhārata, ii. 19 (cf. verses 10-11). The description of Jarāsandha in the Mahābhārata reminds us of the summary account of Mahāpadma Nanda in the Purāṇas (Pargiter, The Purāṇa Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age, p. 25). It has to be noticed that Jarāsandha is conspicuous by his non-mention in the Vedic literature.

c5.s2.38

⁷⁹ See Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, viii. 15 : sa ya icched=evamvit kṣatriyam=ayaṃ sarvā jitīr=jayet=ayaṃ sarvāṃ=llokān vindet=āyaṃ sarveṣāṃ rājñām śraiṣṭhyam=atiṣṭhāṃ paramatāṃ gaccheta sāmrājyam bhaujyam svārājyam vairājyam pārameṣṭhyam rājyam māhārājyam=ādhipatyam=ayaṃ samanta-paryāyī syāt Sārvabhaumaḥ sarv-āyuṣa ā=ntād=ā

3. Mountains and Rivers

c5.s3.1

Of the mountains, the *Rgveda* mentions only a few, such as the Himavat⁸⁰ (the Himalayas together with other systems such as the Suleiman range) and the Mūjavat⁸¹ (called Muñjavat in later works and located in the Himalayas). The later Saṃhitās and Brāhmaṇas speak of the Trikakud or Trikakubh (modern Trikota in the Himalayas),⁸² while the *Taittirīya Āraṇyaka* refers to the Krauñca, Mahāmeru (i.e. Meru or Sumeru) and Maināka (or Maināga), all of them to be located in or about the Himalayan region.⁸³ The mountain on which Manu’s vessel rested after the subsidence of the Great Deluge is called ‘Manu’s Avasarpaṇa’ in the

c5.s3.2

⁸⁰ x. 121. 4.
81. x. 34.

c5.s3.3

⁸² *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. i. p.

c5.s3.4

⁸³ *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. i, p. 200 ; Vol. ii., pp. 141, 180.

c5.s3.5

parārdhāt pṛthivyāḥ samudra-paryantāyā Ekarāḍ=iti tam=eten=aindreṇa mahābhiṣekeṇa Kṣatriyam śāpayitv=ābhiṣiñcet, “If he, who knows thus, should desire of a Kṣatriya, ‘May he win all victories, find all the worlds, attain the superiority, pre-eminence and supremacy over all kings and overlordship, paramount rule, self-rule, sovereignty, supreme authority, kingship, great kingship and suzerainty ; may he be all-encompassing, possessed of all the earth, possessed of all life, from the one end upto the further side of the earth bounded by the ocean, sole ruler,’ he should anoint him with the great anointment of Indra, after adjuring him.” Cf. Raychaudhuri, *PHAI*, 1938, pp. 139, 178 ff. ; also Sircar, *Inscriptions of Aśoka*, p. 10. The suggestion offered above would mean that all sections of the *Śatapatha* and *Aitareya Brāhmaṇas* may not be earlier than c. 400 B.C. Although the gradation of the different types of rulers cannot be regarded as strictly historical, it is less fanciful than the Buddhist conception about the ruler of the whole earth of 4 continents, of only one continent and of a part of one of the continents.

c5.s3.6

¹ Soma is called *Maujavata* meaning ‘from the Mūjavat’, the reference being to Mount Mūjavat according to Yāska. The Mūjavat are mentioned as a distant people in the later Saṃhitās.

c5.s3.7

³²⁹ Some scholars believe that the Seven Mountains called the Doors of Heaven are mentioned in the *Taittirīya Saṃhitā* (iii. 12. 2. 9 ; vi. 2. 4. 3). See Hopkins, *Epic Mythology*, p. 9, note ; Raychaudhuri, *Stud. Ind. Ant.*, p. 90, note.

c5.s3.8

Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa.⁸⁴ The Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad⁸⁵ mentions the Dakṣiṇa-parvata probably meaning the Vindhyan range. The Pāriyātra is mentioned in the Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra as we have seen above.

c5.s3.9

⁸⁴ i. 8. 1. 8. Its epic name is Naubandhana (Ved. Ind., Vol. ii, p. 130).

c5.s3.10

⁸⁵ ii. 8.

c5.s3.11

The Ṛgvedic Aryans regarded some of the rivers as divinities. Thus the Sarasvatī is called devitamā (the best among the goddesses).⁸⁶ In the Āprī hymns, she is associated with the goddess Bhāratī who was the divine protective power of the Bharata people dwelling in the Sarasvatī valley.⁸⁷ It is well known that the goddess Sarasvatī=Bhāratī became a famous deity in later times.

c5.s3.12

⁸⁶ ii. 41. 16.

c5.s3.13

⁸⁷ Ved. Ind., Vol. ii. p. 97.

c5.s3.14

There is a eulogy of rivers, containing the following names, in the latest section of the Ṛgveda.

c5.s3.15

1. Sindhu—the Indus ; rises in Tibet, passes through Kashmir, the Punjab and Sind and discharges its waters into the Arabian Sea.

c5.s3.16

2. Gaṅgā—the Ganges ; rising in the Himalayas, it appears near Gaṅgotri (lat. 30⁰ 56′, long. 79⁰ 56′) in Garhwal, runs through U. P., Bihar and Bengal and discharges its waters into the Bay of Bengal.

c5.s3.17

3. Yamunā—the Jumna ; runs from Garhwal through the Eastern Punjab and North-Western U.P. and joins the Gaṅgā at Prayāga (near Allahabad).

c5.s3.18

4. Sarasvatī—modern Sarsūtī ; rises in Sirmur, passes by Thanesar in the Ambala District and loses itself in the sands of Patiala ; originally a large river flowing to the Arabian Sea ; in some cases, Hillebrandt is inclined to identify the Sarasvatī with Iranian Harakhvaiti (Helmund) which gave the name to Arachosia (the Kandahar region of Afghanistan).

c5.s3.19

5. Śutudrī—post-Vedic Śatadru, modern Satlaj ; the most easterly of the Punjab rivers ; rising in the further Himalayas, it runs through the Punjab as the boundary between the Hoshiarpur and Jalandhar Districts on the right and the Ambala and Ludhiana Districts on the left and joins the Beas in lat. 31⁰ 11′, long. 75⁰ 4′ ; originally flowing independently into the Rann of Kutch.

c5.s3.20

6. Paruṣṇī—later Irāvatī, modern Rāvi ; rises in Kulu in the Kangra District and joins the Chenab in lat. 30⁰ 31′, long. 71⁰ 51′.

c5.s3.21

7. Asiknī—later Candrabhāgā, modern Chenab ; rises in Lahul in the Himalayas, runs through Kashmir and the Punjab and joins first the Jhelam and then the Rāvi.

c5.s3.22

8. Marudvṛdhā—regarded by some as the combined stream of the Asiknī and Vitastā; but the name is apparently the same as that of modern Maru-wardwan which joins the Chenab at Kistawar in Kashmir.

c5.s3.23

9. Vitastā—modern Jhelam; rises in Kashmir, passes through Kashmir and the Punjab and joins the Chenab in lat. 31⁰ 11′, long. 72⁰ 12′.

c5.s3.24

10. Suṣomā—probably modern Suwan or Sohan which runs through the Rawalpindi and Jhelam Districts and joins the Indus near Mokhad.

c5.s3.25

11. Ārjīkiyā—the Vipāś or Beas according to Yāska, though identified by some scholars with Arghesan, a tributary of the Arghanab; associated with the Ārjīka people.

c5.s3.26

12. Tṛṣṭāmā.

c5.s3.27

13. Susartū—some tributary of the Sindhu.

c5.s3.28

14. Rasā—supposed by some scholars to be the same as Avestic Raṅhā or the Araxes or Jaxartes (Syr Darya) in Central Asia.

c5.s3.29

15. Śvetī or Śvetyā—probably a tributary of the Sindhu; identified by some scholars with the Swat.

c5.s3.30

16. Krumu—modern Kurum; a western tributary of the Sindhu; rises in the Safed Koh, passes through Afghanistan and the Bannu District and joins the Indus near Isakhel in lat. 32⁰ 37′, long. 71⁰ 22′.

c5.s3.31

17. Gomatī—modern Gomal, a western tributary of the Sindhu; passes through the Dera Ismail Khan District and gives the name to the Gomal pass, the middle route from India to Afghanistan.

c5.s3.32

18. Kubhā—the Kabul, a western tributary of the Sindhu; runs through Afghanistan and the Peshawar District.

c5.s3.33

9 Mehatnū—probably a tributary of the Krumu or a western tributary of the Sindhu.⁸⁸

c5.s3.34

⁸⁸ x. 75. Most of the rivers are mentioned in stanzas 5-6 :

c5.s3.35

A significant omission from the above list is the well-known name of the

c5.s3.36

Imam me Gaṅge Yamune Sarasvati
Śutudri stomaṃ sacatā Paruṣṇyā |
Asiknyā Marudvṛdhe Vitastay=Ā-
rjikiye śṛṇuhyā Suṣomayā ||
Tṛṣṭāmayā prathamam yātave sajūḥ
Susartvā Rasayā Śvetyā tyā |
tvam Sindho Kubhayā Gomatīm Krumum
Mehatnvā saratham yābhir=īyase ||

c5.s3.37

Dṛṣadvatī (literally ‘the stony’) which flows into the Sarasvatī after running parallel to it for some distance, its modern name being Citang, Citrang or Cautang, though some writers prefer its identification with the Rakṣi which flows by the south-east of Thanesar, while a few earlier authors proposed to identify it with the Ghaggar.⁸⁹ Besides the above, the Ṛgveda also mentions the following rivers.

c5.s3.38

⁸⁹ Vedic Index, Vol. i, p. 374.

c5.s3.39

1. Anitabhā.
2. Yavyāvatī—identified by Sāyaṇa with Hariyūpīyā ; Hillebrandt identifies it with the Djob.
3. Vipāś—later Vipāśā, modern Beas ; rises in Lahul in the Himalayas, passes through Mandi and the Punjab and joins the Satlaj at Endrisa near Hureki on the borders of Kapurthala.
4. Vibāli.
5. Śiphā.
6. Sarayu—reminds us of the name Sarayū applied to two tributaries of the Ghogra in Eastern U.P., now called Eastern and Western Sarju, though the Ṛgvedic river is often identified by scholars with the united course of the Śutudrī and Vipāś.
7. Suvāstu—modern Swat ; runs through the Peshawar District and joins the Kubhā or Kabul at Nisatha.
8. Hariyūpīyā—the Yavyāvatī according to Sāyaṇa ; Hillebrandt identifies it with the Iranian river Iryab or Haliab ; some scholars are inclined to associate the name with modern Harappa in the Montgomery District.⁹⁰

c5.s3.40

⁹⁰ Ved. Ind., Vol. i. p. 22 ; Vol. ii, pp. 188, 301, 302, 380, 433-34, 460, 499.

c5.s3.41

According to some, the following names occur in stanzas 7-8 of the hymn—(1) Ṛjitī, (2) Enī, (3) Ruśatī, (4) Citrā, (5) Ūrṇāvatī, (6) Hiraṇmayī and (7) Śilamāvatī.⁹¹ Scholars have further traced the names of the following rivers in the Ṛgveda—(1) Añjasī, (2) Amśumatī, (3) Aśmanvatī, (4) Kulīśī and (5) Virapatnī.⁹²

c5.s3.42

⁹¹ See Majumdar Sastri, Cunningham's Ancient Geography of India, p. xl.

c5.s3.43

⁹² Cf. Majumdar Sastri, loc. cit. According to RV, viii. 96. 13-15, a certain Kṛṣṇa living with an army of 10,000 on the bank of the Amśumatī, was killed by Indra with all his retinue.

c5.s3.44

Among rivers referred to in other works of the Vedic literature, mention may be made of the following.

c5.s3.45

1. Revā—name of the Narmadā in post-Vedic literature ; probably alluded to in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa.

c5.s3.46

2. Varaṇāvavatī—known from the Atharvaveda; identified by Ludwig with the Ganges.
3. Sadānīrā—same as the Karatoyā according to the lexicons; but mentioned in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa as the boundary between the lands of the Kośalas and the Videhas; may be any of the rivers now called Ghogra, Rāptī and Gaṇḍak.
4. Sudāman—known from the Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa.⁹⁸

c5.s3.47

⁹⁸ Ibid., Vol. ii, pp. 226, 244, 421-22, 454.

4. Peoples and their Countries

c5.s4.1

The Ṛgveda mentions a number of peoples whose territories were apparently known after their own names. This tendency is responsible for the development of the grammatical convention according to which the names of countries were used in the plural in the Sanskrit language. There was a group of five tribes collectively called the Pañca Janāḥ (Mānuṣāḥ, Mānavāḥ and Kṛṣṭayaḥ) who lived on the Sarasvatī and are often identified by scholars with the Anu, Druhyu, Turvaśa and Pūru peoples.⁹⁴

c5.s4.2

⁹⁴ Ibid., Vol. i. pp. 466 ff.

c5.s4.3

Among the various tribes or clans known from the Ṛgveda, we may mention the following.

c5.s4.4

1. Aja—defeated by the Tṛtsus under Sudās in the dāśarājña or battle of the ten kings; fought with the aid of the Yakṣu and Śigru under the leadership of Bheḍa.
2. Anu—mentioned along with clans like the Yadu, Turvaśa, Druhyu and Pūru, the five names being applied in post-Vedic literature to the five sons of king Yayāti of the lunar race; dwelt on the Paruṣṇī.
3. Alina—probably defeated by Sudās together with the Paktha, Bhalānas, Śiva and Viṣāṇin on the Paruṣṇī.
4. Kikaṭa—mentioned in the Ṛgveda (and nowhere else in the Vedic literature); identified with the Magadha in post-Vedic literature, though their location in the age of the Ṛgveda cannot be definitely determined.
5. Kuru—alluded to in the Ṛgvedic reference to the name Kuruśravaṇa and epithet Kaurayāṇa, but mentioned as a people, often jointly with the Pañcāla (cf. Vaikarṇa) and sometimes in association with the Sṛñjaya, in the later Saṃhitās and Brāhmaṇas; the Ṛgvedic Tṛtsu-Bharata people who defeated the Pūru are supposed to have later merged with their subdued enemies to form the Kuru clan, although the later tradition of the epics and the Purāṇas represents king Kuru as a descendant of kings Bharata and Puru (same as Ṛgvedic Pūru), so that his successors were called Kaurava (or Kuru), Paurava (or Puru) and Bhārata (or Bharata); the Kurus are obviously associated with the Sarasvatī-Dṛṣadvatī valley which became famous as the holy Kurukṣetra (land of the Kuru people) although, as we have seen above, later tradition explains the name by regarding it as the field cultivated by king Kuru of the Paurava-Bhārata clan; the Śāṅkhāyana Śrautasūtra refers to a curse which led the Kurus being driven away from Kurukṣetra. For a northern branch of the Kuru people, see infra.

c5.s4.5

6. Krivi—settled on the Sindhu and Asiknī according to Ṛgvedic evidence; they combined with the Turvaśa and other tribes to give rise to the Pañcāla people; the older name of the Pañcāla according to the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa.

c5.s4.6

7. Gandhārī—later on famous as Gandhāra; the Śatapatha and Aitareya Brāhmaṇas mention Nagnajit the Gandhāra, i.e. king of the Gandhāra, who is mentioned in the Pali literature as the king of Kaśmīra-Gandhāra with his capital at Takṣaśilā; post-Vedic tradition locates the Gandhāra in the Rawalpindi and Peshawar areas.

c5.s4.7

8. Cedi—mentioned in the dānastuti or ‘praise of gifts’ at the end of a Ṛgvedic hymn; later tradition locates them in the Ken valley in Bundelkhand.

c5.s4.8

9. Turvaśa—often mentioned in the Ṛgveda in association with the Yadu, the two being mentioned as brought by Indra from a distant land; they attacked Divodāsa, but were defeated by the latter’s son Sudās; later they merged with the Krivis, etc., to give rise to the Pañcāla people; associated with the Pañcālas according to the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa; post-Vedic literature spells the name as Turvasu and makes it the name of one of the five sons of Yayāti of the lunar race (cf. Pūru, etc.).

c5.s4.9

10. Tṛtsu—helped Sudās in his battle against the ten kings; intimately associated with the Bharata; members of the royal family of the Bharatas according to some scholars.

c5.s4.10

11. Druhyu—one of the Pañca Janāḥ; their king was defeated by Sudās; Druhyu is regarded in later tradition as the name of one of the five sons of king Yayāti, the others being Anu, Turvasu, Yadu and Puru (cf. Turvaśa and Pūru).

c5.s4.11

12. Paktha—one of the tribes opposing the Tṛtsu-Bharatas in the dāśarājña or battle of the ten kings; identified with the modern Pakhtun people.

c5.s4.12

13. Paṇi—a tribe that opposed Divodāsa; probably a Nonaryan people noted as traders; seem to have been associated with another people called Bekanāṭa, although the word bekanāṭa is often taken to mean ‘a usurer’. Hillebrandt identifies the Paṇi with the Parnians of Iran just as he regards the Dāsa as the same as the Dahae.

c5.s4.13

14. Parśu—Ludwig finds reference in the Ṛgveda to the Parśu or Persian (brought into special relation with the Yadu in viii. 6. 46) and to the Pṛthu or Parthava, i.e. the Parthian.

c5.s4.14

15. Pārāvata—a people living on the Yamunā and probably also on the Sarasvati.

c5.s4.15

16. Pūru—a people living on the Sarasvatī; sometimes mentioned along with the Anu, Druhyu, Turvaśa and Yadu (cf. Pañca Janāḥ); enemies of Sudās in the story of the battle of the ten kings; later merged in the Kuru people; the name is spelt as Puru in the epico-Puranic tradition which makes Puru, Anu, Yadu, Turvasu and Druhyu the five sons of king Yayāti of the lunar race.

c5.s4.16

17. Bharata—enemies of the Pūru; closely associated with the Tṛtsu and living on the Sarasvatī, Āpayā and Dṛṣadvatī; they were merging with the Pūru, Tṛtsu, etc., to form the Kuru people in the age of the Brāhmaṇas, the Mahābhārata regarding the Kurus as descendants of a Paurava king named Bharata.

c5.s4.17

18. Bhalānas—mentioned with the Paktha, Alina, Viṣāṇin and Śiva as enemies of Sudās; they may have lived near the modern Bolan Pass (in Baluchistan) leading from Kachchhi to Sarawan on the route to Kandahar and Ghazni.

c5.s4.18

19. Matsya—ranged with the enemies of Sudās; mentioned in later Vedic literature with the Vaśa or the Sālva, the Manusmṛti making them a people of the Brahmarṣi-deśa along with the Pañcāla and Śūrasenaka; settled in the Alwar-Bharatpur-Jaipur region according post-Vedic tradition.

c5.s4.19

20. Mūjavat—mentioned in the Ṛgveda in the epithet Maujavata applied to Soma; the Yajurveda and Atharvaveda mention them as a distant people sometimes along with the Mahāvṛṣa, Gandhāri and Balhika.

c5.s4.20

21. Yakṣu—mentioned in connection with the battle of the ten kings; fought on the Paruṣṇī and the Yamunā under the leadership of Bheḍa with the aid of the Aja and Śigru; regarded by some as a variant of Yadu.

c5.s4.21

22. Yadu—often mentioned along with the Turvaśa (the two being said to have been brought by Indra from a distant land) and sometimes also with the Anu, Pūru and Druhyu; took part in the battle of the ten kings against Sudās; the name Yadu is applied in post-Vedic tradition to one of the five sons of king Yayāti (cf. Pūru).

c5.s4.22

23. Ruśama—mentioned also in the *Atharvaveda*; cf. Ruṣaṇa of the Purāṇas.

c5.s4.23

24. Varaśikha—the *Bṛhaddevatā* gives the name as Vāraśikha.

c5.s4.24

25. Viṣāṇin—enemies of the Tṛtsu-Bharata people; allied with the Alina, Bhalānas, Śiva and Paktha against Sudās in the battle of the ten kings.

c5.s4.25

26. Vṛcivat—allies of the Turvaśa; contended with the Jahnu tribe for sovereignty, according to the *Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa*.

c5.s4.26

27. Vaikarṇa—identified by some scholars with the combined Kuru-Pañcāla people; the Vikarṇa tribe was settled in Kashmir according to the lexicons.

c5.s4.27

28. Śigru—allied with the Aja and Yakṣu; defeated by king Sudās of the Tṛtsu-Bharata clan in the battle of the ten kings.

c5.s4.28

29. Śimyu—coupled with the Dasyu; defeated by Sudās in the *dāśarājña* or battle of the ten kings.

c5.s4.29

30. Śiva—mentioned along with the Alina, Paktha, Bhalānas and Viṣāṇin in connection with the battle of the ten kings; cf. the Śibi people of the Jhang District mentioned in later works and the name of Śibi, son of Uśīnara, known from the *Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra*, etc.

c5.s4.30

31. Śiṣṭa—mentioned in a Vālakhilya hymn of the *Ṛgveda*.

c5.s4.31

32. Sṛñjaya—closely allied with the Tṛtsu and the enemy of the Turvaśa and Vṛcivat; the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* represents them probably as friends of the Kuru people. They later merged in the Pañcāla.⁹⁵

c5.s4.32

⁹⁵ Ibid., pp. 12, 22, 39, 159, 165ff., 198, 218-19 (cf. p. 126), 263, 315ff, 320ff., 385, 463-64, 471ff., 504-05, 518-19 ; Vol. ii, pp. 11ff., 94h., 99, 121-22, 169-70, 182, 185, 225, 245, 313, 319, 327, 378, 381-82, 383, 469ff.

c5.s4.33

Besides the above, an ancient hero named Ikṣvāku is known from the *Ṛgveda* and *Atharvaveda*,⁹⁶ while the *Ṛgveda*, *Yajurveda* and *Atharvaveda* also speak of a king named Vitahavya, the last work probably representing the Vitahavya as the Sṛñjaya.⁹⁷ A passage in the *Ṛgveda* (ix. 65. 2) uses the word Kṛtvan in the plural along with the Ārjika (living on the Ārjikīyā) and the five peoples. Sāyaṇa takes the word to be the name of a country while Pischel regards it to be a people who may then have been connected with the Kuru and Krivi. But Hillebrandt preferred to take the same word in the sense of ‘magicians’ and as an adjective of the Ārjika. He thinks that his view is supported by a statement of the Chinese pilgrim Hiuên-tsang regarding a barbarian people of the Kashmir region known as Ki-li-to or Kṛtya. But Ki-li-to of the Chinese pilgrim really stands for Kṛta or ‘purchased’ (Chinese Mai-te) and seems essentially to have been a foreign name probably Sanskritised both as Kṛta and Kṛta.⁹⁸

c5.s4.34

⁹⁶ Ibid., Vol. i. p. 75.

c5.s4.35

⁹⁷ Ibid., Vol. ii, pp. 316-17, 328-29.

c5.s4.36

⁹⁸ Cf. Vedic Index, Vol. i, p. 179; Sircar, Indian Epigraphy, p. 256; Beal, Si-yu-ki, Calcutta reprint, Vol. ii, p. 190, note 94.

c5.s4.37

Some of the peoples known from other works of the Vedic literature, besides Jahnu, etc., mentioned above, are the following:

c5.s4.38

1. Aṅga—mentioned in the Atharvaveda along with the Gandhāri, Mūjavat and Magadha as a border people.

c5.s4.39

2. Andhra—mentioned in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa and Śaṅkhāyana Śrautasūtra as outcastes due to the refusal of their progenitors, the 50 elder sons of Viśvāmitra, to accept his adoption of Śunaḥśepa.

c5.s4.40

3. Ambaṣṭha—an Āmbaṣṭhya, ‘king of the Ambaṣṭha’, is known from the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa.

c5.s4.41

4. Uśīnara—inhabited the Middle Country according to the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa.

c5.s4.42

5. Kamboja—known from the Vamśa Brāhmaṇa reference to Kāmboja Aupamanyava

c5.s4.43

6. Kāraskara—mentioned in the Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra, etc.

c5.s4.44

7. Kāśī—inhabitants of Eastern U. P.; known from the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, etc.

c5.s4.45

8. Kirāta—Himalayan mountaineers; known from the Vājasaneyī Saṃhitā, etc.

c5.s4.46

9. Niṣāda—known from the later Saṃhitās and Brāhmaṇas probably as a general name of the Nonaryan tribes which were outside Aryan control unlike the Śūdras; Mahīdhara regards them as identical with the Bhilla, i. e. the modern Bhil.

c5.s4.47

10. Niṣidha—mentioned in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa; spelt as Niṣadha in later literature and located near the Pāriyātra.

c5.s4.48

11. Pañcāla—probably five tribes merged into a single people, two of the five being the Ṛgvedic Krivi and Turvaśa; allied with the Kuru so that the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa mentions the Kuru-Pañcāla together; later tradition locates their capitals in the Bareilly and Farrukhabad Districts of U. P.

c5.s4.49

12. Puṇḍra—mentioned in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa along with Andhra, etc., as outcastes living on the borders of the Aryan-occupied territory; settled in North Bengal before the 3rd century B.C., their capital having been at Puṇḍranagara or Puṇḍravardhana, modern Mahasthan in the Bogra District of East Pakistan.

c5.s4.50

13. Pulinda—an outcaste tribe mentioned along with the Andhra, etc., in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* in connection with the Śunaḥśepa story; the Vindhyan mountaineers.

c5.s4.51

14. Balhika—mentioned in the *Atharvaveda* with the Mūjavat and Mahāvṛṣa; later spelt Bāhlika, etc.; lived in the Balkh region of Northern Afghanistan.

c5.s4.52

15. Magadha—mentioned in the *Atharvaveda* along with the Gandhāri and Mūjavat of the north-west and the Aṅga of the east as a border people; a Māgadha, ‘belonging to Magadha’, is mentioned in the *Yajurveda* and *Atharvaveda*; cf. Kikaṭa of the *Ṛgveda* and post-Vedic literature; the *Śrautasūtras* refer to the Brahmabandhu (bad Brāhmaṇa) living in Magadha though the *Kauṣitaki Āraṇyaka* mentions a respectable Brāhmaṇa who was an inhabitant of Magadha; also spelt Vagadha.

c5.s4.53

16. Madra—mentioned in the *Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad*; settled probably in the Sialkot region; for a northern branch of the Madra people (Uttara-Madra) living in the neighbourhood of the Uttara-Kuru beyond the Himavat according to the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* (in Kashmir according to some scholars), see *infra*.

c5.s4.54

17. Mahāvṛṣa—mentioned in the *Atharvaveda* along with the Mūjavat; also known from the later Vedic literature.

c5.s4.55

18. Mūcipa, Mūvīpa or Mūtiba—mentioned in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* and *Śāṅkhāyana Śrautasūtra* along with the Andhra, etc., as outcastes living on the borders of the Aryan-occupied territory in Northern India.

c5.s4.56

19. Mleccha—known from the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* to have been barbarian in speech.

c5.s4.57

20. Vaṅga—mentioned in the *Aitareya Āraṇyaka* and *Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra*, in association with the Vagadha or Magadha in the former.

c5.s4.58

21. Vaśa—placed in the Middle Country by the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* along with the Kuru, Pañcāla and Uśīnara, the *Kauṣitaki Upaniṣad* associating them with the Matsya and the *Gopatha Brāhmaṇa* uniting them with the Uśīnara; regarded by some scholars as identical with the Vatsas of post-Vedic literature.

c5.s4.59

22. Videgha, Videha—mentioned in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* and *Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad*, the *Kauṣitaki Upaniṣad* associating them with the Kāśi; settled in North Bihar and the adjoining parts of the Nepalese Tarai.

c5.s4.60

23. Śabara—mentioned in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* as Dasyu along with the Andhra, Pulinda, Mūtiba and Puṇḍra; cf. also the Śunaḥśepa story in the *Śāṅkhāyana Śrautasūtra*.

c5.s4.61

24. Śālva—coupled with the Matsya in the *Gopatha Brāhmaṇa*; famous in the epico-Puranic tradition as Śālva; cf. Salva.

c5.s4.62

25. Śvikna—mentioned in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*.

c5.s4.63

26. Sātvat—a people of the south ruled by kings styled Bhoja according to the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*; defeated by the Bharata people according to the *Śatapatha*; same as the Sātvata of the epico-Puranic tradition.

c5.s4.64

27. Salva—probably the same as Śālva or Sālva; lived on the Yamunā; mentioned in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*, etc.

c5.s4.65

28. Sparśu—a western people known from the *Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra* (cf. Parsu).⁹⁹

c5.s4.66

⁹⁹ *Ibid.*, Vol. i, pp. 11, 23-24, 59-60, 103, 138, 149, 153ff., 157-58, 453-54, 461, 469, 536 ; Vol. ii, pp. 8, 63, 116ff., 123, 142-43, 169, 131, 237, 273, 297, 298-99, 376, 408, 421, 440, 489. Cerapāda in *Ait. Ār.*, II. 1. 1, may be the later Kerala.

c5.s4.67

Besides these, the peoples called Kunti and Dālbhya or Dārbhya are known from the later Vedic literature,¹⁰⁰ while a number of peoples have already been mentioned above as known from the *Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra*.

c5.s4.68

¹⁰⁰ *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. i, pp. 162, 354.

c5.s4.69

In connection with the Kuru and Madra peoples, mention has to be made of the northern branches of the tribes called the Uttara-Kuru and Uttara-Madra whom the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* locates beyond the Himavat. The same work also describes the land of the Uttara-Kuru as *deva-kṣetra* or the land of the gods which was located later in the Purāṇas on and around Mount Meru or Sumeru. The Uttara-Kuru were later regarded as a mythical or semi-mythical people.¹⁰¹ The Kurus of Madhyadeśa are occasionally called Dakṣiṇa-Kuru in the *Mahābhārata*.¹⁰²

c5.s4.70

¹⁰¹ *Ibid.*, Vol. i, pp. 84-85.

c5.s4.71

¹⁰² i. 109. 10. The customs of the Uttara-Kurus are quoted for guidance by a Kuru king (i. 122. 7). Cf. Ptolemy’s Ottorokorrha below.

c5.s4.72

We have referred above to the grammatical convention according to which tribal names in the plural would indicate both the people and the land inhabited by them. Thus the land of the Kuru people is mentioned by the same name in the plural in the *Chāndogya Upaniṣad*103 in the passage *maṭaci-hateṣu Kuruṣu* ‘the Kuru country having been devastated by locusts’. The name Vidarbha occurs in later Vedic literature primarily as the name of a territory,¹⁰⁴ although there is no doubt that it was named after a people called Vidarbha. The *Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra* likewise applies the name Śaphāla to the kingdom of Ṛtuparṇa.¹⁰⁵

c5.s4.73

¹⁰⁴ *Ved. Ind.*, Vol. ii, p. 297.

c5.s4.74

¹⁰⁵ *Ibid.*, p. 354.

5. Villages, Towns, etc.

c5.s5.1

Of the villages, townships and the like, mentioned in the later Saṃhitās, Brāhmaṇas, etc., we may refer to the following.

c5.s5.2

¹⁰³ i. 10. 1.

c5.s5.3

1. Kāmpīla—mentioned in the *Yajurveda*; later spelt as Kāmpilya which was the capital of South Pañcāla; identified with modern Kampil in the Farrukhabad District, U.P. Other Pañcāla cities were Paricakrā (Parivakrā) and probably Kauśāmbā.

c5.s5.4

2. Kārapacava—a place on the Yamunā; known from the *Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa*.

c5.s5.5

3. Kāroti—mentioned in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* as a place or a river.

c5.s5.6

4. Triplakṣa—place where the Dṛṣadvatī disappeared in the sands; near the Yamunā, according to the *Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa*.

First 197 of 214 passages. Read on

Linked texts (34)