The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c7.3

Language: English

c7.3.1

WE HAVE seen that the ancient Aryas originally commenced their year, which was luni-solar and siderial, with the vernal equinox, and that when the beginning was changed to the winter solstice both the reckonings were kept up, the one for sacrificial and the other for civil purposes. Let us now examine if there is any reliable evidence to show that the Vedic priests made any corrections in the calendar when by the precession of the equinoxes the cycle of seasons gradually fell back. All our present calendars are prepared on the supposition that the vernal equinox still coincides with the end of Revatī and our enumeration of the Nakshatras begins with Ashvinī, though the equinox has now receded about 18° from Revatī. It has been shown by Prof. Whitney (Sūrya Siddhānta, viii., 9 note, p. 211) that the above position of the vernal equinox may be assumed to be true at about 490 A. D Taking this as the probable date of the introduction of the present system, we have now to see if we can trace back the position of the vernal equinox amongst the fixed circle of stars. The question, so far, as one antecedent stage is concerned, has been thoroughly discussed by Colebrooke, Bentley, Max Müller, Weber, Whitney, Biot, and other scholars: and I shall therefore only summarise what they have said, noting the points where I differ from them.

c7.3.2

I do not propose to enter into any detailed mathematical calculations at this stage of the inquiry, for I am of opinion that until we have thoroughly examined and discussed all the passages in the Vedic works bearing on this question, and settled and arranged our facts, it is useless to go into minute numerical calculations. The Vedic observations could not again be such as need any minute or detailed arithmetical operations. I shall therefore adopt for the present the simplest possible method of calculation,—a method which may be easily understood and followed by any one, who can watch and observe the stars after the manner of the ancient priests. We shall assume that the zodiac was divided into 27 parts, not by compass but by means of the leading stars, which Prof. Max Müller rightly calls the milestones of the heavens. The Vedic priest, who ascertained the motion of the sun by observing with his unaided eye the nearest visible star,* cannot be supposed to have followed a different method in making other celestial observations; and, if so, we cannot assume that he was capable of recognizing and using for the purposes of observation any artificial divisions of the ecliptic on a mathematical principle, such as those which would result from the division of 360° of the zodiac into 27 equal parts, each part thus extending over 13° 20' of the ecliptic.

c7.3.3

Of course, such an artificial method might be easily followed in later days, when the means of observation increased and the science of arithmetic was developed. But in the earliest days of civilization, it is more natural to suppose that the motions of the sun and the moon were determined by observing which of the known fixed stars was nearest to them. When we, therefore, find it stated in the Vedic works that the sun was in the Krittikâs, it is more probable that the fixed asterism, and not the beginning of the artificial portion of the zodiac, was intended. I admit that the accuracy of such observations cannot be relied upon within two or three degrees, if not more. But we must take the facts as they are, especially when it is impossible to get anything more accurate from the ancient observers of the heavens.* It will, I trust, however, be found that this inevitable want of accuracy in the old observations does not affect our conclusions to such an extent as to make them practically useless for chronological purposes. For instance, suppose that there is a mistake of 5° in observing the position of the sun with reference to a fixed star when the day and the night are of equal length. This would cause an error of not more than 5 × 72 = 360 years in our calculations; and in the absence of better means there is no reason to be dissatisfied even with such a result, especially when we are dealing with the remotest periods of antiquity.

c7.3.4

I shall, therefore, assume that references to the Nakshatras in the old Vedic works, especially in cases where the motions of other bodies are referred to them, are to the fixe asterisms and not to the zodiacal portions. I may also state here that as a change in the position of the vernal equinox necessarily causes a similar change in the position of the winter solstice, both the beginnings of the year, previously referred to, would require to be simultaneously altered. Whenever, therefore, we find a change in the position of the vernal equinox recorded in the early works, we must look for the evidence of a corresponding alteration in the position of the winter solstice, and the corroborative evidence so supplied will naturally add to the strength of our conclusions. This will, I hope, sufficiently explain the procedure I mean to follow in the investigation of the problem before us. I shall now proceed to examine the passages which place the vernal equinox in the Krittikâs, beginning with the latest writer on the subject.