Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Arctic Home in the Vedas c10: Chapter VII. Months and Seasons

The Arctic Home in the Vedas c10

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VII. Months and Seasons

c10.2

Evidence of rejected calendar generally preserved in sacrificial rites by conservative priests —Varying number of the months of sunshine in the Arctic region —Its effect on sacrificial sessions considered —Seven-fold character of the sun in the Vedas —The legend of Aditi —She presents her seven sons to the gods and casts away the eighth —Various explanations of the legend in the Brâhmanas and the Taittirîya A'ranyaka —Twelve suns understood to be the twelve month-gods in later literature —By analogy seven suns must have once indicated seven months of sunshine —Different suns were believed to be necessary to produce different seasons —Aditi's legend belongs to the former age, or pûrvyam yugam —Evidence from sacrificial literature —The families of sacrificers in primeval times —Called 'our ancient fathers' in the Rig-Veda —Atharvan and Angiras traced to Indo-European period —Navagvas and Dashagvas, the principal species of the Angirases —Helped Indra in his fight with Vala —They finished their sacrificial session in ten months —The sun dwelling in darkness —Ten months' sacrifices indicate only ten months of sunshine, followed by the long night —Etymology of Navagva and Dashagva —According to Sâyana the words denote persons sacrificing for nine or ten months —Prof. Lignana's explanation improbable —The adjective Virûpas applied to the Angirases —Indicates other varieties of these sacrificers —Saptagu, or seven Hotris or Vipras —Legend of Dîrghatamas —As narrated in the Mahâbhârata —A protege of Ashvins in the Rig-Veda —Growing old in the tenth yuga —Meaning of yuga discussed —Mânushâ yugâ means 'human ages,' and not always 'human tribes' in the Rig-Veda —Two passages in proof thereof —Interpretations of Western scholars examined and rejected —Mânushâ yugâ denoted months after the long dawn and before the long night —Dîrghatamas represents the sun setting in the tenth month —Mânushâ yugâ and continuous nights —The five seasons in ancient times —A Rig-Veda passage bearing on it discussed —The year of five seasons described as residing in waters —Indicates darkness of the long night —Not made up by combining any two consecutive seasons out of six —The explanation in the Brâhmanas improbable —Summary.

c10.3

STARTING with the tradition about the half-yearly night of the gods found everywhere in Sanskrit literature, and also in the Avesta, we have found direct references in the Rig-Veda to a long continuous dawn of thirty days, the long day and the long night, when the sun remained above the horizon or went below it for a number of 24 hours; and we have also seen that the Rig-Vedic texts describe these things as events of a bye-gone age. The next question, therefore, is—Do we meet in the Vedas with similar traces of the Arctic conditions of seasons, months or years? It is stated previously that the calendar current at the time of the Vedic Samhitâs was different from the Arctic calendar. But if the ancestors of the Vedic people ever lived near the North Pole, “we may,” as observed by Sir Norman Lockyer with reference to the older Egyptian calendar, “always reckon upon the conservatism of the priests of the temples retaining the tradition of the old rejected year in every case.” Sir Norman Lockyer first points out how the ancient Egyptian year of 360 days was afterwards replaced by a year of 365 days; and then gives two instances of the traditional practice by which the memory of the old year was preserved. “Thus even at Philæ in later times,” says he, “in the temple of Osiris, there were 360 bowls for sacrifice, which were filled daily with milk by a specified rotation of priests. At Acanthus there was a perforated cask into which one of the 360 priests poured water from the Nile daily.”¹ And what took place in Egypt, we may expect to have taken place in Vedic times. The characteristics of an Arctic year are so unlike those of a year in the temperate zone, that if the ancestors of the Vedic people ever lived within the Arctic regions, and imigrated southwards owing to glaciation, an adaptation of the calendar to the altered geographical and astronomical conditions of the new home was a necessity, and must have been effected at the time. But in making this change, we may, as remarked by Sir Norman Lockyer, certainly expect the conservative priests to retain as much of the old calendar as possible, or at least preserve the traditions of the older year in one form or another especially in their sacrificial rites. Indo-European etymological equations have established the fact that sacrifices, or rather the system of making offerings to the gods for various purposes, existed from the primeval period;¹ and if so, the system must have undergone great modifications as the Aryan races moved from the Arctic to the temperate zone. I have shown elsewhere that calendar and sacrifice, especially the annual sattras, are closely connected, and that in the case of the annual sattras, or the sacrificial sessions which lasted for one year, the priests had in view, as observed by Dr. Haug,² the yearly course of the sun. It was the duty of these priests to keep up the sacrificial fire, as the Parsi priests now do, and to see that the yearly rounds of sacrifices were performed at proper times (ritus). The sacrificial calendar in the Arctic home must, however, have been different from what it came to be afterwards; and happily many traces of this calendar are still discoverable in the sacrificial literature of Vedic times, proving that the ancient worshippers or sacrificers of our race must have lived in circum-polar regions. But before discussing this evidence, it is necessary to briefly describe the points wherein we might expect the ancient or the oldest sacrificial system to differ from the one current in Vedic times.

c10.4

¹ See Lockyer’s Dawn of Astronomy, p. 248.

c10.5

¹ See Schrader's Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples, Part IV, Chap. XIII, translated by Jevons, p. 421. Cf. Sans. yaj; Zend yaz; Greek azomai, agios. See Orion, Chap. II.

c10.6

² See Dr. Haug's Aitareya Brâh. Vol. I, Introduction, p. 46.

c10.7

In the Saṃhitâs and Brâhmaṇas, the annual sattras, or yearly sacrificial sessions, are said to extend over twelve months. But this was impossible within the Arctic region, where the sun goes below the horizon for a number of days or months during the year, thereby producing the long night. The oldest duration of the annual sattras, if such sattras were ever performed within the Polar regions, would, therefore, be shorter than twelve months. In other words, an annual sattra of less than twelve months would be the chief distinguishing mark of the older sacrificial system, as contrasted with the later annual sattra of twelve months. It must also be borne in mind that the number of the months of sunshine and darkness cannot be the same everywhere in the Circum-Polar regions. At the Pole the sun is alternately above and below the horizon for six months each. But as all people cannot be expected to be stationed precisely at the Pole, practically the months of sunshine will vary from seven to eleven for the inhabitants of the Arctic region, those nearest to the North Pole having seven month’s sunshine, while those living farther south from the Pole having the sun above their horizon for eight, nine or ten months according to latitude. These periods of sunshine would be made up of the long Arctic day at the place and a succession of ordinary days and nights closely following each other; and sacrificial sessions would be held, or principal business transacted, and important religious and social ceremonies performed only during this period. It would, so to say, be a period of action, as contrasted with the long night, by which it was followed. The long dawn following the long night, would mark the beginning of this period of activity; and the Arctic sacrificial year would, practically, be made up, only of these months of sunshine. Therefore, the varying number of the months of sunshine would be the chief peculiarity of the Arctic sacrificial calendar, and we must bear it in mind in examining the traces of the oldest calendar in the Rig-Veda, or other Samhitâs.

c10.8.1

A dawn of thirty days, as we measure days, implies a position so near the North Pole, that the period of sunshine at the place could not have been longer than about seven months, comprising, of course, a long day of four or five months, and a succession of regular days and nights during the remaining period; and we find that the Rig-Veda does preserve for us the memory of such months of sunshine. We refer first to the legend of Aditi, or the seven Âdityas (suns), which is obviously based on some natural phenomenon. This legend expressly tells us that the oldest number of Âdityas or suns was seven, and the same idea is independently found in many other places in the Rig-Veda. Thus in IX, 114, 3, seven Âdityas and seven priests are mentioned together, though the names of the different suns are not given therein. In II, 27, 1, Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Varuṇa, Dakṣa and Amśa are mentioned by name as so many different Âdityas, but the seventh is not named. This omission does not, however, mean much, as the septenary character of the sun is quite patent from the fact that he is called saptâ-shva (seven-horsed) in V, 45, 9, and his ‘seven-wheeled’ chariot is said to be drawn by ‘seven bay steeds’ (I, 50, 8), or by a single horse ‘with seven names’ in I, 164, 2. The Atharva Veda also speaks of “the seven bright rays of the sun” (VII, 107, 1); and the epithet Âditya, as applied to the sun in the Rig-Veda, is rendered more clearly by Aditeḥ putraḥ (Aditi’s son) in A. V. XIII, 2, 9.

c10.8.2

Sâyaṇa, following Yâska, derives this seven-fold character of the sun from his seven rays; but why solar rays were taken to be seven still remains unexplained, unless we hold that the Vedic bards had anticipated the discovery of seven prismatic rays or colours, which were unknown even to Yâska or Sâyaṇa. Again though the existence of seven suns may be explained on this hypothesis, yet it fails to account for the death of the eighth sun; for the legend of Aditi (Rig. X, 72, 2-3) tells us, “Of the eight sons of Aditi, who were born from her body, she approached the gods with seven, and cast out Mârtâṇḍa. With seven sons Aditi approached (the gods) in the former age (pûrvyam yugam); she brought thither Mârtâṇḍa again for birth and death.” 1 The story is discussed in various places in the Vedic literature, and many other attempts, unfortunately all unsatisfactory, have been made to explain it in a rational and intelligent way. Thus in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, VI, 5, 6, 1 f., the story of Aditi cooking a Brahmaudana oblation for the gods, the Sâdhyas, is narrated. The remnant of the oblation was given to her by the gods, and four Âdityas were born to her from it. She then cooked a second oblation, and ate it herself first; but the Âditya born from it was an imperfect egg. She cooked a third time and the Âditya Vivasvat, the progenitor of man, was born.

c10.8.3

But the Saṁhitâ does not give the number and names of the eight Âdityas, and this omission is supplied by the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (I, 1, 9, 1 f.). The Brâhmaṇa tells us that Aditi cooked the oblation four times, and each time the gods gave her the remnant of the oblation. Four pairs of sons were thus born to her; the first pair was Dhâtṛi and Aryaman, the second Mitra and Varuṇa, the third Aṁsha and Bhaga and the fourth Indra and Vivasvat. But the Brâhmaṇa does not explain why the eighth son was called Mârtâṇḍa, and cast away. The Taittirîya Âraṇyaka, I, 13, 2-3, (cited by Sâyaṇa in his gloss on Rig. II, 27, 1, and X, 72, 8), first quotes the two verses from the Rig-Veda (X, 72, 8 and 9), which give the legend of Aditi but with a slightly different reading for the second line of the second verse. Thus, instead of *tvat punaḥ Mārtaṇḍam ā abharat* (she brought again Mārtaṇḍa thither for birth and death), the *Āraṇyaka* reads *tat parā Mārtaṇḍam ā abharat* (she set aside Mārtaṇḍa for birth and death). The *Āraṇyaka* then proceeds to give the names of the eight sons, as Mitra, Varuṇa, Dhātṛi, Aryaman, Amsha, Bhaga, Indra and Vivasvat. But no further explanation is added, nor are we told which of these eight sons represented Mārtaṇḍa. There is, however, another passage in the *Āraṇyaka* (I, 7, 1--6) which throws some light on the nature of these Ādityas.¹ The names of the suns here given are different.

c10.8.4

They are:— Āroga, Bhrāja, Paṭara, Pataṅga, Svarṇara, Jyotiṣhīmat, Vibhāsa and Kashyapa; the last of which is said to remain constantly at the great mount Meru, permanently illumining that region. The other seven suns are said to derive their light from Kashyapa and to be alone visible to man. We are then told that these seven suns are considered by some Āchāryas to be the seven manifestations of the *Prāṇas*, or the vital powers in man; while others are said to hold the opinion that they are the types of seven officiating priests

c10.9

¹ Rig. X, 72, 8 & 9 :—अष्टौ पुत्रासो अदितये जातास्तन्वस्परि । देवाँ उप प्रैत्त्सप्तभिः परा मार्ताण्डमास्यत् ॥ सप्तभिः पुत्रैरदितिरुप प्रैत्पूर्व्यं युगं । प्रजायै मृत्यवे त्वत्पुनर्मार्ताण्डमाभरत् ॥ For त्वत्पुनः in the second verse the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka, I, 13, 3, reads तत्परा, see infra.

c10.10

1. See Taittirīya Āraṇyaka, I, 7,—आरोगोभ्राजः पटरः पतंगः । स्वर्णरो ज्योतिषीमान् विभासः । ... । कश्यपोष्टमः । स महामेरुं न जहाति । ... । ते अस्मै सर्वे कश्यपाज्ज्योतिर्लभन्ते । ... । सप्त शीर्षण्याः प्राणाः सूर्या इत्याचार्याः । ... । सप्तर्त्विजः सूर्या इत्याचार्याः । तेषामेषभवति । “सप्त दिशो नानासूर्याः सप्त होतार ऋत्विजः । देवा आदित्या ये सप्त तेभिः सोमाभि रक्ष न” इति (Rig. IX, 114, 3) । तदप्याम्नायः । दिग्भ्राज ऋतून् करोति । एतयैवावृता सहस्रसूर्यताया इति वैशंपायनः । ...... । नानालिंगत्वादृतूनां नानासूर्यत्वं । अष्टौ तु व्यवसिता इति ।

c10.11

Upon this Sāyaṇa says :—‘दिग्भ्राजः’ तान् तान् दिशं प्राप्यावस्थिताः सूर्याः । ‘ऋतून्’ वसंतादिसुचितानृतुधर्मान्, ‘करोति’ तस्यां तस्यां दिशि कुर्वति । न हि ऋतुनिष्पादकसूर्यव्यतिरेकेण तत्तद्धर्माः संभवति । तस्मात्त्येव दिक्षु विभिन्नाः सूर्याः । *And again* नानालिंगत्वादिति । यद्येक एव सूर्यः स्यात् तदानीं वसंताद्यतूनां नानालिंगत्वं न स्यात् । न हि कारणभेदमन्तरेण कार्यभेदः संभवति । तस्मादृतुधर्मवैलक्षण्यसिद्धये बहुसूर्यत्वमभ्युपेयम् । ...... । ‘अष्टौ तु व्यवसिता’ इति । बाढम्, संत्येव तत्तल्लिंककल्पा अनन्ताः सूर्याः । किन्तु तत्रास्ति काश्चिद्विशेषः । ‘व्यवसिताः’ निश्चिताः । tvijaḥ). A third explanation is then put forward, viz., that the distinction of seven suns is probably based on the different effects of sun's rays in different months or seasons, and in support of it a Mantra, or Vedic verse, Dig-bhrāja ṛtūn karoti, (resorting to, or shining in, different regions (they) make the seasons), is quoted. I have not been able to find the Mantra in the existing Saṁhitās, nor does Sāyaṇa give any clue to it, but simply observes "the different features of different seasons cannot be accounted for, except by supposing them to have been caused by different suns; therefore, different suns must exist in different regions".¹ But this explanation is open to the objection (actually raised by Vaiśampāyana), that we shall have, on this theory, to assume the existence of thousands of suns as the characteristics of the seasons are so numerous. The Āraṇyaka admits, to a certain extent, the force of this objection, but says—aṣṭau vyavasitāḥ, meaning that the number eight is settled by the text of the scripture, and there is no further arguing about it.

c10.12

¹ See Sāyaṇa's explanation quoted on tha last page.

c10.13

The Shatapatha Brāhmaṇa, III, 1, 3, 3, explains the legend of Aditi somewhat on the same lines. It says that seven alone of Aditi's sons are styled Devāḥ Ādityāḥ (the gods Ādityas) by men, and that the eighth Mārtāṇḍa was born undeveloped, whereupon the Āditya gods created man and other animals out of him. In two other passages of the Shatapatha Brāhmaṇa, VI, 1, 2, 8, and XI, 6, 3, 8, the number of Ādityas is, however, given as twelve. In the first (VI, 1, 2, 8) they are said to have sprung from twelve drops generated by Prajāpati and then placed in different regions (dikṣhu); while in the second (XI, 6, 3, 8)² these twelve Âdityas are identified with the twelve months of the year. The number of Âdityas is also given as twelve in the Upanishads; while in the post-Vedic literature they are everywhere said to be twelve, answering to the twelve months of the year. Muir, in his Original Sanskrit Texts, Volumes IV and V, gives most of these passages, but offers no explanation as to the legend of Aditi, except such as is to be found in the passages quoted. There are many different speculations or theories of Western Scholars regarding the nature and character of Aditi, but as far as the number of Âdityas is concerned, I know of no satisfactory explanation as yet suggested by them. On the contrary the tendency is, as observed by Prof. Max Muller, to regard the number, seven or eight, as unconnected with any solar movements. A suggestion is made that the eight Âdityas may be taken to represent the eight cardinal points of the compass, but the death or casting away of the eighth Âditya seals the fate of this explanation, which thus seems to have been put forward only to be rejected like Mârtâṇḍa, the eighth Âditya.

c10.14

² Shatapatha Brāhmaṇa, VI, 1, 2, 8,—स मनसैव वाचं मिथुनं सम-भवत् । स द्वादश द्रुप्सान् गर्भ्यभवत् । ते द्वादशादित्या असृज्यंत तान्दिक्षुपा-अन् । Again XI, 6, 3, 8—ऋतम आदित्या इति । द्वादश मासाः संवत्सरस्यैत आदित्याः ।

c10.15.1

We have here referred to, or quoted, the texts and passages bearing on Aditi's legend, or the number of Âdityas, at some length, in order to show how we are apt to run into wild speculations about the meaning of a simple legend when the key to it is lost. That the twelve Âdityas are understood to represent the twelve month-gods in later Vedic literature is evident from the passage in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa (XI, 6, 3, 8 = Bṛih. Ârṇ. Up. III, 9, 5), which says "There are twelve months of the year; these are the Âdityas." With this explanation before us, and the belief that different seasonal changes could be explained only by assuming the existence of different suns, it required no very great stretch of imagination to infer that if twelve Âdityas now represent the twelve months of the year, the seven Âdityas must have once (pûrvyam yugam) represented the seven months of the year. But this explanation, reasonable though was, did not commend itself, or we might even say, occur to Vedic scholars, who believed that the home of the Aryans lay somewhere in Central Asia.

c10.15.2

It is, therefore, satisfactory to find that the idea of different suns producing different months is recognised so expressly in the Taittirîya Âranyaka, which quotes a Vedic text, not now available, in support thereof, and finally pronounces in favour of the theory, which regards the seven suns as presiding over seven different heavenly regions and thereby producing different seasons, in spite of the objection that it would lead to the assumption of thousands of suns—an objection, which the Âranyaka disposes of summarily by observing that eight is a settled number, and that we have no right to change it. That this explanation is the most probable of all is further evident from Rig. IX, 114, 3, which says “There are seven sky-regions (sapta dishaḥ), with their different suns (nânâ-sûryâḥ), there are seven Hotṛis as priests, those who are the seven gods, the Âdityas,—with them, O Soma! protect us.” Here nânâ-sûryâḥ is an adjective which qualifies dishaḥ (sapta), and the co-relation between seven regions and seven suns is thus expressly recognised. Therefore, the simplest explanation of Aditi’s legend is that she presented to the gods, that is, brought forth into heavens, her seven sons, the Âdityas, to form the seven months of sunshine in the place. She had an eighth son, but he was born in an undeveloped state, or, was, what we may call, still-born;

c10.15.3

evidently meaning that the eighth month was not a month of sunshine, or that the period of darkness at the place commenced with the eighth month. All this occurred not in this age, but in the previous age, and the words pûrvyam yugam in X, 72, 9, are very important from this point of view. The word yuga is evidently used to denote a period of time in the first and second verses of the hymn, which refer to the former age of the gods (devânâm pûrvye yuge) and also of the later age (uttare yuge). Western scholars are accustomed to interpret yuga to mean ‘a generation of men’ almost in every place where the phrase is met with; and we shall have to consider the correctness of this interpretation later on. For the purpose of this legend it is enough to state that the phrase pûrvyam yugam occurs twice in the hymn, and that where it first occurs (in verse 2), it clearly denotes ‘an early age’ or ‘some division of time.’ Naturally enough we must, therefore, interpret it in the same way where it occurs again in the same hymn, viz., in the verse describing the legend of Aditi’s seven sons. The sun having seven rays, or seven horses, also implies the same idea differently expressed. The seven months of sunshine, with their different temperatures, are represented by seven suns producing these different results by being differently located, or as having different kinds of rays, or as having different chariots, or horses, or different wheels to the same chariot.

c10.15.4

It is one and the same idea in different forms, or as the Rig-Veda puts it, “one horse with seven names,” (I, 164, 2). A long dawn of thirty days indicates a period of sunshine for seven months; and we now see that the legend of Aditi is intelligible only if we interpret it as a relic of a time when there were seven flourishing month-gods, and the eighth was either still-born, or cast away. Mârtâṇḍa is etymologically derived from mârta meaning ‘dead or undeveloped’, (being connected with mṛita, the past participle of mṛi, to die) and aṇḍa, an egg or a bird; and it denotes a dead sun, or a sun that has sunk below the horizon, for in Rig. X, 55, 5, we find the word mamâra (died) used to denote the setting of the daily sun. The sun is also represented as a bird in many places in the Rig-Veda (V, 47, 3; X, 55, 6; X, 177, 1; X, 119, 3). A cast away bird (Mârtâṇḍa) is, therefore, the sun that has set or sunk below the horizon, and the whole legend is obviously a reminiscence of the place where the sun shone above the horizon for seven months, and went below it in the beginning of the eighth. If this nature of the sun-god is once impressed on the memory, it can not be easily forgotten by any people simply by their being obliged to change their residence; and thus the seven-fold character of the sun-god must have been handed down as an old tradition, though the Vedic people lived later on in places presided over by the twelve Âdityas.

c10.15.5

That is how ancient traditions are preserved everywhere, as, for instance, those relating to the older year in the Egyptian literature, previously referred to.

c10.16.1

We have seen above that the peculiar characteristic of the Arctic region is the varying number of the months of sunshine in that place. It is not, therefore, enough to say that traces of a period of seven months’ sunshine are alone found in the Rig-Veda. If our theory is correct, we ought to find references to periods of eight, nine or ten months’ sunshine along with that of seven months either in the shape of traditions, or in some other form; and fortunately there are such references in the Rig-Veda, only if we know where to look for them. We have seen that the sun’s chariot is said to be drawn by seven horses, and that this seven-fold character of the sun has reference to the seven suns, conceived as seven different month-gods. There are many other legends based on this seven-fold division, but as they do not refer to the subject under discussion, we must reserve their consideration for another occasion. The only fact necessary to be mentioned in this place is that the number of the sun’s horses is said to be not only seven (I, 50, 8), but also ten in IX, 63, 9; and if the first be taken to represent seven months, the other must be understood to stand for ten months as well. We need not, however, depend upon such extension of the legend of seven Âdityas to prove that the existence of nine or ten months of sunshine was known to the poets of the Rig-Veda.

c10.16.2

The evidence, which I am now going to cite comes from another source I mean, the sacrificial literature, which is quite independent of the legend of the seven Âdityas. The Rig-Veda mentions a number of ancient sacrificers styled ‘our fathers’ (II, 33, 13; VI, 22, 2), who instituted the sacrifice in ancient times, and laid down, for the guidance of man, the path which he should, in future, follow. Thus the sacrifice offered by Manu, is taken as the type, and other sacrifices are compared with it in I, 76, 5. But Manu was not alone to offer this ancient sacrifice to the gods. In X, 63, 7, he is said to have made the first offerings to the gods along with the seven Hotṛis; while Aṅgiras and Yayâti are mentioned with him as ancient sacrificers in I, 31, 17, Bhṛigu and Aṅgiras in VIII, 43, 13, Atharvan and Dadhyañch in I, 80, 16, and Dadhyañch, Aṅgiras, Atri and Kaṇva in I, 139, 9. Atharvan by his sacrifices is elsewhere described, as having first extended the paths, whereupon the sun was born (I, 83, 5), and the Atharvans, in the plural, are styled ‘our fathers’ (naḥ pitaraḥ) along with Aṅgirases, Navagvas and Bhṛigus in X, 14, 6. In II, 34, 12, the Dashagvas are said to have been the first to offer a sacrifice; while in X, 92, 10 Atharvan is spoken of, as having established order by sacrifices, when the Bhṛigus showed themselves as gods by their skill.

c10.16.3

Philologically the name of Atharvan appears as Athravan, meaning a fire-priest, in the Avesta, and the word Aṅgiras is said to be etymologically connected with the Greek Aggilos, a ‘messenger’ and the Persian Angara ‘a mounted courier.’ In the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (III, 34) Aṅgirases are said to be the same as Aṅgârâḥ, ‘burning coals or fire’ (Cf. Rig. X. 62, 5). Whether we accept these etymologies as absolutely correct or not, the resemblance between the different words sufficiently warrants the assumption that Atharvan and Aṅgiras must have been the anci at sacrificers of the whole Aryan race and not merely of the Vedic people. Therefore, even though Manu, Atharvan, Aṅgiras be not the names of particular individuals, still there can be little doubt that they represented families of priests who conducted, if not originated, the sacrifices in primeval times, that is, before the Aryan separation, and who, for this reason, seem to have attained almost divine character in the eyes of the poets of the Ṛig-Veda. They have all been described as more or less connected with Yama in X, 14, 3-6; but it does not follow therefrom that they were all Yama's agents or beings without any human origin. For, as stated above, there are a number of passages in which they are described as being the *first* and the most ancient sacrificers of the race;

c10.16.4

and if after their death they are said to have gone to Yama and become his friends and companions, that does not, in any way, detract from their human character. It is, therefore, very important in the history of the sacrificial literature to determine if any traditions are preserved in the Ṛig-Veda regarding the duration of the sacrifices performed by these ancient ancestors of the Vedic people (*naḥ pūrve pitaraḥ*, VI, 22, 2), in times before the separation of the Aryan people, and see if they lend any support to the theory of an early Circum-Polar home.

c10.17

Now so far as my researches go, I have not been able to find any Vedic evidence regarding the duration of the sacrifices performed by Manu, Atharvan, Bhr̥igu or any other ancient sacrificers, except the Aṅgirases. There is an annual *sattra* described in the Shrauta Sūtras, which is called the *Aṅgirasâm-ayanam*, and is said to be a modification of the *Gavâm-ayanam*, the type of all yearly sattras. But we do not find therein any mention of the duration of the *sattra* of the Aṅgirases. The duration of the *Gavâm-ayanam* is, however, given in the Taittirîya Saṃhitâ, and will be discussed in the next chapter. For the present, we confine ourselves to the sattra of the Aṅgirases, and have to see if we can find out other means for determining its duration. Such a means is, fortunately, furnished by the Ṛig-Veda itself. There are two chief species of the Aṅgirases (Aṅgiras-tama), called the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda (X, 62, 5 and 6). These two classes of ancient sacrificers are generally mentioned together, and the facts attributed to the Aṅgirases are also attributed to them. Thus the Navagvas are spoken of as ‘our ancient fathers,’ in VI, 22, 2, and as ‘our fathers’ along with Aṅgirases and Bhṛigu in X, 14, 6. Like the Aṅgirases, the Navagvas are also connected with the myth of Indra overthrowing Vala, and of Saramâ and Paṇis (I, 62, 3 and 4; V, 29, 12; V, 45, 7; X, 108, 8). In one of these Indra is described as having taken their assistance when he rent the rock and Vala (I, 62, 4); and in V, 29, 12, the Navagvas are said to have praised Indra with songs and broken open the firmly closed stall of the cows. But there are only two verses in which the duration of their sacrificial session is mentioned. Thus V, 45, 7 says, “Here, urged by hands, hath loudly rung the press-stone, with which the Navagvas sang (sacrificed) for ten months”; and in the eleventh verse of the same hymn the poet says, “I place upon (offer to) the waters your light-winning prayers wherewith the Navagvas completed their ten months.”¹ In II, 34, 12, we again read, “They, the Dashagvas, brought out (offered) sacrifice first of all. May they favour us at the flashing forth of the dawn”: while in IV, 51, 4,² the Dawns are said “to have dawned richly on the Navagva Aṅgira, and on the seven-mouthed Dashagva,” evidently showing that their sacrifice was connected with the break of the dawn and lasted only for ten months. What the Navagvas or the Dashagvas accomplished by means of their sacrifices is further described in V, 29, 12, which says, “The Navagvas and the Dashagvas, who had offered libations of Soma, praised Indra with songs; labouring (at it) the men laid open the stall of kine though firmly closed;” while in III, 39, 5, we read, “Where the friend (Indra), with the friendly energetic Navagvas, followed up the cows on his knees, there verily with ten Dashagvas did Indra find the sun dwelling in darkness (tamasi kṣiyantam).”¹ In X, 62, 2 and 3, the Aṅgirases, of whom the Dashagvas and the Navagvas were the principal species (Aṅgiras-tama, X, 62, 6), are, however, said to have themselves performed the feat of vanquising Vala, rescuing the cows and bringing out the sun, at the end of the year (pari vatsare Valam abhindan); but it obviously means that they helped Indra in achieving it at the end of the year. Combining all these statements we can easily deduce (1) that the Navagvas and the Dashagvas completed their sacrifices in ten months: (2) that these sacrifices were connected with the early flush of the Dawn; (3) that the sacrificers helped Indra in the rescue of the cows from Vala at the end of the year; and (4) that at the place where Indra went in search for the cows, he discovered the sun “dwelling in darkness.”

c10.18

¹ Ṛig. V, 45, 7,—अनूनोदत्र हस्तयतो अद्विराच्र्‌न् येन दश मासो नवग्वाः । V, 45, 11,—धियं वो अप्सु दधिषे स्वर्षां यया तरन् दश मासो नवग्वाः ।

c10.19

² Ṛig. IV, 51, 4,—कुवित्स देवीः सनयो नबो वा यामो बभूयादुषसो वो अद्य । येना नवग्बे अंगिरे दशग्वे सप्तास्ये रेवती रेवदूब ॥

c10.20

¹ Ṛig. III, 39, 5.—सखा ह यत्र सखिभिर्नवग्वैर्भिङ्वा सत्वभिर्गा अनुग्मन् । सत्यं तदिन्द्रो दशभिर्दशग्वैः सूर्ये विवेद तमसि क्षियन्तम् ॥

c10.21

Now we must examine a little more closely the meaning of these four important statements regarding the Navagvas and the Dashagvas. The first question that arises in this connection is—What is meant by their sacrifices being completed in ten months, and why did they not continue sacrificing for the whole year of twelve months?

c10.22

expression for ‘ten months’ in the original is dasha mâsâh, and the words are so plain that there can be no doubt about their import. We have seen that the Navagvas used to help Indra in releasing the cows from the grasp of Vala, and in X, 62, 2 and 3, the Angirases are said to have defeated Vala at the end of the year, and raised the sun to heaven. This exploit of Indra, the Angirases, the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, therefore, clearly refers to the yearly rescue of the sun, or the cows of the morning, from the dark prison into which they are thrown by Vala; and the expression “Indra found the sun dwelling in darkness”, mentioned above further supports this view. In I, 117, 5, the Ashvins are said to have rescued Vandana, like some bright buried gold, “like one asleep in the lap of Nir-riti (death), like the sun dwelling in darkness (tamasi kshiyantam)”. This shows that the expression ‘dwelling in darkness,’ as applied to the sun, means that the sun was hidden or concealed below the horizon so as not to be seen by man. We must, therefore, hold that Indra killed or defeated Vala at the end of the year, in a place of darkness, and that the Dashagvas helped Indra by their songs at the time. This might lead any one to suppose that the Soma libations, offered by the Navagvas and the Dashagvas for ten months, were offered during the time when war with Vala was waging. But the Vedic idea is entirely different. For instance the morning prayers are recited before the rise of the sun, and so the sacrifices to help Indra against Vala had to be performed before the war. Darkness or a dark period, of ten months is again astronomically impossible anywhere on the globe, and as there cannot be ten months of darkness the only other alternative admissible is that the Dashagvas and the Navagvas carried on their ten months’ sacrifice during the period of sunshine. Now if this period of sunshine had extended to twelve months, there was no reason for the Dashagvas to curtail their sacrifices and complete them in ten months. Consequently the only inference we can draw from the story of the Navagvas and the Dashagvas is that they carried on their sacrifices during ten months of sunshine and after that period, the sun went to dwell in darkness or sank below the horizon, and Indra, invigorated by the Soma libations of the Dashagvas, then entered into the cave of Vala, rent it open, released the cows of the morning and brought out the sun at the end of the old and the beginning of the new year, when the Dashagvas again commenced their sacrifices after the long dawn or dawns. In short, the Dashagvas and the Navagvas, and with them all the ancient sacrificers of the race, lived in a region where the sun was above the horizon for ten months, and then went down, producing a long yearly night of two months' duration. These ten months, therefore, formed the annual sacrificial session, or the calendar year, of the oldest sacrificers of the Aryan race, and we shall see in the next chapter that independently of the legend of the Dashagvas this view is fully supported by direct references to such a session in the Vedic sacrificial literature.

c10.23.1

The etymology of the words Navagva and Dashagva leads us to the same conclusion. The words are formed by prefixing *nava* and *dasha* to *gva*. So far there is no difference of opinion. But Yâska (XI, 19) takes *nava* in *navagva* to mean either 'new' or 'charming', interpreting the word to mean 'those, who have charming or new career (*gva*, from *gam* to go).' This explanation of Yâska is, however, unsatisfactory, inasmuch as the Navagvas and the Dashagvas are usually mentioned together in the Rig-Veda, and this close and frequent association of their names makes it necessary for us to find out such an etymological explanation of the words as would make Navagva bear the same relation to *nava* as Dashagva may have to dasha. But dasha or rather dashan, is a numeral signifying ‘ten,’ and cannot be taken in any other sense; therefore, as observed by Prof. Lignana,¹ nava or rather navan must be taken to mean ‘nine’. The meaning of gva (gu+a) is, however, yet to be ascertained. Some derive it from go, a cow, and others from gam, to go. In the first case the meaning would be ‘of nine cows’ or ‘of ten cows’; while in the second case the words would signify ‘going in nine’ or ‘going in ten,’ and the fact, that the Dashagvas are said to be ten in III, 39, 5, lends support to the latter view.

c10.23.2

But the use of the words Navagva and Dashagva, sometimes even in the singular number as an adjective qualifying a singular noun, shows that a group or a company of nine or ten men, is not, at any rate, always intended. Thus in VI, 6, 3, the rays of Agni are said to be navagvas, while Adhrigu is said to be dashagva in VIII, 12, 2, and Dadhyañch navagva in IX, 108, 4. We must, therefore, assign to these epithets some other meaning, and the only other possible explanation of the numerals ‘nine’ and ‘ten’ is that given by Sâyaṇa, who says (Comm. on Ṛig. I, 62, 4), “The Aṅgirases are of two kinds, the Navagvas or those who rose after completing the sattra in nine months, and the Dashagvas, or those who rose after finishing the sattra in ten months.”² We have seen that in the Ṛig-Veda V, 45, 7 and 11, the Dashagvas and The Navagvas are said to have completed their sacrifices in ten months. Sâyaṇa's explanation is, therefore, fully warranted by these texts, and very probably it is based on some traditional information about the Dashagvas. Prof. Lignana of Rome,¹ suggests that the numerals navan and dashan in these names should be taken as referring to the period of gestation, as the words nava-mâhya and dasha-mâhya occur in the Vendidad, V, 45, (136), in the same sense.

c10.23.3

Thus interpreted Navagva would mean 'born of nine months,' and Dashagva 'born of ten months.' But this explanation is highly improbable, inasmuch as we cannot first suppose that a number of persons were born prematurely in early times, and secondly that it was specially such persons that attained almost divine honours. The usual period of gestation is 280 days or ten lunar months (V, 78, 9), and those that were born a month earlier cannot be ordinarily expected to live long or to perform feats which would secure them divine honours. The reference to the Vendidad proves nothing, for there the case of a still-born child after a gestation of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10 months is under consideration, and Ahura Mazda enjoins that the house where such a still-born child is brought forth should be cleaned and sanctified in a special way. Prof. Lignana's explanation again conflicts with the Vedic texts which say that the Dashagvas were ten in number (III, 39, 5), or that the Navagvas sacrificed only for ten months (V, 4, 7). Sâyaṇa's explanation is, therefore, the only one entitled to our acceptance. I may here mention that the Ṛig-Veda (V, 47, 7 and 11) speaks of ten months' sacrifice only in connection with the Navagvas, and does not mention any sacrifice of nine months. But the etymology of the names now helps us in assigning the ten months' sacrifice to the Dashagvas and the nine months’ to the Navagvas.

c10.23.4

For *navan* in Navagva is only a numerical variation for *dashan* in Dashagva, and it follows, therefore, that what the Dashagvas did by tens, the Nanagvas did by nines.

c10.24

¹ See his Essay on “The Navagvas and the Dashagvas of the Ṛig-Veda” in the Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Orientalists, 1886, pp. 59-68. The essay is in Italian, and I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Śrīnivâs Iyengar, B. A., B. L., High Court Pleader, Madras, for a translation of the same.

c10.25

² Sâyaṇa, in his gloss. on Ṛig. I, 62, 4, says:—अंगिरसो द्विविधाः । सत्रयागमनुतिष्ठन्तो ये नवभिर्मासैः समाप्य गतास्ते नवग्वाः । ... ‘नवग्वा नवनीतगतय’ इति यास्को व्याचख्यौ । ये तु दशभिर्मासैः समाप्य जग्मुस्ते दशग्वाः । Again in his gloss. on X, 62, 6, he states:—सत्रमासीनानामंगिरसां मध्ये केचन नवसु मास्तु कर्म कृत्वातिष्ठन् केचन दशसु मास्त्विति । एवंमंगिरसामयनमुक्तम् । तेषामभिनर्वगवश्च दशगवश्चोक्तः ।

c10.26

¹ See his Essay in the Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of the Orientalists, pp. 59-68.

c10.27

There is another circumstance connected with the Aṅgirases which further strengthens our conclusion, and which must, therefore, be stated in this place. The Aṅgirases are sometimes styled the *Virūpas*. Thus in III, 53, 7, the Aṅgirases are described as “*Virūpas*, and sons of heaven”; and the name *Virūpa* once occurs by itself as that of a single being, who sings the praises of Agni, in a stanza (VIII, 64, 6) immediately following one in which Aṅgiras is invoked, showing that *Virūpa* is here used as a synonym for Aṅgiras. But the most explicit of these references is X, 62, 5 and 6. The first of these verses states that the Aṅgirases are *Virūpas*, and they are the sons of Agni; while the second describes them along with the Navagva and the Dashagva in the following terms, “And which *Virūpas* were born from Agni and from the sky; the Navagva or the Dashagva, as the best of the Aṅgirases (*Aṅgiras-tama*), prospers in the assemblage of the gods.”¹ Now *Virūpas* literally means ‘of various forms,’ and in the above verses it seems to have been used as an adjective qualifying Aṅgirases to denote that there are many species of them. We are further told that the Navagvas and the Dashagvas were the most important (*Aṅgiras-tamaḥ*) of these species. In the last chapter I have discussed the meaning of the adjective *Virūpa* as applied to a couple of Day and Night and have shown, on the authority of Mâdhava, that the word, as applied to days and nights, denotes their duration, or the period of time over which they extend. *Virūpas* in the present instance appears to be used precisely in the same ense. The Navagvas and the Dashagvas were no doubt the most important of the early sacrificers, but these too were not their only species. In other words they were not merely ‘nine-going,’ and ‘ten-going,’ but ‘various-going’ (virûpas), meaning that the duration of their sacrifices was sometimes shorter than nine and sometimes longer than ten months. In fact a Sapta-gu (seven-going) is mentioned in X, 47, 6, along with Bṛihaspati, the son of Aṅgiras, and it seems to be used there as an adjective qualifying Bṛihaspati; for Bṛihaspati is described in another place (IV, 50, 4) as saptâsya (seven-mouthed), while the Atharva-Veda IV, 5, 1, describes the first Brâhmaṇa, Bṛihaspati, as dashâsya or ten-mouthed. We have also seen that in IV, 51, 4, the Dashagva is also called ‘seven-mouthed.’ All these expressions can be satisfactorily explained only by supposing that the Aṅgirases were not merely ‘nine-going’ or ‘ten-going’, but virûpas or ‘various-going’, and that they completed their sacrifices within the number of months for which the sun was above the horizon at the place where these sacrifices were performed. It follows, therefore, that in ancient times the sacrificial session lasted from seven to ten months; and the number of sacrificers (Hotṛis) corresponded with the number of the months, each doing his duty by rotation somewhat after the manner of the Egyptian priests previously referred to. These sacrifices were over when the long night commenced, during which Indra fought with Vala and vanquished him by the end of the year (parivatsare, X, 62, 2). The word parivatsare (at the end of the year) is very suggestive and shows that the year closed with the long night.

c10.28

¹ Ṛig. X, 62, 6,—ये अग्नेः परि जज्ञिरे विरूपासो दिवस्परि । नवग्वो नु दशग्वो अंगिरस्तमः सचा देवेषु मंहते ॥

c10.29

Another reference to a period of ten months’ sun-shine is found in the legend of Dîrghatamas whom the Ashvins are said to have saved or rescued from a pit, into which he was thrown, after being made blind and infirm. I have devoted a separate chapter later on to the discussion of Vedic legends. But I take up here the legend of Dîrghatamas because we have therein an express statement as to the life of Dîrghatamas, which remarkably corroborates the conclusion we have arrived at from the consideration of the story of the Dashagvas. The story of Dîrghatamas is narrated in the Mahâbhârata, Âdiparvan, Chap. 104. He is said to be the son of Mamatâ by Utathya, and born blind through the curse of Bṛihaspati his uncle. He was, however, married and had several sons by Pradveshî. The wife and the sons eventually became tired of feeding the blind Dîrghatamas (so called because he was born blind), and the sons abandoned him afloat on a worn-out raft in the Ganges. He drifted on the waters for a long time and distance, when at last the king Bali picked him up. Dîrghatamas then had several sons born to him from a dâsî or a female slave, and also from the wife of Bali, the sons of Bali's wife becoming kings of different provinces. In the Rig-Veda Dîrghatamas is one of the proteges of the Ashvins, and about 25 hymns in the first Maṇḍala are ascribed to him. He is called Mâmateya, or the son of Mamatâ in I, 152, 6, and Uchathya's offspring in I, 158, 4. In the latter hymn he invokes the Ashvins for the purpose of rescuing him from the ordeals of fire and water to which he was subjected by the Dâsa Traitana. In I, 147, 3 and IV, 4,13, Agni is, however, said to have restored to Dîrghatamas his eyesight. But the statement need not surprise us as the achievements of one deity are very often ascribed to another in the Rig-Veda. Dîrghatamas does not stand alone in being thus rescued by the Ashvins. Chyavâna is spoken of as another protege of the Ashvins, and they are said to have restored him to youth. Vandana and a host of others are similarly mentioned as being saved, rescued, cured, protected or rejuvenated by the Ashvins. All these achievements are now understood as referring to the exploit of restoring to the sun his decayed power in the winter. But with the expression "like the sun dwelling in darkness" before us, in the legend of Vandana (I, 117, 5), we must make these legends refer not merely to the decayed power of the sun in winter, but to his actual sinking below the horizon for some time. Bearing this in mind, let us try to see what inference we can deduce, so far as the subject in hand is concerned, from the legend of Dîrghatamas.

c10.30

The statement in the myth or legend, which is most important for our purpose, is contained in I, 158, 6. The verse may be literally translated as follows:—"Dîrghatamas, the son of Mamatâ, having grown decrepit in the tenth yuga, becomes a Brahman charioteer of the waters wending to their goal."¹ The only expressions which require elucidation in this verse are "in the tenth yuga" and "waters wending to their goal." Otherwise the story is plain enough. Dîrghatamas grows old in the tenth yuga, and riding on waters, as the Mahâbhârata story has it, goes along with them to the place which is the goal of these waters. But scholars are not agreed as to what yuga means. Some take it to mean a cycle of years, presumably five as in the Vedânga-Jyotisha, and invest Dîrghatamas with infirmity at the age of fifty. The Petersburg Lexicon would interpret yuga, wherever it occurs in the Rig-Veda, to mean not 'a period of time,' but 'a generation,' or 'the relation of descent from a common stock'; and it is followed by Grassmann in this respect. According to these scholars the phrase "in the tenth yuga" in the above verse would, therefore, signify "in the tenth generation" whatever that may mean. Indeed, there seems to be a kind of prejudice against interpreting yuga as meaning 'a period of time' in the Rig-Veda, and it is, therefore, necessary to examine the point at some length in this place. That the word *yuga* by itself means ‘a period of time,’ or that, at any rate, it is one of its meanings goes without saying. Even the Petersburg Lexicon assigns this meaning to *yuga* in the Atharva Veda VIII, 2, 21; but so far as the Rig-Veda is concerned *yuga*, according to it, must mean ‘descent,’ or ‘generation,’ or something like it, but never ‘a period of time.’ This is especially the case with the phrase *Mânuṣhâ yugâ*, or *Ma-nuṣhyâ yugâni*, which occurs several times in the Rig-Veda. Western scholars would everywhere translate it to mean ‘generations of men,’ while native scholars, like Sâyaṇa and Mahîdhara, take it to refer to ‘mortal ages’ in a majority of places. In some cases (I, 124, 2; I, 144, 4) Sâyaṇa, however, suggests, as an alternative, that the phrase may be understood to mean ‘conjunction’ or ‘couples (*yuga*) of men’; and this has probably given rise to the interpretation put upon the phrase by Western scholars. Etymologically the word *yuga* may mean ‘conjunction’ or ‘a couple,’ denoting either (1) ‘a couple of day and night,’ or (2) ‘a couple of months,’ *i. e.* ‘a season,’ or (3) ‘a couple of fortnights,’ or ‘the time of the conjunction of the moon and the sun,’ *i. e.* ‘a month.’ Thus at the beginning of the Kali-Yuga the planets and the sun were, it is supposed, in conjunction and hence it is said to be called a *yuga*. It is also possible that the word may mean ‘a conjunction, or a couple, or even a generation of men.’ Etymology, therefore, does not help us in determining which of these meanings should be assigned to the word *yuga*, or the phrase *Mânuṣhâ yugâ* in the Rig-Veda, and we must find out some other means for determining it. The prejudice we have referred to, appears to be mainly due to the disinclination of the Western scholars to import the later Yuga theory into the Rig-Veda. But it seems to me that the caution has been carried too far, so far as almost to amount to a sort of prejudice.

c10.31

¹ Rig. I, 158, 6—दीर्घतमा मामतेयो जुजुर्वान् दशमे युगे । अपामर्थे यतीनां ब्रह्मा भवति सारथिः ॥

c10.32

Turning to the hymns of the Rig-Veda, we find as remarked by Muir, the phrase yuge yuge used at least in half a dozen places (III, 26, 3; VI, 15, 8; X, 94, 12, &c.), and it is interpreted by Sâyaṇa to mean a period of time. In III, 33, 8, and X, 10, 10, we have uttara yugâni ‘later ages,’ and in X, 72, 1, we read uttare yuge ‘in a later age’; whilst in the next two verses we have the phrases Devânâm pûrvye yuge and Devânâm prathame yuge clearly referring to the later and earlier ages of the gods. The word Devânâm is in the plural and yuga is in the singular, and it is not therefore possible to take the phrase to mean ‘generations of gods.’ The context again clearly shows that a reference to time is intended, for the hymn speaks of the creation and the birth of the gods in early primeval times. Now if we interpret Devânâm yugam to mean ‘an age of gods,’ why should manuṣyâ yugâni or mânuṣhâ yugâ be not interpreted to mean ‘human ages,’ is more than I can understand. There are again express passages in the Rig-Veda where mânuṣhâ yugâ cannot be taken to mean ‘generations of men.’ Thus in V, 52, 4, which is a hymn to Maruts, we read Vishve ye mânuṣhâ yugâ pânti martyam riṣhaḥ. Here the verb is pânti (protect), the nominative vishve ye (all those), and the object is martyam (the mortal man), while riṣhaḥ (from injury), in the ablative, denotes the object against which the protection is sought. So far the sentence, therefore, means “All those who protect man from injury”; and now the question, is what does mânuṣhâ yugâ mean? If we take it to mean “generations of men” in the objective case it becomes superfluous, for martyam (man) is already the object of pânti (protect). It is, therefore, necessary to assign to mânuṣhâ yugâ the only other meaning we know of, viz., ‘human ages’ and take the phrase as an accusative of time. Thus interpreted the whole sentence means “All those, who protect man from injury during human ages.” No other construction is more natural or reasonable than this; but still Prof. Max Muller translates the verse to mean "All those who protect the generations of men, who protect the mortal from injury,"¹ in spite of the fact that this is tautological and that there is no conjunctive particle in the text (like *cha*) to join what according to him are the two objects of the verb 'protect.' Mr. Griffith seems to have perceived this difficulty, and has translated, "Who all, through ages of mankind, guard mortal man from injury." Another passage which is equally decisive on this point, is X, 140, 6. The verse² is addressed to Agni, and people are said to have put him in front to secure his blessings. It is as follows:—

First 44 of 74 passages. Read on

Linked texts (11)