Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v2.c38: 2. Minerals and Metals in the Ṛgveda

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v2.c38

Language: English

v2.c38.s1 Transition from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic Age — 3 parts
v2.c38.s2 Fire in Matallurgy — 7 parts
v2.c38.s3 The Meaning of Ayas — 6 parts
v2.c38.s4 Some Metallic Objects — 8 parts
v2.c38.s5 Ornaments and Gems — 11 parts
v2.c38.s6 Conclusion — 22 parts

2. Minerals and Metals in the Ṛgveda

v2.c38.1

The *Ṛgveda* (*RV*) is the oldest Indo-Aryan literary document available to us. Before we discuss the metals and minerals mentioned in the *Ṛgveda*, we may briefly comment on the controversial views on its authorship and date of compilation.

v2.c38.2

Max Müller, the famous scholar and translator of the *Ṛgveda*, noticed the similarities between the Indo-European languages and proposed in 1859, that *Ṛgveda* was compiled around 1200 BC by the Āryans ‘who had come to India from outside around 1500 BC’ (Max Müller, 1859) His theory was shown by Winternitz, Bühler, Macdonnel, Muir, etc. to be based on very flimsy premises. John Muir asserted in 1872 that the Ṛgvedic Āryans were not aware of any land outside India, and also that ‘the nations whose speech is derived from Sanskrit have sprung from the gradual dispersal of the ancient Āryan race of India’. (Muir, 1872:2, 322-23). The most recent rebuttal of Max Müller’s dates has been recorded by K.C. Varma (1987). We agree with Winternitz that ‘no power on earth can anytime be sure whether the Vedic hymns were composed 1000 or 2000 or 3000 years before Christ’. As a matter of fact, the verses were orally transmitted through centuries, and the only question is: in which era in the pre-history did the events, narrated in the verses, actually take place.

v2.c38.3

Our considered opinion is that the *Ṛgveda* corresponds to the ancient civilization on the valley of the lost river (*vinaśana*) Sarasvatī. (Biswas, 1987) The archaeological expeditions have unearthed not only the ancient course of the said river (Stein, 1942; Ghose *et al.*, 1979) but also the details of many important sites on the river such as Kālībaṅgan (Lal, 1979), Banawālī (Bisht, 1982), Bhagwānpurā (Lal, 1982), etc. C-14 measurements have shown that the different strata of the above settlements ranged from 3000 to 1500 BC. In other words, the Ṛgvedic culture was Pre-, Mature- as well as Post-Harappan. We agree with B.B. Lal (1982:337) that the uninterrupted sequence from the Pre-Harappan ploughed field to the Post-Harappan PGW ‘formed the base on which the Mature Harappan appeared like bubbles on a vast lake, only to disappear and merge into the waters of the lake itself’.

v2.c38.4

In other words, we consider that the myth of ‘foreigner Āryans invading India and destroying the totally different Harappan culture’ is fictitious, unproven and unacceptable. Many scholars have provided arguments as to why the myth cannot be accepted at the present level of our knowledge. (Dales, 1964; Poliakov, 1974; Shaffer, 1984; Srivastava, 1984; Biswas, 1988)

v2.c38.5

It appears more likely that the Ṛgvedic civilization was indigenous and, flourishing on the banks of the Sarasvatī and its tributaries such as Dṛṣadvatī, Śatadru or Sutlej, was neolithic or mesolithic in the Pre-Harappan, and chalcolithic during the Mature-Harappan era. Its economy was essentially agro-rural when it came into contact with the economically exploiting class of the Panis or Harappan traders. The Ṛgvedic war was basically a civil war fought around 2500-2000 BC and won by the authors of the Ṛgveda. Their opponents belonged to the same racial stock but different religious sect. As the Sarasvatī river got dried up, the Ṛgvedic people moved towards the eastern valley of Gaṅgā and Yamunā and continued with the later part of the Vedic civilization, lasting up to 800 BC and heralding the onset of the second urbanisation and the Historical Period in India.

Transition from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic Age

v2.c38.s1.1

Ṛgveda is not a manual on metallurgy, and hence we cannot expect too many details on minerals and metals in this earliest literature of mankind. Yet we do obtain here a glimpse into the transition from the neolithic to the chalcolithic age in India.

v2.c38.s1.2

Ṛgveda (RV) contains several words for the stone: aśman, adri, pāṣya, etc., of which the first, i.e., aśman is the most significant one. Mehta and Kantawala (1987) have discussed the varieties of stone-tools in the Ṛgveda. In RV, 1.191.15 the text bhinadmy aśmanā indicated a cutting stone-tool which could be a blade, celt or cleaver. The aśmānam vajram (RV, 4.22.1) is evidently a vajra or weapon made of stone. Later a similar weapon was made of ayasa or metal. The simultaneous appearance of the words kārmāra and aśman in 9.112.2 led Mehta et al. (1987) to propose that kārmāra was a stone-worker rather than a blacksmith. It may be recorded here that in the Pre-Harappan stratum of Kālibaṅgan, chalcedony and agate blades have been found. These were serrated, mounted on wooden handle and probably used for cutting and sowing. At a later stage, chert blades were introduced. Side by side copper-made axe and paraśu were found, the latter probably used for cutting scrubby bushes. (Lal, 1979:70) Chert and chalcedony blades have been found at Banawālī also. (Bisht, 1982)

v2.c38.s1.3

The vāsī in the Rgveda is probably an adze with a flat surface and a sloping edge for cutting or rough shaping of wooden materials. Its modern equivalent could be the carpenter's basulā (Hindi). Mehta et al. (1987) have pointed out that whereas RV, 10.101.10 refers to aśmanmayī vāsī or stone-made implement, RV, 8.29.3 mentions vāsīm ayasīm or a metallic axe. Sāyaṇa explains that this could be a stone adze with a metallic edge.

Fire in Matallurgy

v2.c38.s2.1

It is evident that the transition from the neolithic to the chalcolithic age has been subtly depicted in the Rgveda. This transition was possible only through the discovery and use of fire. Generation of fire by friction (3.29.1), and its sustenance by the fire-wood (araṇi) and the fuel-wood (atas) have been described in the Rgveda (vide Appendix B — reference to agni, atas and araṇi).

v2.c38.s2.2

Agni or fire has been described as the cradle of (metallic) gems: ratnadhātamam (1.1.1). Here quite evidently, ratna or gem stands for metallic gems like gold and silver. These two metals and also copper have been known to exist in the native or metallic state. It is quite likely that man obtained these three metals in the chalcolithic age solely by melting the ore, using fire and some kind of furnace. At a later stage, copper ores (sulphide or oxide) were smelted or reduced to the metallic state by using fuel-wood or atas, the carbonaceous matter in it serving as the fuel as well as the reductant.

v2.c38.s2.3

The valuable ore body has been known in the Vedic literature as nidhi (RV, 2.24.6 etc.). Mining was known in elementary form. The mined product khanitrima (7.49.2) was obtained by using digging tool or khanitra (1.179.6). Grinding (1.28.4), using muṣala or pestle and ulukhala or mortar (1.28.1-6) was done before the ore-body was put into the furnace.

v2.c38.s2.4

We have indicated before the controversy as to whether kārmāra in 9.112.2 stands for stone-worker or blacksmith. May be there was no fine distinction between the two professions in the Rgvedic age. Kārmāra in RV, 10.72.2 was however clearly a metalsmith who blew in a furnace and made metal objects presumably by casting of molten metal. He is associated with the act of blowing (dhama) in a furnace in order to purify or prepare the metal (RV, 4.2.17, 10.72.2), and was therefore known as dhmātari or one who blows (5.9.5).

v2.c38.s2.5

धमातेव धमति शिशीते धमातरी यथा

v2.c38.s2.6

dhmāteva dhamati śiśīte dhmātari yathā
(5.9.5)
ब्रह्मणस्पतिरेता सं कर्मा र इवाधमत्
brahmaṇaspatiretā saṃ karmārā ivādhamat
(10.72.2)

v2.c38.s2.7

The metallic gem thus obtained by the smelting or melting process was known as dravina (4.5.11, 4.23.4 etc.) and the smelter was known as the melter or dravi (6.3.4) also.

The Meaning of Ayas

v2.c38.s3.1

The sūkta 9.112.2 has been referred to earlier. The full text reads:

v2.c38.s3.2

जरतीभिः ओषधीभिः पर्णेभिः शकुनानाम्
कार्मारी अश्मभिः द्युभिः हिरण्यवन्तम् इच्छति
jaratībhiḥ oṣadhībhiḥ parṇebhiḥ śakunānām
kārmāro aśmabhiḥ dyubhiḥ hiraṇyavantam icchati
(9.112.2)

v2.c38.s3.3

Mehta et al. (1987) felt that kārmāra here could mean a stone-worker. Banerji (1929) however accepted Schraeder’s earlier suggestion that the hymn actually described a smithy. Banerji argued that the passage alludes to the making of carburised iron. The Ṛgvedic smith, according to Banerji, used to convert the bright quartzian magnetic stone of iron oxide to iron through reduction by the carbonaceous dried medicinal plant, and then to carburise it by fusing with birds' wings,

v2.c38.s3.4

Indirectly, Banerji proposes that the word ayas in the Ṛgveda means iron. We do not subscribe to his views. Iron was not discovered in the age of the Ṛgveda. The Sarasvātī valley archaeological sites have not yielded any iron specimen. Iron appeared in India much later, around 1200 BC.

v2.c38.s3.5

The word ayas in the Ṛgveda (1.57.3, 1.163.9, 4.2.17, 6.3.5, 10.53.9-10 etc.) means metal in general, and not iron in particular. In the Ṛgvedic age it probably corresponded to copper and its alloys. In the subsequent Vedic literature, copper was mentioned as the red metal and iron as the black metal. This also proves that ayas in the Ṛgveda could not mean iron specifically. We would propose that the hymn 9.112.2 might have alluded to the making of copper metal through the reduction of its ore or simply to the melting of gold-bearing quartz. The end product of golden ornament, copper implement or copper-tipped arrow were sold to the moneyed people by the metalsmiths.

v2.c38.s3.6

The words *āyasī* and *ayasmaya* meant metallic commodity, and fire was characterised as *ayodaṃṣṭra* (1.88.5, 10.87.2), that which bites metal.

Some Metallic Objects

v2.c38.s4.1

For agriculture, the Ṛgvedic people used plough which had various names e.g., *phāla* (4.57.8, 10.117.7), *lāṅgala* (4.57.4), *vṛka* (1.117.21, 8.22.6), *sirā* (4.57.5 & 8, 10.101.3-4). *Sītā* (the name of the heroine in *Rāmāyaṇa*) means the line or furrow tilled by the plough. The tip of the plough known as *phāla* or *śunā* (4.57.5 & 8) might have been made of sharpened stone during the neolithic age, but was metallic in the chalcolithic era. Sickles *dātra* (8.78.10) and *sṛṇi* (10.101.3) — were used for cutting the crops.

v2.c38.s4.2

Next to the ploughshare, the most important metallic tool in the hands of the Ṛgvedic people were the axe the chisel or the adze which were used to cut the forest trees and utilised as the carpenter's tool. We have earlier discussed that chisels or adzes, *vāsī* or *basulā* were stone-made in the neolithic age (10.101.10) and became metallic in the chalcolithic age (8.29.3). *Kṛti* was a chopper or cutter (1.92.10, 1.168.3), more like a sword, and eventually developed as a scissor. *Swadhiti* (2.39.7, 3.8.11) was a similar instrument. The name sounds similar to sword. *Bhurija* (4.2.14, 8.4.16, 9.71.5) was a carpenter's tool used in the making of chariots.

v2.c38.s4.3

*Kuliśa* (1.32.5) was the axe, the modern *kulhaḍe* or *kuṭhāra*. *Paraśu*, also a sharpened metallic axe, was an offensive weapon. The cow-plunderers ‘came to the east with big *paraśu*’ to attack the Ṛgvedic people (7.83.1). *Vadhara* and *heti* were also weapons, the details of which are not known.

v2.c38.s4.4

Several names were used to indicate an arrow: *iṣu, bāṇa, bunda, śaru, śarya, śaryā, saru* and *sāyaka*. Copper-tipped arrows were evidently not enough to kill the enemy, and therefore poisonous materials were used on the tips: *ālāktā ayomukham iṣu* (6.75.15). There were several kinds of javelins or spears to be thrown at the enemies: *sṛka* (*srja* means to let go or fly), *pavi* (10.180.2), *ṛṣṭi* (1.37.1, 1.64.4, 8.20.11 etc.). The action is clearly conveyed in the text *ṛṣṭiḥ asṛkṣata* (5.52.6). *Vajra* (1.32.2, 1.51.7, 6.23.4) was probably a spear or a barbed harpoon. The metal spike (*śūla*, 1.162.11) and the knife (*sūna*, 1.162.13) could be used either for offensive combats or in connection with cooking.

v2.c38.s4.5

Closer to the domestic scene, we find the uses of the razor (*kṣura*, 1.166.10, 10.142.4), needle (*vesī*, 7.18.17 and *sūcī*, 2.32.4), (some metallic) pitchers (*āhāva, kalaśa* and *kumbha*) and some musical instruments such as *āghāti* (1.146.2) or cymbal and *karkari* (2.43.3) or lute.

v2.c38.s4.6

Some of the copper implements actually found in the Sarasvatī Valley sites are: Kālībaṅgan — celt, hammer, bangle, arrow, fish-hook, axe, paraśu, mirror, pin. (Lal, 1979)

v2.c38.s4.7

Banawālī — arrowhead, bangle, spearhead, sickle blade, razor, chisel, ring, double spiralled and simple pin, ear/nose ring/fish-hook. (Bisht, 1982)

v2.c38.s4.8

The Sarasvatī Valley copper artefacts were not alloyed with tin, and therefore not as hard as those from Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro.

Ornaments and Gems

v2.c38.s5.1

In the *Ṛgveda*, silver has been mentioned only once (*rajata*, 8.25.22). The Sarasvatī Valley has been far from the sources of silver. The Indus system of rivers however provided bank sands containing alluvial gold particles. These rivers were called *hiraṇyavartanī* (6.61.7, 8.26.18, 10.75.8), the golden ways.

v2.c38.s5.2

Quite naturally, the *Ṛgveda* contains references to many golden objects such as a pitcher made of gold (1.117.12). *Khādi* was the general term for golden ornaments: bracelet, armlet or bangle *hasteṣu khādi* (1.168.3) *khādi hastaṃ* (5.58.2), anklet, *patsu khādayo* (5.54.11), shoulder decoration, *aṃseṣu khādayo* (7.56.13) etc. On the finger, *khādi* was known as *vṛṣakhādi* or ring (1.64.10). Armlet or *kavaca* was also known as *pratyatkān* (5.55.6). The golden crown or tiara was known as *śiprā*; this was worn on the forehead:

v2.c38.s5.3

शिप्राः शीर्षसु वितता हिरण्ययीः
*śiprāḥ śīrṣasu vitatā hiraṇyayīḥ*
(5.54.11, 8.7.25)

v2.c38.s5.4

*Rukmā* was defined as the chest ornament made of gold : *vakṣaḥsu rukmā* (5.54.11).

v2.c38.s5.5

Gold ornamental pieces to decorate neck were known as *niṣka* (2.33.10). *Niṣkagrība* meant golden necklace (5.19.3). There was no minted money or golden coin during the *Ṛgvedic* era, but possibly *niṣka*, as a golden lump, often served as the barter or exchange unit of money (1.126.2, 4.37.4, 5.27.2).

v2.c38.s5.6

*Añji* (5.53.4) and *svadhā* (4.10.6) were certain kinds of ornaments, the details of which are not known. *Karṇaśovana* (8.78.3) was evidently the golden ornament for the ear. Excavations at Banawālī have yielded gold necklaces, gold beads and gold-plated terracotta beads. (Bisht, 1982)

v2.c38.s5.7

The *Ṛgveda* refers to gems or *ratna* several times starting from its very first hymn (1.1.1). The other name of gem was *maṇi*, that which decorates (*maṇḍana*). Gems other than metallic gems were specially recognised.

v2.c38.s5.8

हिरण्येन मणिना श्रुम्भमानाः
*hiraṇyena maṇinā śrumbhamāṇāḥ*
(1.33.8)

v2.c38.s5.9

हिरण्यकर्ण मणीग्रीवम्
*hiraṇyakarṇam maṇigrīvam*
(1.122.14)

v2.c38.s5.10

The latter reference alludes to golden ear-ring and a necklace made of gems the like of which has been found at Banawālī. (Bisht, 1982) The *Rgveda* does not discuss different kinds of gems but at least one, namely pearl or *kṛśana* has been specifically mentioned: *abhivṛtam kṛśanai* (1.35.4).

v2.c38.s5.11

Archaeological excavations at Kālībaṅgan have yielded bangles of copper, shell and terracotta, beads of shell, copper, agate and carnelian copper mirrors, ivory combs, etc. At Banawālī we find in the Pre-Harappan level beads of gold, semi-precious stones, steatite (including disc beads), faience, shell, bone and clay; bangles of shell, faience and copper. At the Mature-Harappan level, a jewellery dealer’s large house has been excavated. This was found to contain beads of etched carnelian, gold and lapis lazuli. Also found were gold-plated terracotta beads and numerous steatite seals. At Banawālī, beautiful golden ornaments and finely cut smoky brown crystal stones showed the heights of fine gem craftsmanship. Evidently this river-port was an important and prosperous trading centre. During the Post-Harappan period, the cultural pattern changed at Banawālī. The Harappan seal, chert weights, steatite disc beads, etc. disappeared. The Indus economy had collapsed. But the qualitative and quantitative profusion of faience ornaments such as bangles, anklets, rings, beads and *pipal*-leaf-shaped ear-rings continued to meet the local requirements. The faience items had noteworthy and shiny silvery coatings.

Conclusion

v2.c38.s6.1

There is thus reasonable correlation between the Sarasvati Valley archaeological data, that we have gathered in India after Independence, and the information in the *Rgveda*. The Pre-Harappan Sothi culture that had evolved in the Sarasvati Valley was influenced by the later day Harappan, and yet the original Harappan civilization. The clay stele *Śivaliṅgas*, the fire-worship, the animal sacrifice as religious ritual, and the segregation of population (along caste lines?) at Kālībaṅgan clearly show the *Rgvedic* culture. Mother Goddess and ram figurines at Banawālī and Bhagwānpurā indicate the Sarasvatī cult. The paṇis or the merchants at Banawālī became parts of the Ṛgvedic culture representing islands of affluence in an ocean of agro-rural setting. Gamesman type of ivory or bone cubes remind one of the Ṛgvedic poetry related to a dice player (10.34.1-14). The merchants used to bring lapis lazuli from Afghanistan or Persia, etched carnelian beads from Gujarat and Copper celts from Gaṇeśwar-Jodhpura in Rajasthan.