SOME explanation may be necessary for the publication of an essay on the antiquity of the Vedas by one whose professional work lies in a different direction. About four years ago, as I was reading the Bhagavad Gita, it occurred lo me that we might derive important conclusions from the statement of Krishna that “he was Margashirsha of the months.” This led me to inquire into the primitive Vedic calendar, and the result of four years’ labour is now placed before the public. The essay was originally written for the Ninth Oriental Congress held in London last year. But it was found too large to be inserted in the proceedings wherein its summary alone is now included. I have had therefore to publish it separately, and in doing so I have taken the opportunity of incorporating into it such additions, alterations and modifications, as were suggested by further thought and discussion.
The chief result of my inquiry would be evident from the title of the essay. The high antiquity of the Egyptian civilization is now generally admitted. But scholars still hesitate to place the commencement of the Vedic civilization earlier than 2400 B.C. I have endeavoured to show in the following pages that the traditions recorded in the R̥gveda uomistakably point to a period not later than 4000 B. C., when the vernal equinox was in Orion, or, in other words, when the Dog-star (or the Dog as we have it in the R̥gveda) commenced the equinoctial year. Many of the Vedic texts and legends, quoted in support of this conclusion, have been cited in this connection and also rationally and intelligently explained for the first time, thus throwing a considerable light on the legends and rites in later Sanskrit works. I have further tried to show how these legends are strikingly corroborated by the legends and traditions of Iran and Greece. Perhaps some of this corroborative evidence may not be regarded as sufficiently conclusive by itself, but in that case I hope it will be borne in mind that my conclusions are not based merely upon mythological or philological coincidences, and if some of these are disputable, they do not in any way shake the validity of the conclusions based on the express texts and references scattered over the whole Vedic literature. I wanted to collect together all the facts that could possibly throw any light upon, or be shown to be connected with the question in issue, and if in so doing I have mentioned some, that are not as con vincing as the others, I am sure that they will at least be found interesting, and that even after omitting them there will be ample evidence to establish the main point. I have, therefore, to request my critics not to be prejudiced by such facts, and to examine and weigh the whole evidence I have adduced in support of my theory before they give their judgment upon it. I have tried to make the book as little lechnical as possible ; but I am afraid that those who are not acquainted with the Hindu method of computing time may still find it somewhat difficult to follow the argument in a few places. If my conclusions come to be accepted and the second edition of the book be called for, these defects may be removed by adding further explanations in such cases. At present I have only attempted to give the main argument on the assumption that the reader is already familiar with the method. I may further remark that though I have used the atronomical method, yet a comparison with Beatley’s work will show that the present essay is more literary than astronomical io its character. In other words, it is the Sanskrit scholars who have first of all to decide if my interpretations of certain texts are correct, and when this judgment is once given it is not at all difficult to astronomically calculate the exact period of the traditions in the R̥gveda. I do not mean to say that no knowledge of astronomy is necessary to discuss the subject, but ou the whole it would be readily seen that the question is one more for Sanskrit scholars than for astronomers to decide.
Some scholars may doubt the possibility of deriving so important and far-reaching conclusions from the data furnish. ed by the hymas of the R̥gveda, and some may think that I am laking the antiquity of the Vedas too far back. But fears like these are out of place in a historical or scientific inquiry, the sole object of which should be to search for and find out the truth. The method of investigation followed by me is the same as that adopted by Bentley, Colebrooke and other well kuown writers on the subject, and, in my opinion, the only question that Sanskrit scholars have uow to decide, is whe. ther I am or an vot justified in carrying it a step further than my predecessors, independently of any modifications that may be thereby made necessary in the existing hypothesis on the subject.
I have omitted to mention in the essay that a few native scholars have tried to ascertain the date of the Mahabharata, and the Ramayana from certain positions of the sun, the moon and the planets given in those works. For instances the horoscope of Rama and the positions of the planets at the time of the great civil war, as found in the Mahābharata are said to point to a period of 8000 or 6000 B, C., and it is contended that the Vedas which preceded these works must be older still. Beatley relying on the same date has calculated 961 B. C. as the exact date of Rāma’s birth. This will show how unsafe it is to act upon calculations based upon such loose statements. Sometimes the accounts in the Puranas are themselves conflicting, but even where they are or can be made definite any conclusions based on them are not only doubtful, but well nigh useless for chronological purposes, for in the first instance they are open to the objection that these works may not have been written by eye-witnesses (the mention Rashis in the Ramayana directly supporting such an assumption), and secondly, because it is still more difficult to prove that We now possess these books in the form in which they were originally written. With regard to the positions of the planets at the time of the war given in the Mahābhārata, the statements are undoubtedly confused; but apart from it, I think that it is almost a gratuitous assumption to hold that all of them really give us the positions of the planets in the ecliptic and that such positions again refer to the fixed and the moveable zodiacal portions of the Nakṣatras. Perhaps the writers simply intend to mention all auspicious or inauspicious positions of the planets in such cases. I have therefore avoided all such debatable and doubtful points by confining myself solely to the Vedic works, about the genuineness of which there can be no doubt, and using the Puranic accounts only to corroborate the results deduced from the Vedic texts. According to this view the Mahabharata war must be placed in the Kr̥ttika period, igas. muoh as we are told that Bhishma was waiting for the turning of the sub from the winter solstice in the month of Magha. The poem, as we now have it, is evidently written a long time after this event.
Lastly, I have to express my obligatiops to several friends for encouragiog me to carry on the inquiry and helping me in one way or another to complete this essay. My special thanks are however due to Dr. Rāmkrisboa Gopal Bhandar. kar, who kindly underlook to explain to me the views of German scholars in regard to certain passages from the R̥gveda, and 10 Khan Bahadur Dr. Dastur Hoshang Jamasp for the ready assistance he gave in supplying information contained in the original Parsi sacred books. I am also greatly indebted to Prof. Max Mūller for some valuable suggestions and critical comments on the etymological evi dence contained in the essay. I am, however, alone respon. sible for all the views, suggestions, and statements made in the following pages.
With these remarks I leave the book in the hands of critics, fully relying upon the saying of the poet हेम्नः संलक्ष्यते त्यग्नौ विशुद्धिः श्यामिकाऽपि वा। “The fineness or the darkness of gold is best tested in fire.” It is not likely that my other engagements will permit me lo devote much time to this subject in future ; and I shall consider myself well rewarded if the present essay does in any way contribute to a fuller and unprejudiced discussion of the high antiquity of the Aryan civilization, of which our sacred books are the oldest records in the world.
B, G. TILAK
Poona, October, 2898.