08 THE ANTELOPE'S HEAD

Msigashiras-Its oldest form and position-Identification of Robint and Rudra, etc.Plutarch on the non-Egyptien origin of Orion, Canis and Ursa-Methods of interpreting mythological legends Storm and dawn theories. Their insufficiency-Knowledge of the heavens amongst the ancient Aryks-Heaven and Hell, Devayāna and Pitr̥yaga-Joined by equinoxes, the gates of Heaven–Dogs at these gates-Kerberos and Yama’s dogs The Chinvat bridge and the dogs that guard it-Their identi fication with Canis Major and Canis Minor, when the vernal equinox was in Orion-Celestial river aod Charon’s boat Comparison of the R̥gveda and the Avesta dog8Sarama and Shupāsirau-Dog (star) commencing the year-Heliacal and acronycal rising of Orion in apring and autumn-Vishnu and Rudra-Kerberos and Orthros–The legend of Namuchi alias Vr̥tra-His decapitation by Indra at the gates of heaven, wbere: Orthros is stationed-Represented by the " antelope’s head" in the heavens, Vr̥itra being = Mriga-Compact betweco lodra and Namuchi-Watery foam-Its identification, with the Milky Way-Legends of Rudra-How he killed Prajāpati Yajña or Sacrifice at the begining of the year-Shulagava sacr.fice-Tistrya = tri stri, the three star belt of Orion - The Hindu Trinity, Dattārreya-His representation in the sky. The part of the heavens, which contains the Nakṣatras, we have now lo consider, is the most attractive and interesting in the celestial sphere. Even a casual observer on a clear night is sure to be attracted by its splendid appearance, and the rising of the sun in this portion of the heavens at the beginning the year must have rendered it doubly attractive to the ancient Aryan observers. It contains no less than five stars of the first magnitude including Sirius and a number of the second, with the stream of the Milky Way passing through them. Here there was a fine field for the virgin imagigation of the ancient poets and V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 97 priests and the numerous legends that exist in almost all the sections of the Aryan race about this portion of the heavens fully show that they did not fail to make use of this brilliant opportunity. I intend to examine some of these legends in this chapter with a view to see what corroborative evidence we may get therefrom. If we can more naturally and easily explain the legends that relate to this part of the heavens on the present theory, than has hitherto been done, we may fairly conclude that we have rightly interpreted the passages - from the Brāhmaṇas; if not, we shall have either to revise our assumption or lo give it up entirely. But before we do so we must, as far as possible, try to identify the asterisms and determine their forms as described in the ancient works. We shall first take up Mr̥gaśiras or Agrahayani according to Amarasinha. The very name of the Nakṣatra, which means “an antelope’s head,” • suggests the figure of the asterism But the constellation consists of so many stars that it is very difficult to say which of ihem might have suggested the name. I may here remark that the doctrine of " Yogatārās” or the junction stars cannot be supposed to have been developed in the early days we are here * I may here, once for all remark that though I have translated the word Mr̥gaśiras by the “antelope’s head,” I do not mean to imply that Mriya necessarily meant “an antelope” in the Vedic literature. It has been suggested that Mriga may mean “a bullock " or some other animal like it. It may, but we have nothing to do with it, inasmucb as the word Mriga itself is still used in the Sanskrit literature to denote the constellation. My translation of Mr̥gaśiras must therefore be considered provisional, remembering that tbough it may change yet the argument in this chapter will still remaiu unaltered. speaking of. I do not mean to say that single stars may not have been or were not specifically named. But whereever a constellation is spoken of, it is more probable that the whole group was intended, as in the case of the Seven Bears or the Krittikas; and hence the determination of the junction stars, as given in later astronomical works, cannot help us beyond indicating where we are to look for the constellation described in the old works. For instance, if we take Irigashiras we are told that one of he three small stars in the head of Orion is the junction star. This means that we must look for Mr̥gaśiras in the constellation of Orion. But how can these three stars give us the figure of an antelope’s head? The three stars are so close that between them. selves they give us no figure at all. It is, however, suggested that the (wo stars in the shoulders and two in the knees of Orion give us the four feet of the antelope, whose head may then be said to correspond with the three stars in the Orion’s head. lo short it is the antelope’s head in the same way as it is the head of Orion, But besides being open to the objection da: this gives us the head and not the form of an antelope’s head, the explanation presupposes that the whole of the antelope is in the heavens; and if ārdrā be correctly identified with the star in the right shoulder of Orion we shall have also to include this star in the four feet of the antelope. The old Vedic works, however, seem to lay down that it was the head of the antelope and not the antelope itself, that was transplanted to the heavens. Referring to the legend of Rudra piercing Prajāpati, Sāyaṇa in his commentary on the Shalapatha Brāhmaṇa (ii. 1. 2. 8) * observes that he, the *पुणा तस्य शिरविण्छेद"“इषुः शिरवेत्युभयमंतरिक्षमुरप्लुत्व नक्षत्रात्मना afin ta I Sāyaṇa’s commentary on Shat, ‘3r. ii. 1. 2. 8. V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 99 terrible form created by the gods, “cut off Prajāpati’s head by the arrow,” and " the arrow and the head both jumped up to the heavens and are there stationed.” The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa (iii. 33) gives the same story and there loo Pashu man or Bhutavan is said to have pierced Prajāpati with an arrow. But it does not distinctly say whether it was the head or the body that was pierced by him though in the śatapatha Brahmaña Mr̥gaśiras is described as the head of Prajā pati. The tradition of piercing the head does not, however, occur in this form in the R̥gveda, though in Rig. x. 61. 5.7 this story of Prajāpati is alluded to. But in many places where lodra is mentioned as killing Vr̥itra we are told that he cut off the head of his enemy (i. 02. 10; iv. :8. 9; viii. 6. 7) and in Rig. v. 34.% and viii. 93. 14, Indra’s enemy is described as appearing in the form of an antelope. This shows that the R̥gveda indirectly speaks of an antelope’s head having been cut off by Indra, and it may justify us in holdiug that Rudra did the same. The tradition is preserved even in the Greek mythology which tells us that Apollo, indignant at her sister’s affections for Orion, made her hit, with an arrow, a mark in the distant sea, which turned out to be the Orion’s head. In the heavens we must therefore look for the “cut off” head of Mpiga with the arrow pierced in it. There are other circumstances which point to the conclusion. Sanskrit writers have described a small group of stars in Mr̥gaśiras called lovakās. Amarasinha tells us thal they are “on che top of Mr̥gaśiras. Now if Mr̥gaśiras * See Smith’s Dictionary of Classical Mythology. Ov. Fast, v,537.

• Thus:– informa 91481oof | 67 Corrett ano ano OT: | Amara i. 3. 23. afstan tielonisti according to Bbān Dīkṣita. itself be understood to denote the three small stars in the head of Orion, Invakas become identical with them and the distinction given in Amara must be put aside as meaningiess. I am, therefore, of opinion that the asterism of Mr̥gaśiras was once really believed to possess the form of an antelope’s head with an arrow sticking to it. The mention of the arrow in these traditions at once enables us to determine the form, for the arrow can be readily and easily identified with the three stars in the bell of Orion. The head with the arrow at the top must therefore be made up by taking along with the bell the two stars in the knees and one in the left shoulder cf Orion somewhat as below: D : : : ORION. 1 It gives us thz ūrrow pierced into the head and the three stars in the bell are at the top of the antelope’s head-a position which Amara assigas to lovakās. I may further observe that the ancient observers could not and would not have selected the three small stars in the Orion’s head to form their asterism when there were so many stars of the first and second magnitude in the sainc portion of the heavens. Then again whatever the later astronomers may say about the junction stars in Mrigashires, the three stars V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 101 of that asterism popularly pointed out, even at prescat, are those in the belt and not in the head of Orion. I do not mean to imply that the asterism may not have been conceived and figured otherwise. As a matter of fact we know that it was figured as a hunter or a deer, and there are good grounds to hold that these are ancient ideas. All that I, therefore, mean is that of the various figures we may make out of the stars in the constellation of Orion, one should be of an antelope’s head with the arrow sticking to it to represent the cut off head of Mriga, and not as the present configuration supposes both the body and the head of Mriga together and unseparated. I have in what has gone above presumed that the asterism of Mpigashiras must be looked for in the constellation of Orion, and that the legends of Rudra and Prajāpati refer to this constellation. Some scholars, however, doubt the correctness of this assumption; and so far as absolute certainty is concerned their doubts may be justifiable. For, Vedic hymas were not committed to paper till a long time after they were subg, and there is of course so possibility of finding therein a photograph of the portion of the heavens referred to in the various hymns. All that we can, therefore, do is to weigh the probabilities of the proposed identifications; and if this course be adopted I do not think any reasonable doubts could be entertained about the identification of Mr̥gaśiras with the constellation of Orion. To quote the words of Prof. *The constellation appears to have been variously conceived :– (1) the antelope’s head; 12) the whole aptelope; (3) Prajāpati either in the form of an antelope or as a person with a belt or Yajnoparita (aec the next chap.). Of these three forms I consider the “agtelope’s hend” to be the oldest. It will be seen that the three forms are closely connected, and thajthey are the developments of the same idea. Whitney “there is the whole story illustrated in the sky: the innocent and the lovely Rohini (Aldebaran); the infamous Prajāpati (Orion) in full career after her, but laid sprawling by the three-jointed arrow (the belt of Orion), which shot from the hand of the near avenger (Sirius) is even now to be seen sticking in his body. With this tale coming down to us from the first period of Nakṣatras in India who could have the least doubt of its persistent identity from the earliest times to the latest 7” * I subscribe to every word of what is here so forcibly expressed. Of course, we may expect some variations of details as the story got degenerated into Purāsic legends; but it is impossible ta mistake the general identity. I shall therefore nut unnecessarily dwell upon it here. We have seen how Mpigashiras may have been primitively conceived. After this it is not difficult to identify the other stars. The Rohiṇi is no other than Aldebaran. Rudra is the presiding deity of Ardra, and we may therefore suppose Rudra to be represented by the star in the right shoulder of Orion (w). But the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa (iii. 33) identi. fies Rudra with Sirius or what is now called the Mriga-vyādha. The Milky way does not appear to have received a specific Dame in these old days, and the three sections of the Aryan race–the Parsis, the Greeks, and the Indians–have no commcn word to denote the same. Yet it is impossible to suppose that this broad stream of stars could have been unnoticed, and I shall show further on that it was aot. Greeek astronomy places two dogs in this part of the heavens-Canis Major and Canis Minor-one on cach side of the Milky Way, and it has been doubted whether * Sec Prof. Whitocy’s Essays on Hindu nou Chinese systems of asterisms, p. 53. V.) THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 103 the claims of these dogs to primitive antiquity are well founded. In what follows, I hope to show that they are. In the meanwhile, I may here refer to the testimoay of Plutarch to prove that some, at least, of the actually existing figures of constellations in the heavens are Greek transforma. tions of others which had been placed there before by the Egyptians; for this writer, who in his treatise De Iside et Osiride makes the priests of Egypt say that the souls of gods shine in the heavens and are stars, adds that “the constellation of Isis is called, by the Greeks, Canis; that of Horas, Orion, and that of Typhon, Ursa.” * This statement is very important, inasmuch as it shows that the names of at least three constellations, Orion, Canis and Ursa, are not of Egyptian or Chaldean origin. Of these Ursa Major (Greek Arktos) has been already identified with sapta r̥kshas or simply the R̥kṣas of the Vedas and the Haploiringa of the Parsis, thus partly confirming the above-mentioned statement of Plutarch; and it can be shewn, that his observation is equally good in respect of the other two constellations, or that Canis, Orion and Ursa are all of Aryan origin. At present I use Plutarch’s statement only so far as to justify us in presuming the three con. stellations to be of Aryan origin, or, to put it negatively, not borrowed by the Greeks from the Egyptians, † • De Iside et Osiride. I take the quotation from Narriso’s Origin and Progress of Astronomy, p. 44. Narrien further observes that this assertion of Plutarch seems to be confirmed by the dis covery of a sculptured planisphere on the ceiling of the Temple of Denderuh where via the place of Canis Major is traced a cow, the animal consecrated to lois” and instead of Orion is the figure of man which is supposed to be intended for the son of Osiris.”
• I have deemed it necessary to make these remarks because Mr, Gladstone in his Time and Place of Homer, p. 214, observer that Orion .is either “non Hellenic or pre-Hellenic.” Plutarch’s Having thus shown that we are at liberty to assume that the Greek legends about Orion and Canis are pot of foreign origin, let us see what coincidences we can discover between the legends of the thrce sections of the Aryan race about this part of the heavens. I am 00: going to trace every legend to its primitive source and explain it on the dawn or the storm theory. Nor do I believe that it is possible to do so; for lbere are many other objects in nature besides the dawn and the storm, that are likely to impress the mind of a primitive man,* and a legend, though it might have originated with the sun or the dawn, is sure to grow and develop under the influence of these objects. For instance, we can under stand the story of Vr̥itra by supposing that he represented the power that locked up the waters in the clouds, but when we are told that this Vr̥itra sometimes assumed the form of a Mriga, here is a distinct addition which cannot be satisfactorily accounted for on the origina theory. Those that have watched and examined how legend: grow can easily understand what I mean. The idea that everything must be reduced to " dawn and nothing but the dawn" is the result of supposing tha in the days of the R̥gveda men were not acquainted with anything else. The supposition is partly true, but as I sha! presently show there are many passages in the R̥gveda which presuppose the knowledge of stars and constellations. Thus testimony shews that the constellation is not of Chaldean oi Bgyptian origin. The conception must therefore be pre Hellenie or, in others words. Indo Germanic, and I think I have given ampk evidence in this chapter and the next to prove tbat the idea C Orion was fully developed before the Grecks, the Parsis and thi Hindus separated. * See Herbert Spencer’s Sociology, Vol. 1., Chap. xxiv, V.) THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 106 at the time we are speaking of several ideas had already been formed and recognised and even familiarly known. For example, the idea of Devayāna and Pitr̥yāna appears to have been well settled at this time, so much so that though the year was afterwards made to commence with the winter solstice, the equinoctial division of the heavens, with all the notions which had already become associated with it, continued to exist, though somewhat restricted in its scope, side by side with the new system. Whether this idea itself is or is not further resolvable into simpler ideas is a different question altogether. Perhaps it may be shown to have grown out of the idea of day and night or light and darkness. There are several passages in the R̥gveda (i. 123.7; 164, 47.) which speak of a black and a white day, and it is very likely that these were the original games of Devayina and Pitr̥yāna; for when new ideas are introduced it is usual lo express them in old words with such qualifying adjectives as would distinguish the new idea from the old one. A “black day” might thus mean the Dakshiṇāyana or the Pitr̥yāna, as night appeared to increase at the expense of day during the period. When the southern course of the sun thus came to be likened to a dark day or night (Rig, vi. 9. 1) it was naturally regarded as a night of the Devas to distinguish it from the ordinary night; and as Do sacrifices were performed during the ordinary night, so no offerings could be made to the Devas during their night (vi. 08. 1). Of course, it must have been a long time before men could develop conceptions like these. There was, indeed, a time when they could hardly account for the fact how the sun found his way from the west hack to the east. In the R̥gveda 2. 72. 7, the & in is said to rise from out of the ocean and a similar idea is found in Homer who describes not only the sun, but even the stars, as “bathed in the waters of the ocean.” . In the R̥gveda x. 108. 1, Sarama is said to have crossed really a " long way." The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa iii. 44, which states that the sun never sets in reality, makes a distinct advance upon these notions. But it is difficult to say whether astronomical ideas were develop ed to such an extent in the days when the year first commenced from the winter solstice. I do not, however, wish to enter here into these details. As previously ob served I assume that, at the time we are speaking, the Vedic Aryas had already passed through these stages, and that the ideas of Devayinn aod Pitr̥yāna were familiarly known and established; and assuming these as established I intend to examine how legends were built upon them I have, however, briefly alluded to the probable origin o these ideas inasmuch as it helps us to better appreciate the description of the Devayāna and the Pitr̥yāna. Ordinarily the Pitr̥yāna is described (Rig. ix. 113. 8) as the regio: “where Vaivasvata is the king, which is the undermos (lit. obstructed t) part of the heavens, and where there ar eternal waters.” The Vaivasvata Yama here spoken does not, however, appear to have as yet been investe with the terrible character we find given to him in th later literature. Corresponding to Yama in the south w have Indra in the north, each supreme in his own spher • Lewis, Hist. Survey of th: Astr. of the Ancients, p. 6. Ilia 4, 6, vii. 422. TINA Ig: in the original, I think we means “whe the view or the heavens is obstructe 1;” " the portion of the heavei. which is turned away," Cl. Ait. Br. iv. 14, where we of the year is spokcu uf, M V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 107 and dividing the whole world into {wo parts, one bright and known, and the other walery and mysterious, or, in the language of seasons, first comprising Vasanta, Griṣma and Varṣā and the second śarada, Hemanta and Shishira. Now when the vernal equinox was in Orion or Mriga. shiras it was the beginning of the Devayāna, and as the constellation is remarkable for its brilliancy and attractiveness the ancient Aryans may have been naturally influenced not merely to connect their old traditions with it, but also to develope them on the same lipes. Thus the Devayāna and the Pitr̥yāna, as representiog the two hemispheres must be joined, and the vernal and the autumnal equinoxes became the natural points of union between the regions of gods and Yama. The equinoxes were, in fact, the gates of heaven, and as such it was natural to suppose that they were watched by dogs. In the R̥gveda i. 48. 15 the dawn is spoken of as illuminating the gates of heaven,’ and in i. 13. 6 and ii. 3. 8 the gates-deties are invoked to keep the gales open. We have a similar invocation in the Vājasaneyi Sanhit& 21. 49. This shows that the idea of the “gates of heaven” was not unknown in Vedic times and the arrangement of the gates on the sacrificial ground, which is prepared on the model of the annual passage of the sun, shows that these gates divided the whole hemisphere into two parts. Macrobius records a tradition that “the ancients designated the signs of Cancer and Capricorn as the gates of the sun, at which having arrived, the luminary seemed to retrace his path in the zone which he never leaves.” * Now Macrobius could not but speak in the language of the twelve zodiacal portions, and if we therefore divest his statement of the form in which it is naturally • Macrob. Commeat. in Soma. Scrip. Lib. I. cap 15. I take the quotation from Narrien’s Origia and Progress of Astronomy, p. 51. expressed it means that the equinoxes, which the ancients supposed to be once in the zodiacal signs named above, were then called gates of heaven. The Iranians, however, have preserved the legend more fully. With them the equinox is not merely a gate, but a bridge connecting heaven and hellthe Devaloka and the Yamaloka, or the Devayāna and the Pitr̥yāna-and “dogs that keep the Chinvat Bridge" help the departing soul to cross il. Darmesteter, in his introduction to the Vendidad, published in the Sacred Books of the East Series, observes * that “this reminds one at once of the three-headed Kerberos, watching at the doors of hell and still more of the four-eyed dogs of Yama, who guard the ways to the realm of death" (Rig. x. 14.10). The ideas are, indeed, strikingly similar and point out to a common source. Kerberos has even been identified with Sanskrit Shabala or Sharvara, meaning varie. gated or a dog of Yama. But, as far as I know, no satisfactory explanation has yet been given of these legends por any attempt made to explain them on a rational basis. If we, however, suppose that the vernal equinox was once in Orion, the constellations of Canis Major and Canis Minor the two dogs.would then be on the boundary line of heaven and Yama’s region, and the whole of the above story may be icen illustrated in the sky like that of Prajā pati and Rudra previously referred to. I According to Bundahis Sacred books of the East, Vol. IV., Zend.Avesta, Part 1., introduction V., 4. See Kaegi’s R̥gveda, by Arrowsmith, p. 160, note 274a, where the writer quotes Aufrecht to the same effect. Weber and Zimmer appear to have suggested that the conception of Yama’s dogs might have been formed from some constellations. Bloomfield rejects this suggestion ahd tries to show V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 109 xii. 7, the Chinval Bridge extends from the height of Chakād-i-Dailak in the middle of the world to the summit of Arezur at the gate of hell; while Dr. Geiger cbserves that “it was believed to have been built over a wide expanse of water which separates the paradise from this world.”* In the later Indian literature we are told that the souls of the deceased have to cross a stream f before they reach the region of Yama, while the story of Charon shews that even the Greeks entertained a similar belief, What could this river he? With the vernal equinox in Orion, one can easily identify it with the Milky Way, which could then have been appropriately described as separating the regions of gods and Yama, the Devayāna and the Pitr̥yāna, or the Northern and the Southern hemisphere. In the later Hindu works it is actually called the Celestial River (svarnadi), while the Greeks have placed that the dogs represent the sun and the moon. His explanation does not, however, show how and why the dogs came to be located at the gates of heaven and why they should be entrusted amongst all the sections of the Aryan race with the duty of watching the souls of the dead. Bloomfield quotes Kath. S. xxxvii. 14 (where day and night are called the dogs of Yama) and Shat. Br. xi, 1. 5. I. (where the moon is said to be a divine dog) to prove that the dogs must be underetood to mean the sun and the moon. But I think that the Brāhmaṇa here gives simply a coojectural explana. tion, and, as in the case of Namuchi’s legend, we cannot accept it, inasmuch as it does not give any reason why the dogs were station. ed at the doors of Yama’s region. There are many other incidents io the story which are not explained on Bloonificld’s theory. I see, therefore, no reason for modifying my views which were put down in writing before I could get Bloomfield’s paper in the last number of the Journal of the American Oriental Society. * Dr. Geiger’s Civil, of East Iran., Vol. 1., p. 100. † Called Vaitarani. The Garuda Purana, Pretak, vir 25-31, states that a cow should be given to a Brāhmaṇ to enable the deceased to pay he ferrymen on this river. near it the constellation of Argos (ship) and two dogs Canis Major and Canis Minor-one on each side to guard both the entrances of the Chinvat Bridge across it. The R̥gveda also mentions two dogs of Yama kept to “watch the way.” while the Greeks place a three-headed dog at the gates of hell. In Rig. X. 63. 10 we are further told that the land of the blessed is to be reached by “the celestial ship with a good rudder.” * The words in the original are daivim nāvan. Comparing these with the expression divyasya shunah in the Atharva Veda vi. 80. 3, and seeing that a celestial (divya) representation of Rudra is described in later workst it seems to me that we must interpret the epithet to mean “celestial” and pot simply “divine.” Thus the Vedic works appear to place a celestial dog and a celestial ship at the entrance of the other world, and these can be easily identified with the Greek constellations of Argo Navis and Capis, if we suppose the Milky Way to be the boundary of Heaven in these days. I do not mean to say that these conceptions had their origin in the appearance of the heavens. On the contrary, a com parison with the non-Aryan legends shows it to be more likely that the heavenly bodies received their names from the pre-existing beliefs, about the other world, amongst the people. Herbert Spencer tells us that amongst the non Aryan savage races the journey to the next world is believed to lie over land, down a river or across the sea, and that in consequence the practice of burying their dead in boats prevails amongst some of them. I The North Americans, See Kaegi’s R̥gveda, translated by arrowsmith, p. 159, note 273. 18ee the passege from the Mabimna Stotra quoted infra. See Herbert Spencer’s Principles of Sociology Vol. 1., chap. XV., 1st Ed. NORTH रोहिणी प्र केनेव नमु. शिर इबोट वर्नय ३.८४१३ PROCYON

N मृगशिरस . CANIS MINOUR WEST C GIRius Chloka BIAYN DOVY (OANIS MAJOR

गिण मशिनच्युषा मिंद्र श.. . पष्टत्य माथिन मुग नमुलं मायवार .. शिरोम्बस्य परिष ….६५ । श्या बम्य अंलिपरपि कर्णा … ो ने पानी यम रक्षिनारी गनुरती पवारRIANRAIN भानं बस्तोबोधयितारमब्रवीरसंवत्सर इदमचा व्यख्यन। ०१-१६1-1३. Spana, peshupana. Vd.xiii. 9. Spanem, sairitem, chathru Chashmem. Va, viii. 16. [Sespage 110, 111. V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 111 we are further told, say that the Milky Way is “the Path of Spirits,’ the Road of the Souls,’ where they travel to the land beyond the grave, and where their camp fires may be seen blazing as brighter stars.”* This coincidence between the Aryan and the non-Aryan legends makes it highly probable that the figures of the constellations were conceived by the Aryans according to notions of the next world prevailing amongst them at that time. It may be noticed, however, that the non-Aryan races do not connect the idea of time, e. f, of the year and the seascos, with these beliefs, while it is the chief characteristic of the Aryan legends. We are, for instance, told that the dog commenced the year (Rig. i. 161. 13) and that the Devayīna comprised the three seasons of Vasantā, Griṣma and Varsha (Shat. Br. ii. 1. 3. 1). It is this feature of the Aryan legends that is most important for the purpose of our enquiry, while the coincidence, above pointed out, confirms, in a remarkable way, the genesis of the Aryan legends here proposed. The chief elements in the traditions of the three Aryan pations may thus be satis factorily explained. It may, however, be contended that the two dogs of Yama spoken of in the R̥gveda may not be the same as the Avesta dogs at the Bridge. A closer examination of the several passages in the R̥gveda will, however, dispel such doubts. Io the Vendidad xiii. 9, the dogs are called peshupana, or those that guard the way to the region of death. The Avesta dog is chathru.chashmen (Ved. viii. 16), while the Vedic dogs are described as chatur-akshan (Rig. x. 14. 11), both of which expressions mean “four-eyed.” The dogs in the Avesta and the R̥gveda, however, differ in colour. In Ved. viii. 16 the * Principles of Sociology, Vol. I., cliap. xxiv., p. 399, 1st Ed, # For Gerrian legends, indicating time, see the next chapter, dogs are said to sairitem or spaetem sairi-gaoshem, yellow or white with yellow ears; while the dogs of Yama are said to be shabalari, spotted or variegated. But the difference is Deither very material, nor such as cannot be accounted for. In the R̥gveda we can trace the yellow colour of the Avesta dogs. The antelope of the sun in Rig. x. 86. 3 is said to be harita or yellow, the cairetem of the Avesta, and if we suppose this antelope to be no other than that represented by Orion, as the sun commenced the year at that point, we need not be surprised if the dogs in the Avesta are described as yellow, especially when in the Atharva Veda viii. 1. 3. we find the two messenger dogs of Yama named as Shyama and Shabala, thus noting probably a difference in colour. The Atharva Veda iy. 20,7 mentions a four-eyed bitch, while in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa xiii. 1. 2.9. the adjective is applied to a dog; and the same animal is evidently intended in both places. In the Parsi scriptures the dogs at the Chinvat Bridge are sometimes spoken of in singular (Ved. viii. 16) and sometimes, as in Rig. X. 14. 11, in dual (Ved. xiii. 9). This shows that we might disregard gender and number in the description of these dogs, and we are thus led to suppose that Saramā in the R̥gveda is again to be identified with the dogs that watch the gates of heaven. Whether Sarama* in primitive days was or was not connected with the dawn, I do not undertake to say. But there is an incident in her story which confirms the identification I have proposed. The Paṇis tried to coax Sara.nā by offering her milk which she draok.. On her return she depied having seen the cows of Indra, who thereupon kicked her and she vomited the milk. Now the meation of * Bee Max Mūller’s Lectures on the Science of Language, Vol. II, 2.511. V.) THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD, 113 milk at on ce suggests the idea that it must be the milk in the galaxy on each side of which the two dogs are stationed. In Rig. iv. 67. 6 Shunāsirau are invoked in order that they may pour down upon the earth the “milk,” which they “make in heaven.” Prof. Max Mūller records a suggestion that Shu. nāsirau, here spoken of, may be a very old name for the Dog. slar, and with its derivative Sairya would give us the etymon of Seirios ! In Rig. vii. 08. 2 the Vastoshpali, “the guardian of the house,” in the form of a dog, is invoked and described as bright and red Sirameya on whose jaws spears seem to glitter: a description which answers so well with the appear ance of Sirius, that with what has been said above we may at once identify the Sarameya with the Dog-star. I may here refer to the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa ii. 1. 2. 9, where speaking of Mr̥gaśiras, the Prajāpati’s body pierced by Rudra is described at his vastu. May not Vāstoshpati be regarded as guardian of this? If so, it may be a further proof that Vastosh pati represents the star Sirius, which, as it were, guards the head of Prajāpati in the form of Orion or the antelope’s head. But, apart from this suggestion, I would fpally quote Rig. i. 16), 13, where it is expressly stated that “the dog awakened" the r̥bhus, the genii of the seasons, at the “end of the year !” Sayapa proposes to interpret shvanam in the original by “wind,” but it is evidently an error. In the Bhatapatha Brāhmaṇa xiii. 5. 1. 8, vrika and shvā are meo. tioned together, and the former is known to be a name for a wild dog. If so, Sayapa’s explanation of Rig. i. 105. 11 appears to be more probable than that of Yāska. It is in fact a description of the dog (star) appearing in the cast after • Max Mūller’s Lectures on the Science of Language, Vol. II., p. 526. crossing “the eternal waters” of Yamaloka, and then being immediately lost in the rays of the sun, which rising after it, had to push the wild dog out of his way. The mention of the “eternal waters” of the Yamaloka indicates that the heliacal rising of the Dog-star, here referred to, occurred at the ead of the Pitr̥yāna or at the veroal equinox, thus further con. firming the statement thal the dog commenced the year. There are other passages of similar import, but as I wish to avoid, for the preseot, any disputed passages, I do not mention them here. If the time, I am contending to establish for the hymns of the R̥gveda, comes to be accepted, it is sure to furnish an unerring clue to the interprelation of many other passages and legends in that sacred book, but the work must be left to be done hereafter. Putting all these passages together, we find that in the R̥gveda, dogs are described as dark and brown, bright and red, possessing four eyes, guardiag the house and the way to Yama’s region, vomiting and making milk, and above all beginning the new year. All these facts clearly show that the Vedic dogs are the same as the Hellenic or the Iranian, and we can easily and salisfactorily account · Prof, Bloomfield’s theory leares many of these facts un explained. If the dogs represent the sun and the moon, how can the sun tell the r̥bhus that the dog awakened them at the ead of the year? I cannot also understand how the aud and the moon can be described as variegated in colour, or as engaged in makiag milk. Again how can the sun or the moon be said to be four-eyed, and why should they perpetually remain at the bound ary of bcaven and hell? In Rig. x. 86. 4, & dog is said to be let toose at the ear of the Mriga, and this as well as the dog io Rig. i. 161. 13, must be supposed to be different from Yama’s dogs, if we accept Bloomficid’s view, THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 116 for all these legends by supposing that the vernal equinox was near the Dog-star in those days, thus making the dog rise with the sun in the beginning of the year at the gates of the Devayāna. We can now also understand how the dogs could have been described as four-eyed. For, if they are correctly identified with Canis near the Milky Way, thea the four stars in the body of Canis might naturally be said to be his eyes; * for once the aumber of eyes is increased from two to four, we need nol expect to find them all on the head, but, like the thousand eyes of Indra in the later mythology, they may be regarded as spread over the whole body. M. Darmes:eter rightly observest that “the Parsis being at a loss to find four-eyed dogs interpreted the name as meaning a dog with two spots above the eyes; but it is clear that the two-spotted dog’s services I are only accepted In Rig. x, 127. 1, the stars are said to be the eyes of night. The Greeks entertained a similar idea. Their Argos was surnamed Panoptes, the all seeing," having a hundred eyes on the body. See Max Muller’s Science of language, Vol. 11., p. 416. † Sacred Books of the East Series, Vol. IV.; Zend Avesta, Part 1.; Intr. v. 4. These services are required at the funeral ceremony. It may be here noted that the hymn in the R̥gveda which describes Yama’s dogs (Rig. *. 14) is still recited at the time of burping the dead body of a Hindu. Every Brūhman has also to give, every day, two small offerings of cooked rice to the two dogs of Yama, Shyama and Shabala, at the time of the Taishwadei a sacrifice. The offerings are placed on the ground in the form of a circle, beginning with the castern point, The offering to Shyama is placed outside the circle at the south west and that to Shabala at the north-west point. In other words, Shyama and Shabala are placed on each side of the western point, in the same way as the dogs appear in the heavens on each side of the Ililky way. for want of a four-eyed one, or of a white one with yellow cars." Evidently the Parsi priests failed to realise that it was the divine or heavenly, and not an earthly dog that was here described, as driving the death-fiend. The Atharva Veda vi. 80. 3 shows that the Indian priests of the time well understood it to mean a dog who is “born of waters, whose house is in the sky, and who sheds his lustre all around." There is another set of traditions which we can similarly explain on the supposition with which we have started, viz., that the verual equinox was then in Orion. The heliacal rising of the constellation at the beginning of the year marked the revival of nature at the commencement of spring, and the asterism may thus be said to represent all these milder influences which in later mythology were fully embodied in the conception of Vishau. But the case was completely reversed if we take the acronycal rising of the same. It was at the autumnal equinox that the Dog-star rose at the beginning of night, and though, strictly speaking, it marked the end of Varshi, yel the portion of the heaven wherein the constellation is situated could have been easily regarded as the battle-ground of Indra and Vfitra who fought in those days, and also as the stage on which the terrible Rudra made his appearance. In short, the constellation naturally became the harbinger of the mild and the terrible aspects of aature. It is in this latter sepse that the Dogs star might be considered a raia-star, and Sarama, like the Greek Hermes with which it is identified, might be said to have been sent to scarch for the cows of Indra taken away by the Papis of the nether word. The Greek legends mention two watch doga-Kerberos and Orthros; and of these V.) THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 117 Kerberos has been etymologically identified with Sharvara and Orthros with Vr̥tra. But no explanation has been given of how this Vr̥itra came to be stationed at the gates of hell, Prof. Max Möller suggests that Orthros is the dark spirit that is to be fought by the sun in the morning. But then, this does not explain why it was called Vr̥itra, and how it came to be killed by Herakles. The legend of Namuchi, as given in the R̥gveda and interpreted on the supposition that the year began with the Dog-star, does, however, solve the difficulty. I have already alluded to the fact that in the R̥gveda Vr̥tra is often said to appear in the form of a Mriga (Rig, i 80.7; V. 32. 3 ; v. 34. 2 ; viii. 93. 14). lo Rig. vii. 19, 8 Vr̥tra and Namuchi are both said to be killed by ladra, and though this cannot be taken as a direct authority for holding that Vr̥itra and Namuchi are the different forras of the same enemy, yet from the description of the two I do not think there can be any doubt as to their being ideatical. In fact, Shushňa, Pipru, Kuyava and Namuchit are only so many different names of the enemy of Indra. Now Ladra is represented as cutting off the head of Vriera (Rig. i. 62. 10), and also of Namuchi (Rig. v. 30.7; vi. 20. 6). Combining these slatemeats we get that Iadra cut of the head of Vr̥tra or Namuchi, in the form of a Mriga ; and this at once suggests the question whether that head is not the same as that of Prajāpati cut off by Rodra and which gave the name of Mriga-shirsha, or “the antelope’s head” to the constellation. In Rig i 53. 7, we are simply *Max Mūller. Gifford Leatures, 1891, p. 218. Biographies of Words, p. 197. Sao Prof. Bloomfield’s contributions to the loterpretation of the Veda in the Journal of the Americna Oricotal Sociaty, Vol. XV. p. 146. told that Namuchi was killed by Indra in the distant (parāvat) region, which seems to mean the region of Yama. But as it docs pot satisfactorily determine the place where Namuchi was killed, I refer to Rig x. 73, 7, where indra by killing Namuchi is said to have cleared up the paths leading (yana in the origioal) to the (region of) Devas ;"** which plainly shows that Namuchi was killed at the gates of the Devayapa. In the Vajasneyi Saphitā 10. 14 a sacrificial rite is described which gives the same place and time of Namuchi’s death. The priest there throws away a piece of metal hidden under a tiger hide, exclaiming, “the head of Namuchi is thrown away," after he has taken his Yajanana through all directions (East, South, West, North and upwards) and also through all the seasons (Vasanta, Griṣma, śarad, Varṣā and Hemanta. and-Shishira). This means, if it can mean anything, that Namuchi alias Vr̥itra was killed, in the language of seasons, after Shishira, or in other words, at the gate of the Devayāna as described in the above quoted passage from the R̥gveda, for the end of Shishira is the end of the Pitr̥yāṇa. Here then we have an explanation of how Orthros came to be at the gate of hell, or ip a distant region under the setting sun. But the association of Orthros with Kerberos throws further light on the subject. If Vpitra’s head is the same a6 Mpiga-shirsha, as explained in the beginning of this chapter, then the three stars in the belt of Orion, which form the top of Mr̥gaśiras, might have easily suggested the idea of a three.headed monster. In Rig. X. 99. 6 * The original verse is as follows: पंच अमुवि मनुस्मुरापाव विमा । वंक मचे स्पोनापको देवपास पानि । V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 119 lodra is said to have killed a three-headed and six-eyed monster. It might be contended that the explanation is not satisfactory, inasmuch as the head of Mriga is here supposed to be again conceived as a dog, while there is no authority in the Vedic works expressly describing Mriga as a dog. But if Orthros has become a dog in the Greek mythology, while it is a Mriga in the Vedas, 1 sce no reason why Kerberos should not get his three heads from the Trishirshan of the Vedas. The difficulty is not at all a serious one. In bring ing together the traditions of the three Aryan races after thousands of years, we must make some allowances, and be satisfied with a general similarity of the stories. The asterism of Mr̥gaśiras and the dogs are so close, that one might be easily mistaken for the other, when all the knowledge of the original traditions was lost. It is thus that we can account for the fact that out of the three beings that were represented in this portion of the heavens, Rudra (the huntes) Mriga (the antelope), and Shvā (the dog), the Greeks retained in the sky only the hunter (Orion), and the dog (Kuon, Capis), with nothing to hunt, while the Hindus have not only forgotten, but condemned, the dog. The Parsis, it is true, have not mistaken the dog, but still as regards complexion, they have represented their dogs as possessing the colour which in the Higveda is given to Loop is still cel that the pre koha The principal star in Canis Minor is still called Procyon=Gk, Prakuon, Sk. Prashvan, the Foredog. It shows that the previous star was once called Kuon by the Greeks, if we count the Nakabin tras in the direction of the sup’s annual course, Kuon comes frut, nad Praktion afterwards, CI. Sanskrit Rādhā and Anurddha, of which, like Procyon, later writers have only retained Anurādha. Phaigunt, Ashidha, and Bhādrapada are similarly divided into Parva and Uttard, the preceding and the foregoing. 190 THE ORION, [CHAPTE the antelope of the sun. Another objection that may be urged against this identification is that we are required to soppose Mr̥gaśiras to be once the head of Prajāpati, and at another time that of Vr̥tra. It must, hower or, be re membered that we do so on the express authority of the R̥gveda, and that besides it is quite patural lo suppose tha once the antelope’s head was wid to exist in the heavens Vedic poets vied with each other in weaving legends ou of it. As an illustration I refer to Rig. x. 86. 8, where the poet describes Vr̥iṣikapi’s head as cut off, but soon afte Vr̥ṣakapi is told that it was an illusion, and that in realits it was some one else whose head was so severed (verse 18 This clearly shows that it was a period when legends wer: will being formed out of the “antelope’s head.” We can now explain how later writers evolved a myt out of Namuchi’s death. The story is given in the Tandy Brehmapa (xii. 6. 8).* There we are told that Indra an Namuchi came to a settlement that the former should ki the latter, Deither during day oor by night, nor by an veapon, whether dry or wet. Indra therefore killed his with the foam of the waters at the junction of day and nigh when it had dawned, but yet the sun had not risen. Il probably this circumstance that has led Professor M: Mauer to suppose that Orthros represents the gloom of li morning. But the explanation does not account for the oth See also Teitt Br. i. 1. 1. 7; Shat. Br. xii. 7.3.3. Also t Purtaus, Ramayana iii. 20. 28; Mahabharata Udyoga p. ix. 28. Pr Bloomfield has collected all such passages in his article on t contributions to the Interpretation of the Veda ia the Journal American Oriental Society, Vol. XV., pp 148 158.-The legend HiragyaKashipu in the Purdyas appears to bave been based Kamuobi’s story, V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 191 incidents in the story. Was Namuchi or Vitra killed every morning by lodra ? Or was it only at the beginning of the rainy season? Evidently the latter. We must then suppose that Namuchi was killed after dawn, but before the actual daybreak, at or during the monsoons. In other words, the junction of day and night in the later myths must be under. stood to nean a particular junction of day and night in the rains, or more definitely, the junction of the day and the night of the Gods–the junction of the Pitr̥yāna and the Devayāna, the gates of which are said to be cleared up by Namuchi’s death in the passage from the R̥gveda given above. The latter part of the legend is, however, still more poetical, and Prof. Max Mūller’s theory leaves it entirely unexplained. Indra is here said to have killed Namuchi with a weapon which was neither dry nor moist–the watery froth. This is evidently based upon Rig. viii. 14. 13, where Indra is described as “cutting the head of Namuchi with the foam of waters,” and the same incident is again referred to in Rig. X. 61. 8. Therefore, even if we reject later speculations with respect to “why foam o froh should have been used,” and decline to solve the question by assuming a compact between Indra and Namuchi, yet we have to account for the fact that in the R̥gveda itself Indra is said to have used the foamy weapon to destroy his enemy. What could this foamy weapon be? If Namuchi was killed at the * Prof, Bloomfield has discussed this legcod in a recent number of the Journal of the American Oriental Society (Vol. XV., Number 11.), but he gives so explanation of the compact between ladri had Namuchi. ia my opinion it is impossible to bold that the compact could have been the original basis of the legend. It is evideatly a later invention to explain what were then deened otherwise inexplionblo incidents in the ingead; and uatil there incidents arc explained in a datural way, the legend cannot be said to be properly understood, gates of the Devayāna and his head still lies there, the watery foam could be no other than the broad belt of the Milky Way which crossed the heavens at the same past. The blue vault of the heavens is often compared to an ocean in the later Sanskrit literature,* and the stars are said to be the patches of foam upon its surface. Thus in the Mahimna Stotra, which is considered to be at least seven or eight hundred years old; the author describes (verse 17) the heavenly form of Rudra (i. e., Rudra as represented in the sky), and tells us that the stream of waters on his head has “the beauty of its foamy appearance enhanced by a Dumber of stars.’t This is a description of the Ganges on the head of the celestial form of Shiva, and the author oi Mahimna, who, in verse 22, refers to the story of Rudra piercing Prajāpati with an arrow, and says that the whole story is still illustrated in the sky, I evidently meant to “cf. Sahitya Darpana 10, where under अपहुति we have– नेदं नभोमरलमंदुराशि तार तारा भवफेनमंगाः । वियद्व्यापी तारागणगुणितफेनोद्मरुचिः प्रवाहो बारां यः पृषताघु बटः शिरसि ते । जगद्वीपाकारं जलधिवलयं तेन कृत मित्यननैवानेयं तमहिम दिग्यं तव वपुः ॥ The conception of Shiva embodied in this verse is really a grane one. The poet usks his readers to imagine how great must rhiv: be, the celestial stream on whose bend cocircles the Universe The Milky Way which girdles the celestial sphere caonot be bette: described. प्रजानाथं नाथ प्रसममामि स्वादुहितर गतं रोहिभूतां रिरमायामुष्यस्य वपुषा । अनुपाणेगांतं दिवमपि सपनाकृतम, असंतं तेऽद्यापि त्पतिम मुगम्बाधरमसः॥ Also Ct. Shakuntala, i., मुगानुसारिणं साक्षात्पश्यागीय पिनादिनम् V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 123 describe by it the Milky Way which passes over the head of the star of Rudra. Now if the poetic imagination of the author of Mahimna can perceive foam in the Milky Way, I see no reason why the virgin imagination of the Vedic poets should not rise to that pitch. Dr. Haug, speaking of the Vapant Yastha, observes that the constellation (Vapaat), by which thc Parsi Dasturs understand the Milky Way is said to stand directly over Hell, and further, " the Dasturs are of opinion that this constellation is the weapon (Vasra) which is constantly aimed by Mithra at the head of the Daevas, as stated in the Khurshed Yasht.”* Referring to the Khurshed Yashta we simply fird that the club (Vazia) of Mithra “was well struck down upon the skulls of the Daevas.’+ The information given to Dr. Haug may therefore be traditional among the Parsi Priests; but whether traditional or other. wsic as it comes from an independent source, it is strong corroborative evidence to support the identification of Indra’s foamy weapon, with the stream of the Milky Way in the heavens. With the vernal equinox near the Dog-star, the Milky Way, which then separated the region of gods from that of Yama, could weil be said to be over Hell and “well struck upon the heads of the Daevas.” Namuchi’s legend can thus be simply and Dalurally accounted for, if we assign to the equinoxes the position which we have deduced from other passages in the Vedic works. I may point out that we do not hereby account for the original idea of Vr̥itra. That is evidently a still older legend. But his existence at the gate of Hell and his decapitation by the foamy weapon–the two chief elements in the later Vedic traditions are satisfactorily *Dr. Haur’s Essays on the Parsis p. 371, Note. | Sacred Booke of the East Series, Vol. XXIII. Zoad Avesta, Part II., p. 87. explained by placing, as originally proposed, the vernal cquinox in the constellation of Orion, and identifying Namuchi alias Vr̥tra with the constellation of Mr̥gaśiras or the antelope’s head, situated just below the Milky Way. We have next to deal with the legends of the bold hunter, the terrible Rudra chasing the antelope. Several attributes in the Purānic mythology, e. &, his bearing the Ganges, in his matted hair, his fondaess for the burging ground, and his appearance as Kirāta or hugler, are all accounted for by placing Rudra just below the Milky Way or the celestial Ganges, at the gates of the Pitr̥. yāpa and figured as a hunter. I have already alluded to the difficulty of identifying Rudra. But whether we take the star of Ardra or Sirius to represent the lord of cattle, the above attributes remain the same. But neither these legends, aor the story of Rudra chasing Prajāpati, which, so far as it was necessary for our present purpose, has been already given, can help us, in a material degree, to solve the question under consideration. I wish, therefore, to deal here only with such traditions as point out to the position of Rudra in the course of the year. Rudra, as the lord of the caltle and the presiding deity of storms, can be at once recognized and placed in the rainy season. There are, how. ever, other legends indicating time more definitely. Ia Rig. X. 192, 3, Saṁvatsara or the year is said to rise out of the ocean, the place where Vr̥itra was killed (Rig. X. 68. 12). Prajāpati, as represented by Orion, may also be Daturally supposed to commence the year when the vernal equinox was in Orioo. Rudra killed Prajāpati, and as I have shown before, Prajāpati, Saṁvatsara , apd Yajña • Ber Mahimna Stotru, verze 17, quoted suppg.’ V.] THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 126 were convertible terme Rudra therefore killed Prajāpati or Yajña at the beginning of the year; and Yajña also meant sacrifice. Rudra was therefore naturally believed to have killed the sacrifice–thus giving rise to the Pur&pic. legends of Rudra routing the sacrifice of Daksha. At the end of the Sauptika Parva in the Mahabharata" we are told that “Rudra pierced the heart of Yajña or Sacrifice with an arrow. Thus pierced the Sacrifice, with fire, fed away in the form of an antelope and having reached the sky, there shines in that form, followed by Rudra." Thus it was that Rudra acquired the title of Sacrifice-breaker. In the Tandya Brāhmaṇa vii.2.1, the death of Prajāpati is, however, spoken of as voluntary. In Taitt. Br. iii. 9. 22. 1, he is said to have assumed the form of Yajña and given himself up to the Devas to be sacrificed. The Devas killed him on their morning, and so every one should similarly perform the Ashvamedha sacrifice at the beginning of the year. One can now uoderstand what the meaning of these stories is: They refer to the death of Prajāpati by Rudra at the begin. ning of the year; and thus it was that Yajña meaning the year was sacrificed by means of Yajña or Prajāpati. Rig, x.90. 16., where we are told that Gods sacrificed Yajña by Yajña, but this (human sacrifice) was an old (out of date) practice, may also be similarly interpreted. I cannot say which of * Moha. Seupt. 18, 19, 14: ततः स बझं विम्बाध रौद्रेण हदि पत्रिणा । भपक्रांतस्ततो यहो मृगो भूत्वा सपावकः ॥ सतु तेनैव रूपेण दिवं प्राप्य राजत । भन्धीवमानो रुदेण युधिहिर नमखले॥ Here the antelope is said tr be pierced in the heart and not in the lead as in the Vedic works. It appears, therefore, that the Cholo antelope was considered to be in the heavens at this time, these legends is older, whether that of Prajāpati sacrificing himself, or of Rudra killing him at the begioning of the year. But whichever of these be the older one it does not affect our present question. Both of them indicate that Prajāpati once commenced the year and that he either willingly allowed himself to be sacrificed or was killed by Rudra at that time. As another indication of time, I may point out that the time, prescribed for the sacrifice of Shalagava in Ashvalāyana Gr̥bya Sūtras, 4. 9. 2, is in Vasanta or śarad with the asterism of Ardrā. The passage, as now under. stood, means that the sacrifice should be performed on any day in Vasanta or śarad when the moon-whether full, half, quarter or newmis dear the asterism of Ardrā, the star over which Rudra presides. But it appears to me that here we have a tradition that the sacrifice was originally required to be performed at the new or full moon in the vicinity of Ardra, in Vasapta or śarad, thus jadicating that the veraal equinox was near Ardra when the sacrifice was orginally established. When the seasons receded ārdrā new or full moon could not fall in Vasanta or śarad and therefore Ardra night afterwards came to mean any right when the moon is near the asterism of Ardrā io Vasanta or śarad. However, as the point is not quite satistactory I shall not press it here. The only other fact about Rudra worthy of nolice is that he seems to be described as followed by dogs or rather as their master (Vaj. San, 16. 27). This may show that the Vedic poets kaew of the dogs near the star of Rudra. * In the original there are salutations to several forms of the dcity, but it would not be quite safe to infer from it that Rudra was. as a matter of certainty, followed by dogs. In Tand. Br. xiv, 9, 19, Shiva is described as Mrigayu, while the passage in Vaj. Sin. (16.27) says * 1919 …17: 1 V.) THE ANTELOPE’S HEAD. 197 I have already alluded to the Parsi legends of the Chiavat Bridge and the dogs that keep it. There is, however, one more circumstance to which I wish here to refer. The star Tistrya has been identified with Sirius and the identification, ifoot absolutely correct, is at least sufficiently so for general purposes. But I think that the word itself has not been yel satisfactorily explained. I propose to derive Tistrya from Tri-stṇi which in Sanscrit means thrce-stars. Tri-stri may easily be corrupied into Tistri, Tister. Tister is, therefore, the same as Kerberos or trishiras and the fact that Tistrya is called Tir or arrow in Modern Persian further confirms this derivation, for the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa (iii. 33) calls it the three-starred or tripartite arrow of Rudra in the sky. I have in the last chapter shown that if we commence with the suminer solstice and regard Fravashinam as the first month of the year, Tiscreye corresponds to Margashirṣa. If Tister is understood etymologically lo mean the belt of Orion this coincidence of the months can be better accounted for. I am therefore of opinion that Tistrya should not be identified with Sirius, but with the belt of Orion. We can then better understand why the star should have been spoken of as Tristryeni* probably iadicating more slars than one and also Paurreni, the first. The Parsis have preserved * As the word is understood at present it means " pertaining to or beloaging to Tristry," But grammatically it may mean " many stars or group of stars." I may bere point out that it we identify Tistryn with Sirus the ctymology is tot explained, nor can we Rcoouat for the modern Persian name Tir which again means ao arrow. While if we identify Tristrya with the three stars in the belt everything is satisfactorily acconated for. All the arguments based upon the raia producing " infiueace of the star are equally applicable in either gik, siace both the stars (Sirius and Orion rise at the same time. See Dr, Geiger’s Civil of Bast Iran., Vol los pp. 141.142. 198 THB ORION. [CHAPTIR V. mother interesting relic of the asterism of Mpigashiras, but I reserve it for the next chapter. Starting with the supposition that the verpal equinox was in Orion, we have thus an easy and a simple explanation by which the three principal deities in the Hindu mythology can be traced to and located in this part of heavens. Viṣṇu representing the happy times of Vasanta, Rudra presiding over storms and Prajāpati, the deity of sacrifices beginning the year, were all combined in one place. It was here that Vishğu killed Vārāha (Rig. i. 68. 7); it was here that Jadra killed Vpitra, and it was here that Rudra chased Prajāpati, in the form of Yajña or that he sacrificed himself. The celestial Ganges separating the upper and the neither world was also in the same quarters, and through it lay the path to Yama’s region. In a word the Trinity of the Hindu Pantheon was fully represented in the constellation of Orion, when the vernal equinox was there. Later writers describe this tripity as represented by the throc-headed Dattatreya, followed by the Vedas in the form of dogs; and after what has been said above, I think we can have no difficulty in identifying this personified Trinity with Orion having three stars in the head and closely followed by the dog (Canis) at its foot. It will be difficult to find another place in the heavens where all these elements are combined in such an interesting mander,