वेदों की प्राचीनता एवं काल-निर्णय / ओरायन (लोकमान्य बाल गंगाधर तिलक - खगोलीय वैदिक शोध)

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 133 and they literally mean ‘make many bodies or forms.’ We have thus a two-fold description of the couple ; it is called the shining and the dark, and also described as possessed of many forms. In I, 123, 7, the couple of Day and Night is said to be vishurûpe; while in other places the adjective virûpe is used in the same sense. It is evident, therefore, that the ‘bodies’ or ‘forms’ intended to be denoted by these words must be different from the two-fold character of the couple as shining and dark; and if so, the phrases vishurûpe, virûpe or nânâ vapûmṣhi used in connection with the couple of Day and Night must be taken to mean something different from ‘bright and dark’, if these expressions are not to be considered as superfluous or tautological. Sâyaṇa. interprets these phrases as referring to different colours (rûpa), like black, white, &c., and some of the Western scholars seem to have adopted this interpreta- tion. But I cannot see the propriety of assigning different colours to Day and Night. Are we to suppose that we may have sometimes green, violet, yellow or blue days and nights ? Again though the word rûpa lends itself to this construction, yet vapûmṣhi cannot ordinarily be so understood. The question does not, however, seem to have attracted the serious atten- tion of the commentators; so that even Griffith translates vishurûpe by ‘unlike in hue’ in I, 123, 7. The Naktoshâsâ are described as virûpe also in I, 113, 3, but there too Sâyaṇa gives the same explanation. It does not appear to have occurred to any one that the point requires any further thought. Happily, in the case of Ṛig. I, 113, 3, we have, however, the advantage of consulting a commentator older than Sâyaṇa. The verse occurs in the Uttarârchika of Sâma-Veda (19, 4, 2, 3), and Mâdhava in his Vivaraṇa, a commentary on the Sâma-Veda, explains virûpe thus:— “In the Dakshiṇâyana during the year there is the increase of

134 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. night, and in the Uttarâyaṇa of day.'"* Mâdhava's Vivaraṇa is a scarce book, and I take the above quotation from an extract from his commentary given in a footnote to the Calcutta edition of the Sâma-Veda Saṁhitâ, with Sâyaṇa's commentary, published by Satya-vrata Sâmashramî, a learned Vedic scholar of Calcutta. It is not known who this Mâdhava is, but Pandit Satyavrata states that he is referred to by Durga, the commentator of Yâska. We may, therefore, take Mâdhava to be an old commentator, and it is satis- factory to find that he indicates to us the way out of the difficulty of interpreting the phrases vishurûpe and virûpe, occuring so many times in the Ṛig-Veda, in connection with the couple of Day and Night. The word 'form' (rûpa) or body (vapus) can be used to denote the extent, duration, or length of days and nights, and virûpe would naturally denote the varying lengths of days and nights, in addition to their colour, which can be only two-fold, dark or bright. Taking our cue from Mâdhava, we may, therefore, interpret the first half of the verse as meaning "The twin pair assume various (nânâ) lengths (vapûṁshi); of the two one shines and the other is dark." But though the first half may be thus interpreted, another diffi- culty arises, as soon as we take up the third quarter of the verse. It says, "Two sisters are they, the dark (shyâvi) and the bright (arûshî)." Now the question is whether the two sisters (svasârau) here mentioned are the same as, or different from, the twin pair (yamyâ) mentioned in the first half of the verse. If we take them as

• See Sâma-Veda, Cal. Ed., Utta. 19, 4, 2, 3. The verse in the Veda is,—समानो अध्वा स्वस्रोरनंतस्तमन्यान्या चरतो देवशिष्टे । न मेथेते न तस्थतुः सुमेके नक्तोषासा समनसा विरूपे ॥ Mâdhava's Vivaraṇa says, सुमेके—संवत्सरे, दक्षिणायने रात्रेर्वृद्धिः, उत्तरायणे त्वह्नः, नक्तं रात्रिः— उषाकालप्रभृत्यहः।”

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 135 identical, the third pâda or quarter of the verse becomes at once superfluous. If we take them as different, we must explain how and where the two pairs differ. The commentators have not been able to solve the difficulty, and they have, therefore, adopted the course of regarding the twins (yamyâ) and the sisters (svasârau) as identical, even at the risk of tautology. It will surely be admitted that this is not a satisfactory course, and that we ought to find a better explanation, if we can. This is not again the only place where two distinct couples of Day and Night are mentioned. There is another word in the Ṛig- Veda which denotes a pair of Day and Night. It is Ahanî, which does not mean 'two days' but Day and Night, for, in VI, 9, 1, we are expressly told that "there is a dark ahaḥ (day) and a bright ahaḥ (day)." Ahanî, therefore, means a couple of Day and Night, and we have seen that Ushâsâ-naktâ also means a couple of Day and Night. Are the two couples same or different ? If Ahanî be regarded as synonymous with Ushâsâ- naktâ or Aho-râtre, then the two couples would be identical; other- wise different. Fortunately, Ṛig. IV, 55, 3, furnishes us with the- means of solving this difficulty. There Ushâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî are separately invoked to grant protection to the worshipper, and the separate invocation clearly proves that the two couples are two separate dual deities, though each of them represents a couple of Day and Night.* Prof. Max Muller has noticed this difference between Ushâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî or the two Ahans; but he does not seem to have pushed it to its logical conclusion. If all the 360 days and nights of the year were of the same class as with us, there was no necessity of dividing them into two representative couples as Ushâsâ-naktâ

• Ṛig. IV, 55, 3;—उभे यथा नो अहनी निपात उषासानक्ता करतामद- ब्धे । See Max Muller's Lectures on the Science of Language, Vol. II, p. 534.

136 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS and Ahani. The general description “dark, bright and of various lengths” would have been quite sufficient to denote all the days and nights of the year. Therefore, if the distinction between Ushāsā-naktā and Ahanī, made in IV, 55, 3, is not to be ignored, we must find out an explanation of this distinction; and looking to the character of days and nights at different places on the surface of the earth from the Pole to the Equator, the only possible explanation that can be suggested is that the year spoken of in these passages was a circum-Polar year, made up of one long day and one long night, forming one pair, and a number of ordinary days and nights of various lengths, which, taking a single day and night as the type, can be described as the second couple, “bright, dark and of varying lengths.” There is no other place on the surface of the earth where the description holds good. At the Equator, we have only equal days and nights throughout the year, and they can be represented by a single couple “dark and bright, but always of the same length.” In fact, instead of virūpe the pair would be sarūpe. Between the Equator and the Arctic Circle, a day and night together never exceed twenty-four hours, though there may be a day of 23 hours, and a night of one hour and vice versa, as we approach the Arctic Circle. In this case, the days of the year will have to be represented by a typical couple, “dark and bright, but of various lengths, virūpe.” But as soon as we cross the Arctic Circle and go into “The Land of the Long Night,” the above description requires to be amended by adding to the first couple, another couple of the long day and the long night, the lengths of which would vary according to latitude. This second couple of the long day and the long night, which match each other, will have also to be designated as virūpe, with this difference, how- ever, that while the length of days and nights in the temperate

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 137

zone would vary at the same place, the length of the long night and the long day would not vary at one and the same place, but only at different latitudes. Taking a couple of Day and Night, as representing the days and nights of the year, we shall have, therefore, to divide the different kinds of diurnal changes over the globe into three classes:— (i) At the Equator,—A single couple; dark and bright, but always of the same form, or length (sarûpe). (ii) Between the Equator and the Arctic Circle,—A single couple; dark and bright, but of various forms, or lengths, (virûpe). (iii) Between the Arctic Circle and the Pole,—Two couples; each dark and bright, but of various forms, or lengths, (virûpe). At the Pole, there is only one day and one night of six months each. Now if we have an express passage in the Ṛig- Veda (IV, 55, 3) indicating two different couples of Day and Night, Ushásâ-naktâ and Ahanî, it is evident that the aho-râtre represented by them are the days and nights of the Circum-Polar regions, and of those alone. In the light of IV, 55, 3, we must, therefore, interpret III, 55, 11, quoted above, as describing two couples, one of the twin pair and the other of two sisters. The verse must, therefore, be translated:—“The twin pair (the first couple) make many forms (lengths); of the two one shines and the other is dark. Two sisters are they, the shyâvî or the dark and arushî or the bright, (the second couple).” No part of the verse is thus rendered superfluous, and the whole becomes far more comprehensible than otherwise. We have seen that days and nights are represented by two distinct typical couples in the Ṛig-Veda Ushásâ- naktâ and Ahanî; and that if the distinction is not unmeaning we must take this to be the description of the days and

138 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. nights within the Arctic Circle. Whether Ahanî means a couple of Day and Night distinct from Uṣhásá-naktá in every place where the word occurs, it is difficult to say. But that in some places, at least, it denotes a peculiar couple of the Day and Night, not included in, and different from, Uṣhásá-naktá is evident from IV, 55, 3. Now if Ahanî really means the couple of the long day and the long night, as distinguished from the ordinary days and nights, there is another way in which these two couples can be differentiated from each other. The ordinary days and nights follow each other closely, the day is succeeded by the night and the night by the day; and the two members of the couple, representing these days and nights, cannot be described as separated from each other. But the long night and the long day, though of equal duration, do not follow each other in close succession. The long night occurs about the time when the sun is at the winter solstice, and the long day when he is at the sum- mer solstice; and these two solstitial points are separated by 180°, being opposite to each other in the ecliptic. This character of Ahanî seems to have been traditionally known in the time of the Âraṇyakas. Thus the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka, I, 2, 3, in discussing the personified Year,* first says that the Year has one head, and two different mouths, and then remarks that all this is 'season-characteristic,' which the commentator explains by stating that the Year-God is said to have two mouths 'because it has two Ayanas, the northern and the southern, which include the seasons. But the statement important for our purpose is the one which follows next. The Âraṇyaka continues "To the right and the left side of the Year- God (are) the bright and the dark (days); and the following verse refers to it:—'Thy one (form) is bright, thy another sacrificial (dark), two

• Taitt. Âran. 1, 2, 3,--एक हि शिरो । नाना मुखे । कृत्स्नं तदृतुलक्षणम् ॥

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 139 Ahans of different forms, thou art like Dyau. Thou, O Self- dependent ! protectest all magic powers, O Pûṣhan ! let thy bounty be here auspicious.'* The verse, or the Mantra, here referred to is Ṛig. VI, 58, 1. Pûṣhan is there compared to Dyau and is said to have two forms, dark and bright, like the Ahanî. These dark and bright forms of Ahanî are said to constitute the right and the left side of the Year-God, that is, the two opposite parts of the body of the personified year. In other words the passage clearly states that the dark and the bright part of Ahanî, do not follow each other closely, but are situated on the diametrically opposite sides of the year. This can only be the case if the couple of Day and Night, represent- ed by Ahanî, be taken to denote the long night and the long day in the Arctic regions. There the long night is matched by the long day, and while the one occurs when the sun is at the winter-solstice, the other occurs when he is at the summer-solstice. The two parts of Ahanî are, therefore, very correctly represented as forming the right and the left side of the Year-God in the Âraṇyaka, and the passage thus materially supports the view about the nature of Ahanî mentioned above. Lastly, we have express passages in the Ṛig-veda where a long day is described. In V, 54, 5, an extended daily course (dîrgham yojanam) of the sun is mentioned and the Maruts are said to have extended their strength and greatness in a similar way.† But the most explicit state- ment about the long day is found in X, 138, 3. This

• Taitt. Âraṇyaka, 1, 2, 4,—शुक्लकृष्णे संवत्सरस्य । दक्षिणवामयोः पार्श्वयोः । तस्यैषा भवति । शुक्लं ते अन्यद्यजतं ते अन्यद्विषुरूपे अहनी द्यौरि- वासि । विश्वा हि माया अवसि स्वधावो भद्रा ते पूषन्निह रातिरस्तु । नात्र भुवनं। न पूषा न पशवः । नादित्यः । संवत्सर एव प्रत्यक्षेण प्रियतमं विद्यात् । † Ṛig. V, 54, 5—तद्वीर्यं वो मरुतो महित्वनं दीर्घं ततान सूर्यो न योजनम् ।

140 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. hymn celebrates the exploits of Indra, all of which are per- formed in aerial or heavenly regions. In the first verse the killing of Vṛitra, and the releasing of the dawns and the waters are mentioned; and in the second the sun is said to have been made to shine by the same process. The third verse* is as follows:— Vi sūryo madhye amuchad rathan divo vidad dāsāya pratimānam āryaḥ । Dṛiḍhāni Pipror asurasya māyinaḥ Indro vyāsyach chakṛivāṁ Ṛijishvanā ॥ The fourth, fifth and the sixth verses all refer to the destru- ction of Vṛitra's forts, the chastisement of Uṣhas and the placing of the moons in the heaven. But the third verse quoted above is alone important for our purpose. The words are simple and easy, and the verse may be thus translated, "The sun unyoked his car in the midst of heaven; the Ârya found a counter-measure (pratimānam) for the Dāsa. Indra, acting with Ṛijishvan, overthrew the solid forts of Pipru, the conjur- ing Asura." It is the first half of the verse that is relevant to our purpose. The sun is said to have unyoked his car, not at sunset, or on the horizon, but in the midst of heaven, there to rest for some time. There is no uncertainty about it, for the words are so clear; and the commentators have found it difficult to explain this extraordinary conduct of the sun in the midway of the heavens. Mr. Griffith says that it is, perhaps, an allusion to an eclipse, or to the detention of the sun to enable the Aryans to complete the overthrow of their ene- mies. Both of these suggestions are, however, not satisfactory. During a solar eclipse the sun being temporarily hidden by the moon is invisible wholly or partially and is not besides stationary. The description that the sun unyoked his car in the mid-heaven

• Ṛig. X, 138, 3—वि सूर्यो मध्ये अमुचद्रथं दिवो. विंदद्दासाय प्रति- मानमार्यः । दृळ्हानि पिप्रोरसुरस्य मायिनः इंद्रो व्यासच्चकृवाँ ऋजिश्वना ॥

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 141 cannot, therefore, apply to the eclipsed sun. As regards the- other suggestion, viz., that the sun remained stationary for a while to allow his favourite race, the Aryans, to overthrow their enemies, it seems to have had its origin in the Biblical passage (Joshua, X, 12, 13), where the sun is said to have stood still, at the word of Joshua, until the people had avenged them- selves upon their enemies. But there is no authority for importing this Biblical idea into the Ṛig-Veda. Indra's exploits are described in a number of hymns in the Ṛig-Veda, but in no other hymn he is said to have made the sun stand still for the Aryans. We must, therefore, reject both the explanations suggested by Griffith. Sâyaṇa gets over the difficulty by interpreting the phrase, ratham vi amuchat madhye divaḥ, as meaning that “ the sun loosened (vi-amuchat) his carriage, that is, set it free to travel, towards the middle (madhye) of heaven, (ratham prasthânâya vi-muktavân).” Sâyaṇa's meaning, therefore, is that when Indra obtained compensation from Vṛitra, he let loose- the chariot of the sun to travel towards the midst of the sky. But the construction is evidently a strained one. The verb vi much is used in about a dozen places in the Ṛig-Veda in relation to horses, and everywhere it means to ‘unharness,’ ‘unyoke,’ or ‘separate the horses from the carriage for rest;’ and even Sâyaṇa has interpreted it in the same way. Thus vi-muchya is explained by him as rathat vishliṣhya in I, 104, 1, and rathât vi-muchya in III, 32, 1, and rathât visṛijya in X, 160, 1, (also compare I, 171, 1 ; I, 177, 4 ; VI, 40, 1). The most natural meaning of the present verse would, therefore, be that the ‘sun unyoked his carriage.’ But even supposing that vi much can be interpreted to mean ‘to loosen for travel,’ the expression would be appropriate only when there is an antecedent stoppage or slow motion of the sun. The question why the sun stopped or slackened his motion in

142 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. the midst of the sky would, therefore, still remain unsolved. The phrase divaḥ madhye naturally means ‘in the midst of the sky,’ and cannot be interpreted to mean ‘towards the mid-heaven.’ Of course if the sun was below the horizon, we may describe him as having loosened his horses for travel as in V, 62, 1; but even there the meaning seems to be that the horses rested at the place. In the present case the sun is already in the midst of heaven, and we cannot take him below the horizon without a pal- pable distortion of meaning. Nor can we properly explain the action of retaliation (pratimānam), if we accept Sâyaṇa's inter- pretation. We must, therefore, interpret the first half of the verse to mean that “the sun unyoked his carriage in the midst of heaven.” There is another passage in the Ṛig-Veda which speaks of the sun halting in the midst of heaven. In VII, 87, 5, the king Varuṇa is said to have made “the golden (sun) rock like a swing in the heaven” (chakre divi preṅkhaṁ hiraṇmayam), clearly meaning that the sun swayed backwards and forwards in the heaven being visible all the time, (cf. also VII, 88, 3). The idea expressed in the present verse is exactly the same, for even within the Arctic regions the sun will appear as swinging only during the long continuous day, when he does not go below the horizon once every twenty-four hours. There is, therefore, nothing strange or uncommon in the present verse which says that “ the sun unyoked his carriage for some time in the midst of the sky ; ' and we need not be impatient to escape from the natural meaning of the verse. A long halt of the sun in the midst of the heaven is here clearly described, and we must take it to refer to the long day in the Arctic region. The statement in the second line further supports the same view. European scholars appear to have been misled, in this instance, by the words Ārya and Dâsa, which they are accustomed to interpret as

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT 143 meaning the Aryan and the non-Aryan race. But though the words may be interpreted in this way in some passages, such is not the case everywhere. The word Dâsa is applied to Indra's enemies in a number of places. Thus Shambara is called a Dâsa (IV, 30, 14,) and the same adjective is applied to Pipru in VIII, 32, 2, and to Namuchi in V, 30, 7. Indra is said to inspire fear into the Dâsa in X, 120, 2, and in II, 11, 2, he is described as having rent the Dâsa, who considered himself immortal. In the verse under consideration Indra's victory over Pipru is celebrated, and we know that Pipru is elsewhere called a Dâsa. It is, therefore, quite natural to suppose that the words Arya and Dâsa in the above verse, refer to Indra and Pipru, and not to the Aryan and the non-Aryan race. The exploits described are all heavenly, and it jars with the context to take a single sentence in the whole hymn as referring to the victory of the Aryan over the non-Aryan race. There is again the word pratimâna (lit. counter- measure), which denotes that what has been done is by way of retaliation, a sort of counter-poise or counter-blast, with a view to avenge the mischief done by Dâsa. A battle between the Aryans and the non-Aryans cannot be so described unless a previous defeat of the Aryans is first alluded to. The plain mean- ing of the verse, therefore, is that the sun was made to halt in the midst of the sky, producing a long day, and Indra thus found a counter-poise for Dâsa, his enemy. For we know that dark- ness is brought on by the Dâsa, and it is he who brings on the long night; but if the Dâsa made the night long, Indra retalia- ted or counter-acted by making the day as long as the night of the Dâsa. The long night of the Arctic regions is, we have seen, matched by the long day in those regions, and the present verse expresses the same idea of matching the one by the other. There is no reference to the victory of

144 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. the Aryan race over the non-Aryans, or anything of that kind as supposed by Western scholars. Sâyaṇa, who had no historic theories to mislead him, has rightly interpreted Ârya and Dâsa in this verse as referring to Indra and his enemy; but he, in his turn, has misinterpreted, as shewn above, the first half of the verse in regard to the sun's long halt in the midst of the sky. The misinterpretation of the second hemistich comes from Western scholars, like Muir, who interprets Ârya, as meaning the Aryans and Dâsa, the non-Aryans. This shows how in the absence of the true key to the meaning of a passage, we may be led away by current theories, even where the words are plain and simple in themselves. We thus see that the Ṛig-Veda speaks of two different couples of Day and Night, one alone of which represents the ordinary days and nights in the year, and the second, the Ahanî, is a distinct couple by itself, forming, according to the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka, the right and the left hand side of the Year, indicat- ing the long Arctic day and night. The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ again gives us in clear terms a tradition that in the former age the night was so long that men were afraid it would not dawn. We have also a number of expressions in the Ṛig-Veda denoting ‘long nights’ or ‘long and ghastly darkness,’ and also the ‘long journey’ of the sun. Prayers are also offered to Vedic deities to enable the worshipper to reach safely the end of the night, the ‘other boundary of which is not known.’ Finally we have an express text declaring that the sun halted in the midst of the sky and thereby retaliated the mischief brought on by Dâsa's causing the long night. Thus we have not only the long day and the long night mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda, but the idea that the two match each other is also found therein, while the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka tells us, that they form the opposite sides of the Year-God. Besides the passages

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 145 proving the long duration of the dawn, we have, therefore, sufficient independent evidence to hold that the long night in the Arctic regions and its counterpart the long day were both known to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda, and the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ distinctly informs us that it was a phenomenon of the former (purâ) age. I shall close this chapter with a short discussion of another Circum-Polar characteristic, I mean the southern course of the sun. It is previously stated, that the sun can never appear over- head at any station in the temperate or the frigid zone, and that an observer stationed within these zones in the northern hemi- sphere will see the sun to his right hand or towards the south, while at the North Pole the sun will seem to rise from the south. Now the word dakshiṇa in Vedic Sanskrit denotes both the 'right hand' and the 'south,' as it does in other Aryan languages ; for, as observed by Prof. Sayce, these people had to face the rising sun with their right hands to the south, in addressing their gods, and hence "Sanskrit dakshiṇa, Welsh dehau and Old Irish des all mean at once 'right hand' and 'south'."* With this explanation before us, we can now understand how in a number of passages in the Ṛig-Veda Western scholars translate dakshiṇa by 'right side,' where Indian scholars take the word to mean 'the southern direction.' There is a third meaning of dakshiṇâ, viz., 'largess' or 'guerdon,' and in some places the claims of rich largesses seem to have been pushed too far. Thus when the suns are said to be only for dakshiṇâvats in I, 125, 6, it looks very probable that originally the expression had some reference to the southern direction rather than to the gifts given at sacrifices. In III, 58, 1, Sûrya is called the son of Dakshiṇâ, and even if Dakshiṇâ be here taken to mean the Dawn, yet the question why the Dawn was called

• See Sayce's Introduction to the Science of Language, Vol. II, p. 130.

146 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. Dakshiṇá remains, and the only explanation at present suggested is that Dakshiṇá means ‘skilful’ or ‘expert.’ A better way to explain these phrases is to make them refer to the southerly direction ; and after what has been said above such an explana- tion will seem to be highly probable. It is, of course, necessary to be critical in the interpretation of the Vedic hymns, but I think that we shall be carrying our critical spirit too far, if we say that in no passage in the Ṛig-Veda dakshiṇá or its derivatives are used to denote the southerly direction (I, 95, 6 ; II, 42, 3). Herodotus informs us (IV, 42) that certain Phœnician mariners were com- manded by Pharoah Neco, king of Egypt, to sail round Lybia (Africa) and return by the Pillars of Hercules (Straits of Gibralter). The mariners accomplished the voyage and returned in the third year. But Horodotus disbelieves them, because, on their return they told such (to him incredible) stories, that in rounding Lybia they saw the sun to their right. Herodotus could not believe that the sun would ever appear in the north ; but he little thought that what was incredible to him would itself be regarded as indisputable evidence of the authenticity of the account in later days. Let us take a lesson from this story, and not interpret dakshiṇá, either by ‘right-hand side’ or by ‘largess,’ in every passage in the Ṛig-Veda. There may not be distinct passages to show that the sun, or the dawn, came from the south. But the very fact that Uṣhas is called Dakshiṇá (I, 123, 1 ; X, 107, 1), and the sun, the son of Dakshiṇá (III, 58, 1), is itself very suggestive, and possibly we have here phrases which the Vedic bards employed because in their days these were old and recognised expressions in the language. Words, like fossils, very often preserve the oldest ideas or facts in a language; and though Vedic poets may have forgotten the original meaning of these phrases, that is no reason why we should refuse to draw from the history of these words such conclusions

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 147 as may legitimately follow from it. The fact that the north is designated by the word ut-tara, meaning 'upper,' and the south by adha-ra, meaning 'lower,' also points to the same conclusion; for the north cannot be over-head or 'upper' except to an obser- ver at or near the North Pole. In later literature, we find a tradition that the path of the sun lies through regions which are lower (adhaḥ) than the abode of the Seven Ṛishis, or the con- stellation of Ursa Major.* That ecliptic lies to the south of the con- stellation is plain enough, but it cannot be said to be below the constellation, unless the zenith of the observer is in the con- stellation, or between it and the North Pole, a position, possible only in the case of an observer in the Arctic region. I have already quoted a passage from the Ṛig-Veda, which speaks of the Seven Bears (Ṛikshâḥ), as being placed on high in the heavens (uchchâḥ). But I have not been able to find out any Vedic authority for the tradition that the sun's path lies below the constellation of the Seven Bears. It has also been stated previously that mere southerly direction of the sun, even if com- pletely established, is not a sure indication of the observer being within the circum-polar region, as the sun will appear to move always to the south of the observer even in the temperate zone. It is, therefore, not necessary to pursue this point further. It has been shown that the Ṛig-Veda mentions the long night and the long day, and we shall see in the next chapter that the months and the seasons mentioned in this Old Book fully accord with the theory we have formed from the evidence hitherto discussed. * See Kâlidâsa's Kumârasambhava, VI, 7,—अधःप्रस्थापिताश्वेन समा- वर्जितकेतुना । सहस्ररश्मिना साक्षात्सप्रणाममुदीक्षिताः । Also I, 16,—सप्त- र्षिहस्तावचितावशेषानधो विवस्वान् परिवर्तमानः । See also Mallinâtha's commentary on these verses.

CHAPTER VII. MONTHS AND SEASONS. 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 ses- sions considered—Seven-fold character of the sun in the Ve- das—The legend of Aditi—She presents her seven sons to the gods and casts away the eighth—Various explanations of the legend in the Brâhmaṇas and the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka —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 Ṛig-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 Sâ- yaṇa the words denote persons sacrificing for nine or ten months—Prof. Lignana’s explanation improbable—The ad- jective Virûpas applied to the Angirases—Indicates other varieties of these sacrificers—Saptagu, or seven Hotris or Vipras—Legend of Dîrghatamas—As narrated in the Mahâ- bhârata—A protege of Ashvins in the Ṛig-Veda—Growing old in the tenth yuga—Meaning of yuga discussed—Mânu- shâ yugâ means ‘human ages,’ and not always ‘human tribes’ in the Ṛig-Veda—Two passages in proof thereof—Interpre- tations 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 Ṛig-Veda passage bearing on it discus- sed—The year of five seasons described as residing in waters’

MONTHS AND SEASONS. 149 —Indicates darkness of the long night—Not made up by combining any two consecutive seasons out of six—The ex- planation in the Brâhmaṇas improbable—Summary. 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 Ṛig-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 Ṛig-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 condition of seasons, months or years? It is stated previously that the calendar current at the time of the Vedic Saṁhitâs 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.”* 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

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

150 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. people ever lived within the Arctic regions, and immigrated 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 ;* 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,† 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 (ṛitus). 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 sacri- ficers 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

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

MONTHS AND SEASONS. 151 or the oldest sacrificial system to differ from the one current in Vedic times. In the Saṁhitâs 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 sun- shine 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

152 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 Ṛig-Veda, or other Saṁhitâs. 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 Ṛig-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 Ṛig-Veda. Thus in IX, 114, 3, seven Âdityas and seven priests are men- tioned together, though the names of the different suns are not given therein. In II, 27, 1, Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Varuṇa, Dakṣha and Aṁsha are mentioned by name as so many dif- ferent 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 Ṛig-Veda, is rendered more clearly by Aditeḥ putraḥ (Aditi's son) in A. V. XIII, 2, 9. 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 re- mains unexplained, unless we hold that the Vedic bards had anticipated the discovery of seven prismatic rays or colours,