"Chapter I. Prehistoric times"
"Chapter II. Ice Age"
"Chapter III. Arctic regions"
"Chapter IV. Night of the Gods"
"Chapter V. Vedic Dawns"
"Chapter VI. Long day and long night"
"Chapter VII. Months and seasons"
"Chapter VIII. The path of the cows"
Promotional video:
If the ancestors of the Vedic bards ever lived near the North Pole, then the cosmic meteorological conditions of these places could not but affect their mythology.
We have already examined most of the passages of the Vedas, which directly indicate that the polar or circumpolar characteristics given in chapter III were traditionally known to the Vedic bards. We started by looking at the night of the gods, or day and night for six months, and found that all of this can be traced back to the Indo-Iranian period, if not the Indo-Germanic period.
A careful study of the Rig Veda hymns dedicated to the dawn revealed that the goddess Ushas, the lord of the dawn, is often invoked in the plural, and this can only be taken as an indication that there were many dawns, mutually merged together. This assumption is supported by expressive passages of the Vedic literature, indicating, without admitting ambiguous interpretation, that these dawns were thirty and that several days elapsed between their first glimpse and the appearance of the sun. We have also seen that the dawn, as the Rig Veda expressively describes, walks in a circle for a long time, like a wheel, and this is possible only in the case of the polar dawn.
These facts provide evidence that the Vedic bards were familiar with natural phenomena that can only be observed in the Arctic region. But to make all this more convincing, I in three chapters quoted and discussed the passages of the Vedas, confirming that the long Arctic nights and their corresponding long days of different lengths, as well as a year of ten months and five seasons - all this was also familiar to the poets Rig Veda.
The ancient sacrificial systems, especially the annual sattras and night rituals, also showed that in ancient times the annual sacrifices were not conducted for twelve months, as in our days, but lasted only nine or ten months, and a hundred night sacrifices were performed, as their name indicates., in the gloom of the long night. The legends of Dirghatamas and the sons of Aditi, as well as the tradition of offering sacrifices to the Navagwamis and Dashagwamis, also lead to the same conclusion. All this shows that we did not rely on facts snatched here and there and not having mutual connection. We have seen that a night for six months, a long dawn in its beauty swirling across the sky, a long day corresponding to such a night, as well as normal alternating days and nights of different lengths, and at the same time a year of sunlight lasting less than twelve months,- all this acts as the main characteristics of the polar and circumpolar zone, determining its calendar. And when you meet with the most expressive passages in the Vedas, in this ancient fixation of the thoughts and feelings of the ancient Aryans, showing that each of these characteristics was familiar to the Vedic bards - after all, they themselves lived in an area where the year consisted of 360–365 days, then you steadily come to the conclusion that the Vedic poets themselves had to know the traditions associated with these facts, and their ancestors had to live in a region where such natural phenomena existed. Of course, one should not expect that all conclusions are equally definitive, especially when it comes to facts that took place thousands of years ago, but if we remember that astronomical data are mutually related in this way and that if one of them is firmly established,then the rest follow from it as inevitability, which means that the cumulative effect of the above facts cannot be unconvincing.
Yes, I agree that much of what I have quoted above in support of the Arctic theory is explained for the first time in this way, but I have already mentioned that a real approach to explaining such passages has been found only in the last 30-40 years. Yaska and Sayana did not know anything definite about the conditions of the Arctic region, and when they could not understand some of the Vedic passages, they were satisfied either with an exemplary retelling of their verbal content, or gave them a meaning corresponding to their imagination. Western scientists have corrected some of these mistakes, but since they did not even admit the possibility of the existence of the Arctic homeland in the pre-glacial period (in their works for these 30-40 years), they either simply ignored or at random explained all the data about it that were encountered them in the Avesta or Rigveda.
Of this category of formerly incomprehensible passages, I have included many in my analysis, but I am sure that if my explanations are considered without prejudice and taking into account the latest scientific discoveries, they will be considered much simpler and more natural than those that are common now. In some cases, there was no need for new translations: the passages were translated correctly, but in the absence of a true key to the perception of the meaning, their real essence was either omitted or misunderstood. In such cases, I tried to reveal the inner shade of the meaning of the passage, citing in each case the reasons and grounds for my approach.
Sometimes, in this regard, it became necessary to enter some data, supposedly directly and not related to the issue under consideration, but in general, it seems to me, it will be found that, as far as possible, I limited myself to the framework of the discussion on the issue of identifying direct evidence to be identified. and researched them, adhering to rigorous methods of historical and scientific research. I did not approach the issue with a preconceived conviction in favor of the Arctic theory, no, at first I viewed it as completely incredible. But, as data and evidence accumulated in its favor, I had to accept it. Perhaps the testimony given in the previous chapters will, I hope, make the same impression on the reader.
But now, in subsequent chapters, I intend to provide evidence of a different nature in support of the Arctic theory. If the ancestors of the Vedic bards ever lived near the North Pole, then the cosmic meteorological conditions of these places could not but affect their mythology. And if our theory is correct, then a careful study of Vedic myths can reveal facts that cannot be explained using any other theory. The presumptive value of such evidence will be lower in comparison with the above-mentioned direct indications in the texts - after all, different researchers explain myths and legends in different ways. So, Yaska spoke of three or even four schools of translation, each of which understood the nature and character of the Vedic gods in its own way. So, in one of them we were assured that many Vedic gods were historical characters,deified by virtue of their supernatural virtues and exploits. Other theologians divide the gods into "Karma-devatas", that is, those who attained the state of divinity as a result of their deeds, and "Ajana-devatas" - those who were a god by birth. And the followers of the Nirukta school (etymologists) argue that the Vedic gods were the embodiment of some cosmic or physical phenomena, such as, for example, the appearance of dawn or the dissection of a cloud by lightning. The adherents of the Adhyatmika school explained the essence of the gods in their own special philosophical way, and besides them there are other methods of these explanations. And the followers of the Nirukta school (etymologists) argue that the Vedic gods were the embodiment of some cosmic or physical phenomena, such as, for example, the appearance of dawn or the dissection of a cloud by lightning. The adherents of the Adhyatmika school explained the essence of the gods in their own special philosophical way, and besides them there are other methods of these explanations. And the followers of the Nirukta school (etymologists) argue that the Vedic gods were the embodiment of some cosmic or physical phenomena, such as, for example, the appearance of dawn or the dissection of a cloud by lightning. The adherents of the Adhyatmika school explained the essence of the gods in their own special philosophical way, and besides them there are other methods of these explanations.
But this is not the place for research and study of the methods of different schools. I would only like to emphasize that those who explain Vedic myths based on the assumption that they, directly or allegorically, represent ethical, historical and philosophical facts, are not inclined to perceive conclusions based on a theory that interprets Vedic myths as referring to certain cosmic and physical phenomena. It is for this reason that I set aside a separate chapter for discussion and consideration of mythological evidence after considering all the evidence directly related to the main purpose of the book.
The data proving the existence of a long lasting dawn, or long day and night, are not influenced by various theories that consider the content of Vedic myths, and therefore can be defined by the lawyer's term "direct". In the case of encountering mythological evidence, only those will perceive the value of a conclusion based on careful consideration of the myth, who accept the methods of the Nirukta school. It is true that this school of explanations has existed for a very long time and that modern scholars have accepted their method without restrictions, although they sometimes differ from the old attitudes of Nirukta, like the words of Yaska, who explained certain details in a different way. But I nevertheless, while developing a new theory, considered it safer to separate the data of mythology from direct instructions regarding the paragraphs of consideration, even in the caseif two lines of inquiry seemed to converge towards the same result.
Yaska found that in Nirukta most of the Vedic legends were explained on the basis of the fact that they were generated either by the fact of the daily triumph of light over darkness, or by the victory of the god of thunder over black clouds that held the fertilizing waters and the light of the sun. So, when the Ashvins rescued Vartik's quail from the wolf's mouth, Yaska believes that the legend means the appearance of dawn or light from the darkness of the night (Nir., V, 21). His explanation of the character of Vritra is also different: speaking of this demon, he points to the opinion of different schools (Nir. II, 18) in this way: “Who was Vritra? A cloud, say the niruktaki; Asura, the son of Tvashtri, is spoken in the Aitihasa (Ichihasa) school. The rainfall is increased by the mixing of water and light, which is figuratively described as a conflict. In hymns and texts, Brahman Vritra is described as a serpent. When he was killed, the waters flowed freely."
The theories of thunder and dawn formed the basis of interpretation in the Nirukta school, and although Western scholars have made amendments to this, nevertheless, the followers of this school continue to adhere to the old explanation. Professor Max Müller believed that this point of view emerged several centuries before the new era.
Thus, the legend of Prajapati, who loved his own daughter, refers, according to Aitareya Brahman, to the sun, hurrying upward after the dawn and sky (III, 33). The interpreter Kumarila expands this view, transferring it to Indra and Achilya, which, he believes, represent the sun and night. And although the niruktakas fully accepted the theory that explained the Vedic myths as a reflection of cosmic and physical phenomena, they were not able to explain every Vedic myth or legend in this way, since their knowledge of the physical world was still very limited at that time. For example, of all the legends about the Ashvins, Yaska could explain only one, based on the theory of dawn, namely, that Vartika was saved from the mouth of a wolf. Now this deficiency has already been partially corrected by Western scientists, who, living in colder countries, know about the weakening of the power of the sun in winter,or about the gradually coming triumph of spring over winter, or about the revival of the weakened power of the sun with the onset of summer. They used these phenomena to explain the origin of certain Vedic myths that could not be associated with the theory of a thunderstorm or dawn.
So, there are three known theories of explaining Vedic myths in accordance with the principles of the Nirukta school, and we need to briefly describe them before we move on to identifying their inconsistency with those myths and legends to the essence of which they are applied.
So, according to the theory of dawn: “All theogony and philosophy in the ancient world is associated with the fact of dawn. Dawn is the mother of the gods of light, the sun in its various manifestations, morning, day, spring. Zarya itself is the sparkling face of immortality."
Professor Max Müller wrote: “The dawn, which for us is just a beautiful sight, was for the ancient observers of this phenomenon and for thinkers a problem of problems. The unknown was the land from which this shining emblem of heavenly power appeared every day, which gave rise to the first impression in a person of a connection with another world, of supreme power, order and wisdom. That phenomenon, which we simply call the rising of the sun, appeared before their eyes as the riddle of all mysteries - the riddle of existence. The days of their lives grew out of a dark hole, which every morning turned out to be full of light and life. And further: “New life flashed every morning in front of their eyes, and the fresh wind of the dawn reached them like a greeting that crossed the golden threshold of the sky, flying from distant lands behind the mountains, behind the clouds, beyond the dawn, beyond the sea of immortality that gave birth to us.
It seemed to them that the dawn opened the golden gates to the sun, its triumphant passage, and while these gates were wide open, their eyes and thoughts in a childish way tried to penetrate beyond the finite world. This silent spectacle awakened in the minds of people thoughts about infinity, about immortality, about divinity, and the names that were bestowed on the dawn turned into the names of the carriers of higher powers."
This description is more poetic than real. But this scientist explains many Vedic myths, based on the idea that they are all associated with stories about the dawn in its different forms. For example, the story that Saranya (the sun), having given birth to twins from Vivasvat, ran away from him, turning into a mare, and he began to pursue her, assuming the image of a stallion, is explained as follows: the dawn disappeared with the approach of the sun, giving birth to a couple - day and night … Other legends are that Surya married Soma; that the bulls, these were morning mists belonging to Vrshakapaya, were swallowed by Indra; that Aditi became the mother of Adityas, etc. - all explained in relation to different aspects of dawn.
Likewise, in the myth of Sarama (Dawn) crossing the waters to find the cows that Pani abducted, she is likened to the dawn bringing the morning rays; similarly, when Urvasi says that he is leaving, and Pururavas calls himself Vasishtha, that is, "the brightest" - and this is again the same dawn flying away from the embrace of the rising sun. More precisely, the dawn was in ancient times for people "everything that there is", and many legends are explained only in this way. This was until the monotonous nature of this interpretation forced Professor Müller to ask himself the question: “Is the dawn of all that exists? Is it the sun? " He asked himself this question again and again and came to the answer that in the process of his many investigations he saw that indeed the sun and dawn were the main essence of the plots of the ancient myths of the Aryan race. Dawn mentioned hereis it a daily dawn that we see in the areas of the tropical and temperate zones, that is, this is the daily victory of light over darkness, and this could fill the souls of the ancient bards with fear and awe, which was reflected in the myths?
It is easy to imagine how this theory was influenced by the discovery that Ushas, the goddess of dawn in the Rig Veda, is not the same as the fleeting dawn of the tropics, but the long dawn of the North Pole or circumpolar region. And the established Arctic theory will show in due time that many of the explanations of mythological pictures must be written in a different way. But in this book we will not solve these problems, for it is devoted only to studying the Vedic evidence in support of this theory.
The theory of the thunderstorm was first put forward by the Indians, followers of the Nirukta school, in the form of a kind of addition to the theory of the dawn, with the goal of taking into account those myths to which the latter was not applicable. The main legend explained on the basis of the thunderstorm theory was the myth of Indra and Vritra, and this explanation was almost unconditionally accepted by all Western scholars. The word "Indra" was taken to the root "Hin" - "a drop of rain", and "Vritra" was taken to the root "vr" - "to cover, to embrace", explaining that it "covers (holds)" the moisture of rain clouds. After such an explanation of these two names, they should have correlated everything with the theory of thunderstorms, distorting the text if it could not be translated without coincidence with it. For example, when Indra breaks a mountain and in this way frees the rivers, then, according to Nirukta, it should have been translated so that the mountain is a thundercloud, and the rivers are streams of rain. The fact that Indra belonged to such weapons as lightning ("vajra") should have meant that Indra was the god of thunderstorms, and thunderstorms do not happen without showers. The fact that the winds-Maruta helped him in battles were just as easily associated with a strong wind during a thunderstorm.
But in the legend there was also a point much more difficult to explain - this is that Vritra and Ahi surrounded and captured water. If this is the moisture of the clouds, then it is easy to imagine that the demon of drought will not let them. But the Rig Veda often speaks of streams ("sindhu") that flowed on the ground when Vritra was killed. And if these rivers were, according to this theory, the rivers of the Punjab, then it is difficult to imagine how they could be described as surrounded and captured by Vritra. But since the imagination of the Vedic scholars could be conveniently applied to any occasion, and it was suggested to them that, if the rivers of India often dry up completely in the summer heat, the god of the rainy season who brings them back to life could well be described as rescuing them from the clutches of Vritra …
Nirukta's Indian followers did not expand on this theory. But in the hands of Germanic mythologists, the theory of thunderstorms turned into an intermediary for the theory of dawn, and such subjects as, for example, the story of Saranya, were explained by them as a picture of the movement of clouds of a thunderstorm that covered the entire sky. “Clouds, thunderstorms, rains, lightning and thunder,” says Professor Kuhn, “were the spectacle that most influenced the imagination of the early Aryans and directed them to search for terrestrial objects for comparison with the ever-changing pictures of the stormy sky. People felt at home, being on earth, and all things on earth were relatively familiar to them, and even the rising and setting of the heavenly bodies were considered by them calmly, as they were regular, but they could not overcome the keenest interest in those amazing meteorological changes, so irregularly and mysteriously appearing,which made such an immediate and tangible impact, good or bad, on the affairs and destinies of people. Professor Kuhn saw in these meteorological phenomena the main reason for the origin of all the myths and superstitions of the Indo-Europeans, and in accordance with such beliefs, Professor R. Roth explains the image of Saranya as a dark cloud hanging over the beginning of all things, and Vivasvata compares it with heavenly light.
A third theory has arisen, connected in its origin, like the first, with the sun. This was an attempt to explain certain Vedic myths by the fact that they were generated by the idea of the victory of spring over snow and winter. Yaska and other followers of Nirukta lived in areas where the contrast between spring and winter was not as noticeable as in the more northern lands, and perhaps this is why their theory of spring was not very widely developed when applied to Vedic myths. But Professor Max Müller tried to use it to explain most of the Ashwins' exploits. So, all their deeds set out below were explained by the fact that the sun restored its strength after the period of its winter decline: Ashvins returned youth to Chhyavana; they protected Atri from heat and darkness; they rescued Vandana from the pit where he was buried alive; they replaced Vishpala's leg, which she had lost in battle;they restored sight to the blind Rijrashwa.
So, the birth of the spring sun, its battle with the army of winter and its victory, which marks the beginning of spring - all this was, according to the theory of spring, the key to explaining many myths in which the sun god was described as dying, weakening or subject to various other troubles. Physical phenomena here, in contrast to the theory of dawn, appear as annual. But both of these theories are solar and as such contrast with the theory of thunderstorms, which is associated with phenomena of meteorological origin.
In addition to these three theories - dawn, thunderstorm and spring - researcher Narayana Ayangar (Bangalore) recently tried to explain the essence of several Vedic myths, putting forward a hypothesis about their connection with the constellations Orion and Aldebaran. This theory, unlike others, can be conditionally called astral. But all these theories cannot be considered in detail here, and there is no need for this, since our goal is different. I would only like to show that, despite the many theories, a number of facts in many legends, most important in their content, remain unexplained - mythologists either completely ignored them, or threw them aside as insignificant and insignificant. If everything could be explained with the help of the theories of the dawn or the thunderstorm, we would not hesitate to accept some new theory, for which there would simply be no room left. But since so many facts that are still not understood can be satisfactorily and accordingly perceived only from the point of view of the Arctic theory, we will justifiably cite these legends as evidence in support of this theory. It is from this perspective that I intend to analyze some of the essential Vedic myths in this and subsequent chapters.
Continuation: Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters. 1. Legend of Indra and Vritra