Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 23
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 168
________________ 158 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. [JUNE, 1894. Great Bear, and the Phoenicians by the Little Bear ;12 farther that the Indian astronomers do not name a pole star, and lastly that European writers in the Middle Ages, though they do mention the north star, do not term it the polar star, since at that time our pole star was still distant some 5 degrees from the pole. Now when, in the Indian ritual of marriage, the pole star (called expressly "the immovable" dhruva) finds a place, the usage, though first mentioned in the Grihya Sitras only, must date back to a very ancient period, when there was a real pole star. After w bat bas been said above, it can only be a Draconis. More than five centuries ago, this star stood nearer the pole than our pole star does now. It was therefore long enough & pole star, in the narrower sense of the word, to be recognized as such by the Hindus, and become closely bound up with their views and customs. In addition its position was such as must lead to its recognition as a steadfast pole, round which the other stars revolved, and was therefore easy to find. It is placed equally distant from the angles of a somewhat irregular four-sided figure formed by and * Draconis, B Ursae Minoris called according to the Pet. Dict. Uttânapada) and Ursae Majoris (near which star stands Alcor-Arundhati, which is likewise shewn to the bride). Since therefore we must look upon a Draconis as the dhruva of the Vedic period, it follows from the table above, that this took place some centuries before and after 2800 B. C. This date coincides nearly exactly with that which we obtained above from the position of the colures in the Brahmana period, perhaps for its beginning. Thus both results, obtained in different ways, harmonize, and mutually confirm their correctness in the completest manner. Many may be inclined to shake their heads at these conclusions, inasmuch as they stand in too decided opposition to the generally accepted views. But on what is the common view founded P Chiefly we think on the splitting up of the Vedio period into several successive divisions of literature, and a somewhat subjective guess at their duration. M. Müller assuines for the three last of his four strata of Vedic literature, in order to avoid a too extravagant estimate,13 a minimum of 200 years. But it is easy to see that this estimate is far below the minimum of the possible period, during which in India a department of literature could take its rise, reach perfection, become obsolete and die out, to give place finally to a thoroughly new departure. For a Brahmana, for example, could only to widely spread by being learned by heart by a gradually extending circle of Brahmans, and with the size of the country this would certainly demand a long time. Every man, who learned such a work, became, so to say, a copy of it, and to carry out the figure, a written copy, to which no new work could be added. But several of such works must successively take the place of their predecessors, before the entire class of works in question became obsolete. I maintain that a minimum of a thousand, years must rather be taken for such & process, which in the conditions that prevailed in ancient India was of necessity a very slow one, especially when we take into consideration that in historical times the literatare of the classical period remained for more than a thousand years nearly unaltered. But I shall not continue these general arguments in order not to overstep the space allotted to me too greatly. Concluding Note. The previous investigation had been finished and communicated orally to others, when I got information of the work of Prof. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, which leads to the same results. These investigations were put on paper in their present form before I saw his summary of the principal facts and arguments in the Orion. Nevertheless, I have determined to publish my arguments, as, in spite of our agreement in the main result, our methods are different. 12 Aratus (Phaen. 87-89) and Eratosthenes (Catasterismi) do mention, it is true, a star below the square of the Little Bear (probably not a) as the poles, round which the vault of heaven revolved. In the root of the ancient literature it does not seem to be noticed. 13 MM. Rig Veda, VOL IV. p. vii. T. M.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412