________________
66
D. D, KOSAMBI
the most gcncrous of princcs, who victoriously achicvcd chicftainship of the Panis like Urukakşa Gūngya. . When wc rccall that the Rgvcdic Panis arc regularly maligncd as grccdy, mcrcantilc, and cvcn cattlc-stcalcrs (x.108 gloss) Vstra himself bcing a Pani at times, or that they arc dcmons-which mcans old encmics of the Aryans, it is clear how Bharadvaja had sinncd. However, hc had another Angiras prcdcccssor, Vāmadeva. Ms.10.106 tells us that starving Vāmadeva was unstaincd by cating dog's flesh, and this is again supported by a tk of Vámadeva (iv.18.13) where the sccr narrates that in distress he was reduced to sccing his wisc in degradation, and to cooking a dog's entrails. But this is no less à dānasluti of Indra, in older form, than Bharadvāja's to Bțbu; for Vūmadeva concludes that then thc Falcon (Indra) brought him Soma. This can only mcan granting the right to Soma, which implics granting membership in the trihc, i.e. adoption as an Aryan follower or pricst of Indra. Says Vāmadeva (iv.24.10) "Who will huy from me, for ten cows, this Indra who is minc? After hc has defcated thc cncmics, let him return (Indra) to me". This has been interpreted as hawking an image or fetish of Indra for hirc, a unique practice in thc Rgvcda not supported by any authority. But hiring out the rşi's scrvices for a specific occasion, to secure the aid of Indra 'in battle, would sccm far more natural, would fit thc context of the hymn better, and is also thc traditional Brahmin practice. Getting Indra back is csscntial ; "What use to you (Indra) arc the cows of the Kikatas” (iii.53.14) shows such an attempt at cnticing Indra away from others. As for the specific mention of those who did not bclicvc in Indra, we have two quite distinct classcs : those who arc thc cncmics belonging to thc aboriginal population (vstras, dasyus, etc.) and thosc who are treated with more circumspection though denying Indra, as in ii.12.5, viii. 100.3. Thesc might be vrátyas, cxtravedic though Aryan, but later tradition like that of the Brhaddcvată says cxplicitly that the reference is to particular scors, Brahmins who had once dcnicd Indra and then "scen", i.c. acknowledged him. There is no rcason to doubt 'this, and it supports our main contention.
This talc of woc, being found in all layers of the Rgveda, is no later invention ; x.33 begins as a song of hunger by one who has barcly cscaped dcath by starvation. The numerous dánastulis cannot be scparated (as donc so often by Grassmann) from thc hymn proper. In thc first place, similar praisc is found in thíc body of other hymns, in the same mctrc. Secondly, Malinowski's experiencc with Trobriand Islanders' folklorc shows that the coda is an integral part of the story, primc cause of its prcscrvation. The record of gifts to the sinster could have hccn important only if thcy wcrc comparatively rarc, lifcsaving cvcnts whosc chanting was at once grateful remembrance and incentive to other donors. The properly historical names of the Rgveda occur for the greater part in such dänastulis. Onc can scc groups like the Bharadvájas and the Kanvas cast about for protectors among all sorts of chicstains. Even
