PREWORD

ANCIENT INDIA : Towards Searching Roots of Culture and Civilization Preword Earlier it was customary to trace the history of ancient India back to the Rigved in the North-west. The trend changed when the Harappa Civilization too was discovered in the North-West. We shifted from Proto-History to pre-History. Even now the books on ancient history begin with Harappa civilization followed by the account of Vedic Period. Then comes the history of the Buddhism and Jainism belonging to the East, as protest against wide spread Vedic Sacrificial rituals. After this we actually enter into the better recorded historical period of the Magadh Empire of the post-Alexandar-invasion era. Even at this stage,many details are missing. We do not come across exact proper names and dates. The Social History of the period is generally built on inferences and approximations; but it is at least available. Given this bifurcated scenario, North India's ancient history has two geographical divisions- the Eastern and the Western, one in the Northwest and another in Northeast! The one in the west, the Harappa civilization, is spectacular but mute, silent for explanations. In stark contrast Vedic period is all well remembered sound, vocal like high-pitched chanting of the Mantras, but visually impaired, lacking in visuals. Even the East is absolutely nothing, materially or otherwise until the Mauryas, Jainism, Ajivikas and Buddhism emerge. We read this history, learn it for examinations, discuss and use it for socio-political reasons. Vedic Culture clearly contains mystic religiosity, rituals, deities and myths as compared to the little known religion of the Harappa civilization. Some impacts can be discernible from the further West with connections to comparable and more antique ancient civilizations like Sumer, Egypt, Babylon and Iran. We have recently started acknowledging the influences from the Central Asia too. Exactly opposite is the situation in the East. The History here both shows itself in monumental remains and speaks from the pages of discovered texts at least from the beginning the Maurya period. In the far flung eastern Lands of the Magadh now in Bangladesh like Mahasthangrih are traced some clear pre-Maurya cultural characteristics. But generally the further far east beyond Magadh seems completely quiet, empty, sans any communication, relation or connection. Scholarly efforts to establish connections with Caucasus, Pontic Sea, Volga, Danube Don BMAC ( Bactria Margiana Archological Complex) Aryans, Indo Iranians galore for more than couple of centuries. These have pointed out bonds between Indo Aryan Indo Iranian and Indo European. We have gone so far as creating a scholarly model of Proto Indo European. As against this, very recently, we have started having some knowledge about the grasslands of Southern Russia, Kazakhstan, Altai in Siberia, Mongolia and beyond. Kurugans are Archaeologically excavated, reported upon and discussed. We have started holding exhibitions on iron age Scythians. We have started realising that Northern Chinese Scythians were speaking some sort of Indo European languages even beyond Tocharian. In some way and after a lot of research India's connection with these eastern neighborhood lands promises to be apparent. This East-West two-fold historical image of India raises many questions in one’s mind. What is needed to solve these riddles are better utilisation of the proper sources of archeology, linguistics and genetics. The knowledge offered by languages, scripts, religious and other philosophies will be necessary beyond doubt. Equally important it will be to link it up with what modern sciences like genetics, demography, etymological study of dialects and their grammar, sciences of geology, geography, climate and environment studies, botany and zoology, stylistics, defense studies, metallurgy, science of tool-making, architecture and related studies. Whatever these sciences will offer as additions to our knowledge and information will be immensely significant. Research related to various aspects of Indology is widely taking place these days. It is equally important to relate the Vedic and other ancient genealogy and the dialect studies to the ongoing research on history in Iran, Central Asia, China and Southeastern Asia for writing ancient Indian history. This will naturally be a highly specialized study. This book is an attempt to raise the sail of curiosity and start a voyage in the sea of ancient and continuing Indian culture and civilization to explore a number of questions aroused by previous reading and to search out roots of India's ancient culture and civilization towards further east also. This writing attempts to show the need to understand the impact of eastern cultural diversity from a new perspective, a new periphery. While doing so, the author does not suggest that the cultural dissimilarity between the East and West is permanent. "The twaine shall never meet" . In fact from East to West is a continuum and Scythians, Saka, Sai and Shak ( of India) are the key players in it from the nost ancient period In the two and half millenniums history of India dissimilarity noticed in the early periods of history appears to change its course in the next few centuries. When in the Magadh the Upnishadik thought beyond the Vedic one stabilises, in the Northwest we witness the dominance of Buddhism in the Kushan empire. In the post-Vedic era, the Upanishads seem to have established a more mystic philosophy related to the soul in the Middle and East of India. Later on,It is noticed that the Yadnya is spread in the East while in the West we can see the rise of Shaiva and Vaishnav tradition. It is necessary to note that in this eternal process of change people and their clusters keep reforming, the old ones restructure into new. May it be an olden culture or a modern state, the narrative of their emergence is essential at some stage. When we consider the written history in India it appears like an exception to this common rule. Religio-cultural historians, or those who consider economy as the basis of the world history or else those experts who use the concept of nation-state just as a given backdrop for the continuance of their specialised professions related to history, are all responsible for the formation of such exception; nothing to say about most of the western historians presuming that the Indian subcontinent had no concept of a single state and only the Britishers brought small regimes together. We generally believe in the cultural diversity of India. There is diversity of rituals and customs, cuisines, costumes, folk arts, languages and regional characteristics and yet the cultural background is the same. There is unity in the diversity. Regional gods may be different in form but they have been integrated with the Gods in the scriptures, as ‘Avataras'. This is named as cultural integrity, unity in diversity. But the name does not prove the unity nor does it adequately introduce or explicate reasons behind it. It is necessary to find out the foundations, the roots on which dissimilarities in their actual form arose . National integrity is a modern term studied in political science. Nationalism can also be studied in sociology. The cultural integrity of a nation falls under the premise of history which also elucidates events of the past. The issues of propriety, honour, credits and inheritance are not central to the discipline of history. History has mainly to deal with historical events, their proofs, and explanations. Most modern nations in the world appear to have been built through some unification of cultural and civilizational diversities. Many times, the unification seems to have occurred in distant past and the rashtrika’s -co states-are aware of the fact. In fact, their self- exploratory study based on the facts offers them a more intense knowledge of the history. The concept of one nation, one culture is not a required fact of ancient history. The history of nation building refers to cultural integration or falling apart. If the lines that distinguish cultural dissimilarities are blurred the history of q nation also remains unclear and the factors in conflict within remain unexplained. We read in the ancient history of Greek and Egyptian cultures that they were homogenized by their religions, languages, ethnicities, customs and deities. In modern times the same is marked regarding the unification of England, the USA and Germany in history books. Even with reference to Japan’s integrity the stories of unification of two different ethnicities are narrated. But that has never happened properly in the history writing process of India. It seems imperative that India’s integration needs to be looked in from a coming together of differences perspective. Exploring the roots of various cultural characteristics with same geographical origin, their mutual reciprocity as well as differences need to be thoroughly studied to start with. It is necessary to understand the fact that geographical diversity and cultural oneness are not likely to exist together without a process of churning. It is futile to proclaim apparent similarities as essential unity and integrity. This writing assumes that through scientific analysis, it is possible to study profoundly the dissimilarities only if crucial differences are recognized while studying them. Such an effort will be successful only if it resolves some recurring complex problems and issues. Along with this, any baseless overstatement of unity is as hazardous to the domain of knowledge as is selfish biased, hand picked and selectively chosen observations are turned into landmarks, theories, paradigms etc to set a general tone suitable to once political or religious ideologies. These things do occur while adhering to the idea of diversity as well as unity and integrity we need to remember. It is a well rehersed tendency in India to narrate Indian history by using the words unity, diversity and similarity. The leftist, the Right wing , moderates and all types of nationalists believe in such homogeneity. In fact only those who believe in this theory of integrity are considered nationalists in India. However, nationalism in India has never rested upon geographical , linguistic or ethnic considerations. ‘There are similarities in India, hence there is cultural oneness’ is the primary modern nationalist theory in India. That ‘there is diversity in Unity’ is a slightly matured one. Here, the diversity is indicative of a few dissimilarities. But understanding of this phenomena ends at that only for most nationalists. Those who accept the actual diversity belong to another category, and most Marxists can be counted here. They essentially believe in many nationalities. Contrary to this the Dravid movement and to some extent Dalit Movements play an ' anti-culture' note of protest denying altogether cultural civilisational living together amicably in any historical epoch. Along with themselves as Dravids and Scheduled Castes they weave tribals, nomadic , outsiders, religious minorities, historical Shudras and modern day OBCs into the basket of Negators and protesters. Rarely, there is any historian like Comrade Sharad Patil, who emphasize differences as contributing towards dialectical sublimation into nationhood. However, including him, those who apprehend the prevailing culture through 'real existing plurality ' are not considered as main stream historians in India . It is obvious that the homogeneity or otherwise of a culture will depend on the comprehension of the foundations of the same. In India, because the homogeneity of language and ethnicity could not be established the emphasis has been on the religious-cultural unity of Indic dharma Sampradayas. The upper crust of nationalism here is entirely based on such so called native Dharmas as seen distinct from Abrahamanic ' Religions and religious denominations. Dharma is something inherent in man and supports his community living. In short, it is a way of life and does not compel adherence to a holy book, a single God or any particular doctrine. This non specific nature has even where in thinking about polity nationhood is rendered in fluid terms and marked by the absense in the post colonial Constitution. So we are having a notion of religious cultural Nation and a polity without a nation. Some have gone to the extent of saying that the Socio- cultural nation of India is newly emerging and the 1950 Constitution has ushered in a new Nation ignoring the fact that there can not be a nation without an historical bullwark. And that is how this nation's history assumes paramount significance. Medivial Perso Arabic books on India reflect Islamic conquering of the land. Colonial historigraphy mirrors the needs of the governance of the jewel in the Crown. Post Independence Marxist history theorises a country's past in terms of economic changes, mostly concentrated on the junctures where these changes appear prominent, and blatantly hide religious conflicts by giving them an economic twist irrespective of whether the evidence suports such meddling or not. It is necessary theoraitically to them as well as lucrative for both individual scholars as well as institutions established by the post colonial power intellectually dependent upon Marxism. Thus the issues concerning the history of the nation have always remained dormant except for those like Shridhar Vankatesh Ketkar. Leaving aside the nation, in the long course of history writing in India, the needs for other factors like climate, crops, trades and skills, social layering and customs, economic and political structures, features of community temperament as a basis for the study of cultural history. were felt ,researched and occupy the pages of history books without making anyone of them pivotal in setting up the narrative of nation's history. The amorphousness of our nationhood has impelled a clearer narrative of history. Not only languages but language families are yet to be decided. We do not know when and what of ethnic mixture taken for granted. We know very little about indic Dharmas, their beginnings, roots, period wise changes, locations and adherents in ancient times. The history of the composition of population is not attempted systematically. There are vast gaps both chronological and geographical. Admitted that insufficient proof gained through excavations, scarcity of scientific tools, antiquated scripts and languages and referentiality of words affect writing history; but total ignorance of some major issues is a grave matter. Some such vitally important issues related to India are so crucial that they may question the entire adequacy of our historical knowledge. Willaim Johns, Max Muller, MacDonnell, Roth, Grifith, Senart, Bloomfield, R.N. Dandekar, Fritz Stall, Mikel Witzel, Asko Papilla, Iravati Mahadevan, Prof. A.H. Dani and so many other scholars have thrown light on the pre-Vedic era from various perspectives. Windows on new information were opened by many others like K.T. Telang, V.K. Rajwade, S.V. Ketkar, V.R. Shinde, Lokmanya Tilak, Dr. Ambedkar, dr. Sadashiv Ghurye, Dr. Iravati Karve, Laxman shastri Joshi, P.R. Deshmukh, Dr. R.C. Dhere, Comrade Sharad Patil. And yet hardly any information, excepting some based on guess work, is available about the communities, contemporary to the Vedic, their language, culture, governance, and the reasons for the Vedic people to remain aloof from them. A vague picture arising out of the chaos talks about the Varun-Mitra as the first period of the organized Vedic system. Before that probably there was the tribal rule by Rashtri Devi Vac Nirriti’s followers. But then what systems did the Dasas, Dasyu and Pani have? The Vedic theology bases itself on various deities and their mutual relationship; but the ancient literature does not produce any image of THE GOD- a supreme ruler. Will it be possible to compare the Pre-Vedic culture to the sans-violence, sans-war culture of Middle Asia and South Russia as interpreted by Victor Sarianidi and Marija Gimbutas who based it on the results of excavations there? The question why Nirriti was considered goddess of death and draught could neither be answered by modern historians nor the Vedic Rishis who composed Ruks. The whole period, including its time scale, remains unknown in spite of research. This is a problem related with India’s early pre-historic era. Same is the case with many other. To add to it there are issues related with sociology, ethnicity, anthropology, language and religion. The pages of Indian pre-history are full of unanswered questions. What are the roots of the Pan-Indian traditions of mother-worship, tree- worship, snake -worship, worship of the ancestors? What is the exact date and geographical boundaries of the Vedic culture of Yadnya? Why are the Brahmin and Shraman traditions so different to each other? Can caste system be traced back to the pre-Vedic, Vedic or Eastern Indian Culture? When in the time line of history, the Brahmins and other similar claimant Brahmin castes emerged? If Sanskrit, Pali and Ardhmagadhi were the languages of religion and scripture, which were the dialects actually in use? why were the Chinese allured by Buddhism? Why is there a lack of references to the communication, influence and attraction in regards with India’s eastern neighbour, China? To which community did Parashuram, Ram and Shri Krushna actually belong? How is it that Shaiva, Shakta, Mahayani and Vajrayanis have, as Siddhas, a common bond? When were the temples actually built? The book attempts to open up some of these questions. Not that any of the suggestions made here are made for the first time. But these are juxtaposed and kaleidoscope of myriad colours is seen immerging. The discussions on a number of complimentary sciences as well as Linguistics, religion and philosophy are in the process touched upon. The subject has a vast scope as it is related to the ancient times of entire Asia and Europe togather. I am not an expert in anything at all. Probably it speeks with the curiacity of a general reader unbiased and unfettered and with an advantage of hip-hop panoramic view available to him not being a specialist expert. The whole book is based on my reading and grasp and I hope that it will help particularly historians to see interrelationship of some cues and enable join some intersections; nothing more. . Show quoted text