VARSHAGIR
WAR
5.
Varshagir War :
After
King Sudas, his grandson King Somak also had to fight a war with
those people because those people settled in the clan (kabele) after
crossing the Indus wanted to come back and establish their dominion
to the prosperous region by crossing Sapta-Sindhu. Some tribes together
again attacked the area of Sapta Sindhu, which was defeated by Sudas's
grandson King Somak in their own area. This battle was fought in
the area which is today's Afghanistan. It is called "War
of the Varshagir" - "The Varshagira Battle".
•
To know more Click
here.
Interpretation
:
The
Three Priestly Classes :
The
basic tribal spectrum of the Rig Ved includes the five tribal groupings
of Yadus, Turvasas, Anus, Druhyus and Purus, and of these the Purus
alone represent the Vedic Aryans, while the other four represent
the Others.
But
among these four it is clear that the Yadus and Turvasas represent
more distant tribes (they are mostly referred to in tandem, and
are also referred to as residing far away from the Vedic Aryans),
while the Anus and Druhyus fall into a closer cultural spectrum
with the Purus.
a.
In the Puran's, the Yadus and Turvasas are classified together
as descendants of sons of DevayanI, and the Anus, Druhyus and Purus
are classified together as descendants of sons of Sharmistha.
b.
The geographical descriptions of the five tribes, as described in
the Purans, place the Yadus and Turvasas together in the more southern
parts (of northern India), and the Anus, Druhyus and Purus together
in the more northern parts.
c.
The Rig Ved itself, where it refers to the five tribes together
(I.108.8) refers to the Yadus and the Turvasas in one breath, and
the Druhyus, Anus and Purus in another: “yad Indragni Yadusu
Turvasesu, yad Druhyusu Anusu Purusu sthah”.
But,
the Purus represent the various branches of the Vedic Aryans, and
the Anus represent various branches of Iranians. It is clear, therefore,
that the Druhyus represent the third entity in this cultural spectrum,
and that it is mainly the Druhyus who will take us beyond the Indo-Iranian
arena onto the wider Indo-European context; and appropriately, while
the Purus are located in the heartland of North India (U.P.-Delhi-Haryana)
and the Anus in the northwest (Punjab), the Druhyus are located
beyond the Indian frontiers, in Afghanistan and beyond.
The
priestly categories, as we have seen, play a more important role
in the rivalries and hostilities in the Rig Vedic period than the
secular categories. In the earliest period, the only two families
of Rishis, from among the families who figure as composers in the
Rig Ved, were the Angiras and the Bhrigus, who were the priests
of Purus and Anus respectively. Logically, there must have been
a priestly class among the Druhyus as well, but no such priestly
class figures among the composers of Rig Vedic hymns.
The
explanation for this is simple : the Druhyus were a rival and non-Puru
(Dasa) tribe, hence their priests do not figure as composers in
the Rig ved. Of course, the Bhrigu's, who were also the priests
of a rival and non-Puru tribe, do figure as composers in the Rig
ved, but that is because a section of Bhrigu's (after Jamadagni)
aligned themselves with Vedic Aryans and joined the Vedic mainstream
where, in fact, they later superseded all the other priestly families
in importance, and became the dominant priests of Vedic tradition.
But
since the Druhyus figure in the Rig ved, the name of their priestly
class must also be found in the text, even if not as the name of
a family of composers. Since no such name appears, it seems logical
that the name Druhyu itself must originally have been the name of
this third priestly class : since priestly categories were more
important for the composers of the Rig ved than the secular categories;
and since the tribes for whom the Druhyus functioned as priests
were an amorphous lot located far out on the frontiers of India
and beyond, the name of the priestly classes became a general appellation
for the tribes themselves.
Therefore,
there were three tribal groupings with their three priestly classes
:
Purus
– Angiras.
Anus
– Bhrigu's and Atharvan's.
Druhyus
– Druhyus.
An
examination of these words helps us to classify the various Indo-European
branches into three groups :
1.
PURUS : Indo-Aryan :
In
the Rig ved, hymn VII.18, the Dasarajna battle hymn, refers to the
enemy confederation once in secular (tribal) terms as “Anus
and Druhyus” (VII.18.14), and once in what is clearly priestly
terms as “Bhrigu's and Druhyus” (VII.18.6: the
only reference in the whole of the Rig ved which directly refers
to the Bhrigu's as enemies). Once, it may be noted, it also refers
to the kings of the two tribal groupings as “Kavas and
the Druhyu” (VII. 1.8.12. Thus, even here, the general
appellation “Druhyu” is used instead of the specific
name of the king of the Druhyus).
The
words Druh / Drugh / Drogha occur throughout the Rig ved in the
sense of “demon” or “enemy”.
(The
word Bhrigu, for obvious reasons, does not suffer the same fate.)
2.
ANUS : Iranian, Thraco-Phrygian, Hellenic :
a.
Iranian : In the Avesta, in Fargard 19 of the Vendidad, it is an
Angra (Angiras / Ali) and a Druj (Druhyu) who try to tempt Zarathushtra
away from the path of Ahura Mazda.
The
priests of the Iranians were the Athravans (Atharvanas = Bhrigu's),
and the words Angra and Druj occur throughout the Avesta as epithets
for the demon enemies of Ahura Mazda and Zarathushtra.
b.
Thraco-Phrygian : While the Armenians, the only surviving members
of this branch, have not retained any tradition about any of these
priestly classes, it is significant that one of the most prominent
groups belonging to this branch were known as the Phryge (Bhrigu).
Phrygia
also known as "Land of Lions" is a place at present in
Turkey where in anicient times Moon Cult which includes Mother-Son
worship, Amazons, etc. was present and they were enemies of Sun
worshiper Aryans.
Phrygia
c.
Hellenic : The fire-priests of the Greeks were known as the Phleguai
(Bhrigu).
What
is more, Greek mythology retains memories of both the other priestly
classes, though not in a hostile sense, as the names of mythical
beings : Angelos (Angiras) or divine messengers, and Dryad (Druhyu)
or tree-nymphs.
3.
DRUHYUS : Baltic and Slavonic, Italic and Celtic, Germanic :
a.
Baltic and Slavonic :
The
word Druhyu occurs in the languages of these two branches in exactly
the opposite sense of the Vedic Druh / Drugh / Drogha and the Iranian
Druj. In Baltic (eg. Lithuanan Draugas) and Slavonic (eg. Russian
Drug) the word means “friend”.
b.
Italic and Celtic :
While
the Italic people did not retain the name of the priestly class
(and called their priests flamen = Brahman), the Celtic priests,
as we have seen, were called the Drui (genitive Druad, hence Druid).
A
significant factor, showing that the Celtic priests must have separated
from the other priestly classes before the priestly hostilities
became intense, is that the Bhrigu's appear to be indirectly remembered
in Celtic mythology in a friendly sense.
The
Larousse Encyclopaedia of Mythology notes : “whereas the Celtic
Gods were specifically Celtic… the goddesses were restatements
of an age-old theme”. And two of the three Great Goddesses
of the Celts were named Anu and Brigit (Anu and Bhrigu?). And while
all the Goddesses in general were associated with fertility cults,
“Brigit, however, had additional functions as a tutelary deity
of learning, culture and skills”.
The
main activity of the Drui, as already stated, was to undergo “years
of instruction and the memorization of innumerable verses, as the
sacred tradition was an oral one”. The fact that the Goddess
of learning was named Brigit would appear to suggest that the Drui
remembered the ancient Bhrigu's in a mythical sense, as the persons
who originally introduced various priestly rituals among them (a
debt which is also remembered by the Angiras in the Mandals of the
Early Period of the Rig Ved.
The
Bhrigu's, by joint testimony of Vedic and Celtic mythology, would
thus appear to have been the oldest or most dominant and innovative
of the three priestly classes.
c.
Germanic: The word Druhyu occurs in the Germanic branch as well.
However the meaning (although the words are cognate to the Russian
Drug and Lithuanian Draugas) is more militant : Gothic driugan,
“do military service” and ga-drauhts, “soldier”;
and Old Norse (Icelandic) drOtt, Old English dryht and Old German
truht, all meaning “multitude, people, army”.
The
meanings of the word Druhyu as it occurs in the Celtic branch (“priest”),
the Germanic branch (“soldier”, etc. or “people”)
and the Baltic-Slavonic branches (“friend”) clearly
correspond with the word in the Rig ved and Avesta, where Druhyu
/ Druh / Drugh / Drogha and Druj represent enemy priests, soldiers
or people.
Thus,
to sum up :
1.
Puru (priests Angiras) : Indo-Aryan.
2.
Anu (priests Bhrigu's /Atharvan's) : Iranian, Thraco-Phrygian, Hellenic.
3.
Druhyu (priests Druhyus): Celtic-Italic, Baltic-Slavonic, Germanic.
The
Anu-Druhyu Migrations :
The
evidence of the Rig Ved, and Indian tradition, clearly shows that
the Anus and Druhyus were Indian tribes. If they were also the ancestors
of the Indo-European branches outside India, as is indicated by
the evidence of the names of their priestly classes, then it is
clear that the Rig Ved and Indian tradition should retain memories
of the migrations of these two groups from India.
An
examination of the evidence demonstrates beyond the shadow of any
doubt that the ancient Indian tribes of the Anus are identical with
the ancient Iranians :
1.
As we have already seen, the Indo-Aryan-Iranian conflict very
definitely had an Angiras-Bhrigu dimension to it, with Angiras being
the priests of the Indo-Aryans and Bhrigu's of the Iranians : a
situation reflected in the traditions of both the peoples.
This
situation is also reflected in the Rig Ved where the dominant priests
of the text, and the particular or exclusive priests of the Bharat's
(the Vedic Aryans), are the Angiras : All the generations before
Sudas have Bharadwaj as their priests (which, perhaps, explains
the etymology of the name Bharad-vaja); Sudas himself has the Kutsas
also as his priests (besides the new families of priests : the Vishvamitra
and the Vashishth); and Sudas’s descendants Sahadev and Somak
have the Kutsas and the Vamadev's as their priests.
The
Bhrigu's are clearly not the priests of the Bharat's, and, equally
clearly, they are associated with a particular other tribe : The
Anus. The names Anu and Bhrigu are used interchangeably in Rig Ved
: compare V.31.4 with IV.16.20, and VII.18.14 with VII.18.6. Griffith
also recognizes the connection in his footnote to V.31.4, when he
notes : “Anus : probably meaning Bhrigu's who belonged to
that tribe.”
2.
The Rig Ved and the Avesta, as we saw, are united in testifying
to the fact that the Punjab (Sapta-Sindhu or Hapta-Handu) was not
a homeland of the Vedic Aryans, but was a homeland of the Iranians.
The Purans as well as the Rig Ved testify to the fact that the Punjab
was a homeland of the Anus.
Pargiter
notes the Puranic description of the spread of the Anus from the
east and their occupation of the whole of the Punjab : “One
branch headed by Udinara established separate kingdoms on the eastern
border of the Punjab, namely those of the Yaudheyas, Ambasthas,
Navarastra and the city Krmila; and his famous son Sivi originated
the Sivis [footnote : called Sivas in Rig Ved VII.18.7] in Sivapura,
and extending his conquests westwards, founded through his four
sons the kingdoms of the Vrsadarbhas, Madras (or Madrakas), Kekayas
(or Kaikeyas), and Suviras (or Sauviras), thus occupying the whole
of the Punjab except the north-west corner.”
In
Rig Ved, the Anus are repeatedly identified with the Parusni river,
the central river of the Punjab, as the Purus are identified with
the SarasvatI : in the Battle Of Ten Kings, the Anus are clearly
the people of the Parusni area and beyond. Likewise, another hymn
which refers to the Parusni (VIII.74.15) also refers to the Anus
(VIII.74.4).
Michael
Witzel remarks about the locations of “the Yadu-Turvasa and
the Anu-Druhyu”, that “the Anu may be tied to the Parusnsi,
the Druhyu to the northwest and the Yadu with the Yamuna”.
3.
The name Anu or Anava for the Iranians appears to have survived
even in later times : the country and the people in the very heart
of Avestan land, to the immediate north of the Hamun-i Hilmand,
was known as the Anauon or Anauoi as late as Greek times (cf. Stathmoi
Parthikoi, 16, of Isidore of Charax).
4.
The names of Anu tribes in the Rig Ved and the Purans can be clearly
identified with the names of the most prominent tribes among latter-day
Iranians. The Battle Of Ten Kings (described in three hymns in the
Rig Ved, VII.18, 33, 83) was between Sudas on the one hand, and
a confederation of ten tribes from among the Anus and Druhyus on
the other, which took place on the Parusni i.e. in Anu territory;
hence, logically, most of the tribes were Anus.
Of
these ten tribes, the following six, named in just two verses, may
be noted :
a.
Prthus or Parthavas (VII.83.1) : Parthians
b.
Parsus or Parsavas (VII .83.1) : Persians
c.
Pakthas (VII.18.7) : Pakhtoons
d.
Bhalanas (VII.18.7) : Baluchis
e.
Sivas (VII.18.7) : Khivas
f.
Visanins (VII.18.7) : Pishachas (Dards)
Three
more tribes, named in adjacent verses, may be noted separately :
a.
Bhrigu's (VII.18.6) : Phrygians.
b.
Simyus (VII. 18.5) : Sarmatians (Avesta = Sairimas).
c.
Alinas (VII.18.7) : Alans.
A
major Iranian tribe which is not named in the Rig Ved, but appears
as a prominent Anu tribe in the Purans and epics is the Madras :
Medes (Madai).
Significantly,
the Anu king who leads the confederation of Anu tribes against Sudas,
and is named in VII.18.12, is common among Zoroastrians even today
: Kavasa. Furthermore, this king is also called Kavi Cayaman four
verses earlier (in VII.18.8). This is significant because an ancestor
of this king, Abhyavartin Cayaman, is identified in VI.27.8 as a
Parthav (Parthian). At the same time, Kavi is the title of the kings
of the most important dynasty in Avestan and Zoroastrian history,
the Kavyan or Kayanian dynasty. In later times, it is the Parthian
kings who were the loudest and most persistent in their claims to
being descendants of the Kayanians.
If
the full name of this king is interpreted as Kavi Kavasa of the
line of Cayamanas, he can be identified with Kavi Kavata, the founder
of the pre-Avestan dynasty of Kavyan or Kayanian kings, whose most
prominent descendant was Kavi Vistaspa. Incidentally, other descendants
of Kavi Kavasa may be the Kekayas or Kaikayas, one of the two most
prominent Anu tribes of the Purans and later Indian tradition (the
other being the Madras), who are located in western Punjab, and
whose name bears such a close resemblance to the names of the Kayanian
kings.
5.
The Dasas of the Rig Ved are opposed to the Aryas : since the word
Arya refers to Purus in general and the Bharat's in particular,
the word Dasa should logically refer to non-Purus in general and
the Anus (or Iranians) in particular.
The
word Dasa is found in 54 hymns (63 verses) and in an overwhelming
majority of these references, it refers either to human enemies
of the Vedic Aryans, or to atmospheric demons killed by Indra :
in most of the cases, it is difficult to know which of the two is
being referred to, and in some of them perhaps both are being simultaneously
referred to. In any case, since these references are usually non-specific,
it makes no material difference to our historical analysis.
There
are eight verses which refer to both Arya and Dasa enemies; and
in this case it is certain that human enemies are being referred
to. As we have already seen in an earlier chapter, these verses
(VI.22.10; 33.3; 60.6; VII.83.1; X.38.3; 69.6; 83.1; 102.3) help
us to confirm the identity of Aryas of the Rig Ved. However, they
offer no additional clue in respect of Dasas.
But
finally, there are three verses which stand out from the rest :
they contain references which are friendly towards the Dasas :
a.
In VIII.5.31, the Asvins are depicted as accepting the offerings
of the Dasas
b.
In VIII.46.32, the patrons are referred to as Dasas
c.
In VIII.51.9, Indra is described as belonging to both Aryas and
Dasas
By
the logic of the situation, these two persons should then be two
prominent Vedic Aryans (Purus) who had aligned with the enemy Iranians
(Anus) in this battle. That the followers of Zarathustra must have
included some Vedic Aryans is accepted by the scholars : Gnoli points
out that “there is no evidence for thinking that the Zoroastrian
message was meant for the Iranians alone. On the-contrary, history
suggests that the exact opposite is likely, and there are also indisputable
facts … which show clearly that Zoroaster’s teaching
was addressed, earlier on at least, to all men … whether they
were Iranians or not, Proto Indo-Aryans or otherwise”.
The
Cambridge History of Iran, as we have seen, refers to Manuscithra,
later ManuchIhr or Minocher, the common Parsee name popularly shortened
to Minoo, and notes that his name “means ‘from the race
of Manu", and refers to the ancient mythical figure, Manu,
son of Vivasvat, who was regarded in India as the first man and
founder of the human race. He has no place in Iranian tradition,
where his role is played by Yima and later GayOmard.”
The
reference goes on to add that the word Manusha is found in only
one other place in the Avesta : in Yasht 19.1 as “the name
of a mountain”. In later Pahlavi texts, the word is found
only in two contexts: firstly in the genealogies of ManuchIhr and
Luhrasp, and secondly in the identification of the Manusha of Yt.19.1
as the birthplace of ManuchIhr.
Manuscithra
was therefore clearly a Vedic Aryan born in the Kurukshetra region.
And the reason he is held high in Zoroastrian tradition is also
clear : as The Cambridge History of Iran notes : “In the Avesta,
ManuchIhr is called Airyana, ‘helper of the Aryans’…”
In
short, Manuscithra was a Vedic Aryan who aligned with the Iranians
in the great battle ; and if Manus is his epithet (indicating his
Indo-Aryan identity) and Cithra is his name, he is clearly the Citraratha
of IV.30.18.
5.
The main priestly enemies of the Iranians are the Angras (Angiras
/ Ali) who are condemned throughout the Avesta right down from the
Gathas of Zarathustra. Significantly, the Avesta does not
refer to any of the other Rigvedic families : neither the Vishwamitra's
and Vashishth's of the Early Period, the Grtsamadas and Kasyapas
of the later Middle Period, the Atris, Kanvas and Bharat's of the
Late Period, nor the Agastyas. And, of the three branches of Angiras,
it does not refer even once to the Bharadwaj's. The Avesta, however,
does refer to the two other branches of Angirases (angiras), the
Usijs (Ausijas) and Gaotemas (Gautamas (Rishi Gautam / Gaudamu),
both of which originated in and dominated the early Middle Period
and in whose hymns alone we find references to the conflict with
the Zoroastrians.
a.
The Usijs (Ausijas / Kakshivan) are mentioned by Zarathustra himself
in the Gathas (Y. 44.20) where they are identified with the Karapans,
a derogatory word used in the Gathas in reference to enemy priests.
b.
Nadhyaongha Gaotema (Nodhas Gautama) is mentioned in the early
Yasht's (FarvardIn Yasht, Yt.13.16) as a priest defeated by Zarathustra
in debate. While many scholars ignore or reject the identification
of the word Nadhyaongha with Nodhas, the identity of the second
word as the name of an enemy priest, Gaotema (Rishi Gautam), is
not disputed by anyone.
In
sum : any analysis of the Rig Ved and Avesta will make it clear
that the main enemies of the Iranians in the Avesta, at least at
the time of Zarathustra, were the “Indo-Aryans” i.e.
the Vedic Aryans or Purus.
A
second Avestan hero, whose name may be noted here, is Thraetaona.
In the Rig ved, Traitana (Thraetaona) is referred to as being killed
by the grace of Indra in I.158.5, attributed to Dirghatamas,
the father of Kaksivan.
In
later Indian tradition, the Iranians became the asuras or demons
of Indian mythology, who ceased to bear even the faintest resemblance
to the original Iranian prototypes. Likewise, the angiras and
other enemies of the time of Zarathustra were so mythologised in
later Iranian traditions in the Pahlavi texts and in the very much
later Shahname, and even in later parts of the Avesta itself, that
they ceased to be identifiable with the original Indo-Aryan prototypes.
Hence, later interpretations of the Avestan words (e.g. the identification
of the tuiryas or Turanians with latter-day peoples like the Turks,
etc.) are untenable in any study of the Zoroastrian period.
The
Avesta does not appear to refer to the Purus or Bharat's by those
names, but then it is not necessary that they do so : the Rig Ved
refers to the Iranians as the Anus (a term which does not appear
in the Avesta); and although Sudas and his descendants are Bharat's,
the Battle Of Ten Kings hymns refer to them as Trtsus, and the Varshagira
hymn refers to them as Varshagiras. The Iranians must have had their
own names for Indo-Aryans in the Avesta. And it is not necessary
that the names or epithets used by the Iranians for the Indo-Aryans
should be found in the Rig Ved.
However,
we can speculate as follows :
a.
The word Turvayana occurs four times in the Rig Ved, and in two
of the verses it refers to the person for whom Indra conquered all
the tribes from east to west i.e. Kutsa - Ayu - Atithigva.
About
Turvayana, Griffith notes in his footnote to VI.18.13 : “According
to Sayana, turvayana, ‘quickly going’ is an epithet
of Divodas.” If this is correct, then it is possible that
this may have been a general epithet of the Bharat kings, descendants
of Divodas, particularly in conflict situations; and the Avestan
word tuirya for the enemies of the Iranians may be derived from
this word as a contrast to the word airya. It may be noted that
according to Skjærvø. the “evidence is too tenuous
to allow any conclusions as to who the Turas were or at what time
the conflict took place”.
b.
Zarathustra refers in his Gathas (Y.32.12-14) to “grahma”
as the most powerful and persistent of his enemies. Though not exactly
cognate, a similar word in the Rig ved, grama, refers to the warrior
troops of the Bharat's in III.33.11, where the reference is to the
armies under Sudas and Vishvamitra crossing the Sutudri and Vipas
on their westward expedition; and in I.100.10 it refers to the troops
of the Varsagiras.
These
are the only two occurrence of this word in the Mandalas and upa-Mandalas
of the Early Period and the early part of the Middle Period. The
word grama occurs once in the hymns of the later Middle Period,
in II.12.7, in its new and subsequent meaning of a “village”.
It occurs many times in the Late Mandalas and upa-Mandalas (I.44.10;
114.1; V.54.8; X.27.19; 62.11; 90.8; 107.5; 127.5, 146.10 149.4)
always meaning “village” (except in I. 44.10, where
it means “battle”, like the later word samgram.
While
the early part of the Middle Period of the Rig Ved represents a
continuation and culmination of the Indo-Iranian conflicts of the
Early Period, the later part (Mandala II and corresponding parts
of the upa-Mandalas) is a period of peace in which the two people
develop their religions and cultures in their respective areas.
Mandala II does not refer to any river other than the sacred Sarasvati.
The
first signs of a thaw taking place in Indo-Iranian relations, in
this period, are the appearance in the Rig Ved of an Avestan personality,
Thrita, who is counted among the important persons (Yt.13.113),
and is primarily associated with the Haoma (Soma) ritual (Y.9.10)
and with medicines (Vd.20).
•
To know more Click
here.
From
the above points we can summarize that :
1. |
Due
to Conflict the Dev worshippers crossed the mountains and
settled in Bharat, |
2. |
Jambudvip
the environs in which Mount Meru stands is in Pamir Region,
|
3. |
Rig
Ved written in Pamir-Badakhshan, |
4. |
Pamir
Region is in Tajikistan, |
5. |
In
Astrology there is D-11 Chart known as Ekadashamsha chart
which is also known as Tajik Astrology. This makes sense because
Astrology is part of Vedas and Rig Ved was written in Tajikistan
D-11 chart is known as Tajik Astrology, |
6. |
There
was a war known as Varshagir in which Angiras, Gautam and
Nodha took part and they were priest of Puru dynasty and, |
7. |
The
Battle of Varhsagir took for around 12 years it is highly
possible that Angiras and his descendants stayed in Iran after
the war and travelled from Iran to India often. |