PDA

View Full Version : Aryavarta and it's historic definitions



hadouken
07-14-2017, 08:42 PM
Historically, the Indo-Aryan steppe nomads who moved into Northwest South Asia around 2000-1500 BC, settled down and wrote the Rig-Veda, called their land Sapta Sindhu or land of the seven rivers (called Hapta Hindwa in Avestan, and mentioned in the Vendidad). This corresponded to the modern regions of Punjab, Eastern AFG, Kashmir and parts of Haryana.

However, after the Indo-Aryan expansion took place eastwards into mainland India, the later Hindu religious texts such as the Mahabharata* (written in 800-500 BC) define Aryavarta, "land of the Aryans", as stretching from Magadha (Bengal/Bihar) to Kurukshetra (in modern day Haryana) and between the Himalaya and Vindhya Mountains i.e the Ganges Plains.
The Mahabharata also refers to the regions of Punjab, Eastern AFG and Kashmir (the former Sapta Sindhu of the Rig-Vedics) as being outside the realm of Aryandom or "Brahmavarta", with Brahmins being advised against travel and told to perform purification rites before going to the Gandhara/Bahlika (Northwest SA) region. The region was said to be inhabited by 'barbarians' who do not practice dharma and is called Aratta-Vahika in the Mahabharata.

"Where forests of Pilus stand, and those five rivers flow, viz., the Satadru, the Vipasa, the Iravati, the Candrabhaga, and the Vitasa and which have the Sindhu for their sixth, there in those regions removed from the Himavat, are the countries called by the name of the Arattas. Those regions are without virtue and religion. No one should go thither. (VIII.30.36)"

What could the reasons be for this historic shift and how could they manifest in the genetics of the region?

People who are knowledgable in ancient South Asian history are requested to contribute.

Coldmountains
07-14-2017, 09:10 PM
Local Brahmanic Chauvinism/tribalism, Iranic incursions/influences and the increasing economic strength of this fertile Gangetic plains shifted the centre of the Indian civilisation eastwards and led to the demonisation of the western part of the Indo-Aryan speaking world. But Gandhara was still very much a part of the Indian civilisation

parasar
07-15-2017, 05:27 AM
Historically, the Indo-Aryan steppe nomads who moved into Northwest South Asia around 2000-1500 BC, settled down and wrote the Rig-Veda, called their land Sapta Sindhu or land of the seven rivers (called Hapta Hindwa in Avestan, and mentioned in the Vendidad). This corresponded to the modern regions of Punjab, Eastern AFG, Kashmir and parts of Haryana.

However, after the Indo-Aryan expansion took place eastwards into mainland India, the later Hindu religious texts such as the Mahabharata* (written in 800-500 BC) define Aryavarta, "land of the Aryans", as stretching from Magadha (Bengal/Bihar) to Kurukshetra (in modern day Haryana) and between the Himalaya and Vindhya Mountains i.e the Ganges Plains.
The Mahabharata also refers to the regions of Punjab, Eastern AFG and Kashmir (the former Sapta Sindhu of the Rig-Vedics) as being outside the realm of Aryandom or "Brahmavarta", with Brahmins being advised against travel and told to perform purification rites before going to the Gandhara/Bahlika (Northwest SA) region. The region was said to be inhabited by 'barbarians' who do not practice dharma and is called Aratta-Vahika in the Mahabharata.

"Where forests of Pilus stand, and those five rivers flow, viz., the Satadru, the Vipasa, the Iravati, the Candrabhaga, and the Vitasa and which have the Sindhu for their sixth, there in those regions removed from the Himavat, are the countries called by the name of the Arattas. Those regions are without virtue and religion. No one should go thither. (VIII.30.36)"

What could the reasons be for this historic shift and how could they manifest in the genetics of the region?

People who are knowledgable in ancient South Asian history are requested to contribute.

Aryavarta was approximately the land from Mathura to Hastinapur to Allahabad - essentially the Ganga-Yamuna doab.
Magadh was Vratya territory. The lands of Gandhara and Anga were considered outcasts.

The Athravan which by many accounts is the oldest Iranian/Aryan text has this: "O takman, go to the Mugavants, or to the Balhikas farther away ... To the Gandharis, the Mugavants, the Angas, and the Magadhas, we deliver over the takman [accursed fever]"
https://books.google.com/books?id=lJQuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2

It was not a matter of east or west, but the center and the periphery. It is also in the periphery that we see the Anavas.

Toor
07-15-2017, 01:57 PM
Eastern Bihar and Bengal were not part of Aryvarta as the Kingdoms in those regions (Magadha, Anga and Vanga) were described as outsiders. The furthest eastern kingdom was Videha.

https://image.ibb.co/dOMUza/IMG_2655.jpg (https://imgbb.com/)
freeimagehost (https://imgbb.com/)

Gandhara
07-15-2017, 07:12 PM
Yes, but all these mythical creatures do not have any linked historical/archeological proof. The book you are quoting too does not look very authentic and seems to be personal perception based on religious ideology.

parasar
07-18-2017, 05:33 PM
Yes, but all these mythical creatures do not have any linked historical/archeological proof. The book you are quoting too does not look very authentic and seems to be personal perception based on religious ideology.

Vratya is often translated as non-Aryan. While the literal meaning is one who takes an oath, these were considered culturally at least as non-Aryan heretics.

Even in the Athartvan - where they are often praised (book 15), the Vrayta don't escape derision. As late as as the Buddha period the Atharvan was not considered a Veda but a text of the heretics, and in its current form incorporates a lot of Rg Vedic material.

These eastern peoples of Magadha/Anga etc. are considered Asur (or demonic in later connotation) by the Pauranics and the kingdom of the Asur Anav Bali.
The Shatpath Brahman (12.8.1.5) has a particular reference on the Asurya mounds (stupta/chaitya/kurgan) of the Prachyah.

This by the way has in a form come down to the present - the Maghi people are still even today spoken of derisively!

Gandhara
07-18-2017, 09:58 PM
Vratya is often translated as non-Aryan. While the literal meaning is one who takes an oath, these were considered culturally at least as non-Aryan heretics.

Even in the Athartvan - where they are often praised (book 15), the Vrayta don't escape derision. As late as as the Buddha period the Atharvan was not considered a Veda but a text of the heretics, and in its current form incorporates a lot of Rg Vedic material.

These eastern peoples of Magadha/Anga etc. are considered Asur (or demonic in later connotation) by the Pauranics and the kingdom of the Asur Anav Bali.
The Shatpath Brahman (12.8.1.5) has a particular reference on the Asurya mounds (stupta/chaitya/kurgan) of the Prachyah.

This by the way has in a form come down to the present - the Maghi people are still even today spoken of derisively!


Thank you for your perspective . Personally, I don't buy and go with religious references.

parasar
07-19-2017, 01:56 AM
Thank you for your perspective . Personally, I don't buy and go with religious references.

Actually these are only partly religious. They are also a historical snapshot. Besides these there is really no other 'history' of the remote past.
Eg. here, invoking the gods and Vashisth along with an early description of the Bharat war:
3 "So, verily, with these he crossed the river, in company with these he slaughtered Bheda.
So in the fight with the Ten Kings, Vasisthas! did Indra help Sudās through your devotions.
4 I gladly, men I with prayer prayed by our fathers have fixed your axle: ye shall not be injured:
Since, when ye sang aloud the Sakvari verses, Vasisthas! ye invigorated Indra.
5 Like thirsty men they looked to heaven, in battle with the Ten Kings, surrounded and imploring.
Then Indra heard Vasiṣṭha as he praised him, and gave the Trtsus ample room and freedom.
6 Like sticks and staves wherewith they drive the cattle, Stripped bare, the Bharatas were found defenceless:
Vasiṣṭha then became their chief and leader: then widely. were the Trtsus' clans extended.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv07033.htm

As far as Aryavart goes we know that Asok ruled much of the Indian subcontinent but never called himself king of Aryavart but only piyadasi laja (raja) of Magadh. https://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/ashoka.html

Samudragupt also had hegemony over much of the subcontinent and islands but called only a portion of it Aryavart:
"the forcible extermination of many kings of Āryāvarta such as Rudradēva, Matila, Nāgadatta, Chandravarman, Gaṇapatināga, Nāgasēna, Āchyuta-Nandin and Balavarman" - all chiefs in the Ganga-Yamuna doab.

El Beruni also circumscribed Aryavart thus:
"middle country, the country all around Kannauj, which is also called Aryavarta"
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_5949073_001/ldpd_5949073_001.pdf

parasar
07-19-2017, 02:20 AM
I would also add that Kalhan Pandit writing the history of Kashmir writes of Brahmans from many locations arriving, getting agrahars, and settling in Kashmir, has a special mention of the Brahmans of Aryavart:
"After consecrating this wise king bestowed the Gopa-Agraharas on Brahmanas born in Aryadesa"

deuterium_1
07-30-2017, 05:08 PM
Aryavarta was approximately the land from Mathura to Hastinapur to Allahabad - essentially the Ganga-Yamuna doab.
Magadh was Vratya territory. The lands of Gandhara and Anga were considered outcasts.

The Athravan which by many accounts is the oldest Iranian/Aryan text has this: "O takman, go to the Mugavants, or to the Balhikas farther away ... To the Gandharis, the Mugavants, the Angas, and the Magadhas, we deliver over the takman [accursed fever]"
https://books.google.com/books?id=lJQuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA2

It was not a matter of east or west, but the center and the periphery. It is also in the periphery that we see the Anavas.

Was Kosala part of Aryavarta?.

parasar
08-01-2017, 09:44 PM
Was Kosala part of Aryavarta?.

Not certain.
But what we now know as Kosal likely was up to perhaps the Gandak.

Textually it is difficult to place Kosal. One of Dashrath's wife is Kaushalya - or from Kosal. Modern terminology equates Avadh with Kosal, but Kaushalya is not considered local to Avadh.

So she must have been from the real Kosal.
This Kosal is mentioned by Samudrgupt as such -
"Whose magnanimity blended with valour was caused by (his) first capturing, and thereafter showing the favour of releasing, all the kings of Dakshiṇāpatha such as Mahēndra of Kōsala, Vyāghrarāja of Mahākāntāra, Maṇṭarāja of Kurāḷa, Mahēndragiri of Pishṭapura, Svāmidatta of Kōṭṭūra, Damana of Ēraṇḍapalla, Vishṇugōpa of Kā˝chī, Nīlarāja of Avamukta, Hastivarman of Vēṅgī, Ugrasēna of Pālakka, Kubēra of Dēvarāshṭra, and Dhana˝jaya of Kusthalapura."

Varahmihir also mentions Kosal to be in the South East exactly like Samudrgupt with no mention of it being near Avadh.

deuterium_1
08-02-2017, 09:32 PM
Not certain.
But what we now know as Kosal likely was up to perhaps the Gandak.

Textually it is difficult to place Kosal. One of Dashrath's wife is Kaushalya - or from Kosal. Modern terminology equates Avadh with Kosal, but Kaushalya is not considered local to Avadh.

So she must have been from the real Kosal.
This Kosal is mentioned by Samudrgupt as such -
"Whose magnanimity blended with valour was caused by (his) first capturing, and thereafter showing the favour of releasing, all the kings of Dakshiṇāpatha such as Mahēndra of Kōsala, Vyāghrarāja of Mahākāntāra, Maṇṭarāja of Kurāḷa, Mahēndragiri of Pishṭapura, Svāmidatta of Kōṭṭūra, Damana of Ēraṇḍapalla, Vishṇugōpa of Kā˝chī, Nīlarāja of Avamukta, Hastivarman of Vēṅgī, Ugrasēna of Pālakka, Kubēra of Dēvarāshṭra, and Dhana˝jaya of Kusthalapura."

Varahmihir also mentions Kosal to be in the South East exactly like Samudrgupt with no mention of it being near Avadh.

The reason I ask is because apparently Siwan formed the eastern part of Kosala in Ancient times.

Toor
08-03-2017, 06:26 PM
The reason I ask is because apparently Siwan formed the eastern part of Kosala in Ancient times.

Siwan is in the Bhojpur region, I thought Kosala correlates with Awadh (Central UP)?

deuterium_1
08-04-2017, 09:59 AM
Siwan is in the Bhojpur region, I thought Kosala correlates with Awadh (Central UP)?

I read that in the British district gazetteer for Saran district (of which Siwan was part of when it was written). Its eastern border was in present day Saran district apparently.