Ethnography (Ancient India): Mahabharat Period
The Period of the Mahabharata
This article is an extract from ETHNOGRAPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA BY ROBERT SHAFER With 2 maps 1954 OTTO HARRAS SOWITZ . WIESBADEN Indpaedia is an archive. It neither agrees nor disagrees |
The Great Epic of India is essentially the story of native rebellion against Aryan exploitation.
The whole background of the war of the Mahabharata is told very simply in the Digvijaya subparvan and a few chapters of the Dyuta subparvan of the Sabhaparvan. In the first, the four brothers of Yu- dhisthira set out and force the Aryan countries to acknowledge Yu- dhisthira's overlordship and they conquer all the other nations and tribes of India. In the second, the countries particularly the non-Aryan 1 countries are forced to pay exhorbitant tribute to Yudhisthira:
The king of Kamboja innumerable skins of best quality, woolen blankets, blankets of soft fur inlaid with threads of gold, 300 horses, 300 camels, 300 she-asses fattened with olives and pilusa.
Sudra kings on the seacoast hundreds of thousands of serving girls of beautiful features, waist, and hair, and decked with golden ornaments; also skins.
Tribes of Vaiyamakas, Paradas, Turigas, Kitavas, and others goats, kine, asses, camels, vegetable honey, blankets, jewels and gems.
King of Pragjyotisa horses of the best breed and with the speed of wind; swords with handles of ivory and adorned with diamonds and gems.
All these are minor tribes living on the outskirts of the empire, so one may gain some idea of the tribute brought. And although it was enormous, the rulers and their retinues were kept waiting at the palace gate until they brought "fitting tribute" before they could enter the palace. 2
1 Since the more specific term Indo-Aryan is so similar in composition to Indo-European, Indo-Chinese, and other hyphenated names of families of languages and Indo-Aryan does not refer to a family of languages but only to the people speaking a single language, I have followed recent usage of many writers on early India in using the term Aryan to refer only to the Sanskrit-speaking people of early India. In the latter part of this essay, where confusion might arise between the Indo- Aryans and the Iranians, I have used the former term to avoid ambiguity and have used Arya or Indo -Iranian to refer to the two branches together or before their separation.
2 II. 51. Of course there is seldom any understatement in the Mahabharata. In one battle Arjuna was struck by at least 305 arrows before I lost interest. The handsome follow must have looked like a porcupine but, according to the epic, he wavered not (VI. 52). I should guess that figures should be discounted to about 10 or 5 per cent. But even if we take the lowest estimate, Yudhisthira would have obtained all the best live stock of Kamboja, a great number of the udra kings'
Is it any wonder that the native peoples of higher culture, living
in fortified cities and towns, rebelled against the Aryan horde of beef-
gorging, soma-swilling warriors and cattle raiders, whose kings still
spent much of their time wandering in the hills and hunting in the
forests, and whose chief claim to be called civilized was a love of
bathing and fighting? The Aryans knew so little about governing
that they enslaved or degraded the masses and exploited the persons
of wealth and position to the point where the native economy was
disrupted and the Great Rebellion of the Mahabharata broke out.
In missing this point scholars have misunderstood the whole back-
ground of the war of the Mahabharata.
This study is not primarily economic or social, but ethnographic. But if, in the emphasis on race, the reader gained the impression that the alignment of forces in the epic conflict was decided solely by race or language, this would be erroneous. The Aryans' system of exploitation of the natives and their imposition of a social system based on color help us to decide ethnographic questions, and hence they are mentioned at the outset.
The myth that Aryans "carried the torch of civilization" to India has been dispelled by the discoveries at Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, and other places. But the interpretations of the Great Epic that grew out of this myth during the century before the excavations in present Pakistan still exert so strong an influence on the minds of many scholars that some have not yet adjusted themselves to the historical significance of the finds.
In part this is due to the thick layer of propaganda covering the true nature of the struggle. The Aryan Pandavas and their supporters had finally won, but they were in such weakened condition that some- thing was needed to bolster their tottering sway. The rsis, their "hired publicity men," outdid some of our modern broadcasters.
"For extending the fame of the high-souled Pandavas and of ksatriyas versed in all branches of knowledge, high-spirited, and already known in the world for their achievements, Krsna-Dvaipayana" composed the Mahabharata. 1 Could the fact that it was a "publicity job" be any more clearly or bluntly stated?
The successful Pandavas gave much to the brahmans and rsis who faithfully placed all the blame on the unfortunate Kauravas and their adherants. But it was not enough to merely write the work or a good part of it. Spirits were bitter and people had to be compelled to listen. It was called a fifth veda and people were told that it was for the good
“prettiest serving girls, blankets and even food as well as live stock from the moun- tain tribes, etc. All classes of the population would be affected and the resentment against the Pandavas would be intense”.
1 Citations are from P. C. Hoy's translation.
of their souls: "He who, from desire of acquiring religous merit, causeth this history to be heard by sacred brahmanas, doth acquire great merit and virtue that is inexhaustible." 1
The propaganda is laid on so thick that the most cursory reader cannot fail to be aware of it. 2
Except for the bits of the Sabhaparvan mentioned above and the account of the war, the Mahabharata is an Aryan apologia for the exter- mination of the ksatriyas and for the suffering brought about by their war against the rebellious natives except for extraneous later insertions.
Although the victorious Pandavas are made the heroes of the epic,
the narrative is not begun by a Pandava but with a lament by Dhrta-
rastra, head of the enemy forces. And the account of the battles is not
related by or to a Pandava but to Dhrtarastra. That is, to say the least,
a peculiar way to narrate an epic dedicated to the victors.
Bhisma, Drona, Karna, and lya, all Kaurava supporters, are undoubtedly the great heroes of the parvans named after them. Again it is odd to find an enemy glorified above all others in the main part of a narrative. 3
In the description of the array of troops the author had a knowledge of the Kaurava forces (nations) taking part and their stations; but, except for the Pandava heroes, only once does the author have a detailed description of the arrangement of the Pandava warriors. 4
In the encounters, the Kuru heroes always won in the beginning but were defeated in the end. If an original epic glorified the Kurus, it would require minimum effort for a Pandava rsi to revise the ending.
Some of the foremost scholars working on the Great Epic recognized long ago that it was not a single composition but the revision of an earlier epic, and then a compilation of various other works strung together
“1 I. 62.
2 As Sanjaya's continual upbraiding of his master, the poor old blind king Dhrtarastra, for his evil ways while praising all the Pandavas for their righteousness. When one recalls that Yudhisthira "the just" and his brother Pandavas are a band of bloody upstarts who had seized all of India and had squeezed every bit of tribute possible from the native peoples and then forced the non-Aryanized natives to become "low caste'* servitors or workers, this propaganda becomes almost nauseating. For the Pandava rsi to make Saiijaya say "Listen to me, O king! The sons of Paijidu are not covetous about this country" is about as raw a piece of publicity favorable to a gangster as has ever been attempted.
3 The Pandavas claimed ties of relationship and of friendship with the Kauravas. But as earlier students of the epic have pointed out, when one has funds he can always find someone to trace a good pedigree for him.
4 VI. 50.”
by introductory phrases or paragraphs to give the whole some appearance of continuity.
The original Kuru epic l was not only modified to serve as an apologia for the Pandavas and a eulogy of them, but a great deal of original material was added to the same purpose. And much extraneous data was inserted, often entirely out of context, as that of the Bhagavadgita. The "geography" with which we shall be particularly occupied here is one of the many didactic bits which have been thrown in where they interrupt the continuity of the narrative. The Harivamsa, supposedly an appendix of the Mahabharata, is actually the compendium of history and folklore of the Yadavas reworked, of course, by the all-revising Vaisampayana.
So much more detailed analysis has been done by early scholars 2 that I have mentioned only a few additional points to bring to the attention of the non-specialist that the epic was composed over a long period. Yet despite the detailed work that has been done, the work of analysis is so enormous and dating so difficult that we cannot yet state with any certainty when any part of the Great Epic was written. Hence when we refer to the geography or the ethnography of the Mahabharata we are referring to a period of at least several hundred years when the epic was being composed, revised, and added to. During this period the boundaries of kingdoms were expanded and retracted and some ceased to exist ; nomads and even some fairly stable tribes moved around as the result of war or economic pressure. So if the maps which accompany this article are static in not showing the changes in position and of boundaries at different times during the period of the epic, it is only
“1 Hopkins (see n. 2 below) usually referred to it as the Bharata epic.
2 Adolf Holtzmann began the analysis of the reworking of the original epic in his work on Das Mahabharata und seine Theile, 4 vols. (Kiel, 1892 5). For Edward Washburn Hopkins' attempts to arrive at the Bharata (Kuru) epic and the history of the composition of the Mahabharata see his work on "The Social and Military Position of the Ruling Caste in Ancient India as Represented by the Sanskrit Epic," JAOS 13 (1889), pp. 67-8; "The Bharata and the Great Bharata," Amer. Journ. PhiloL 19 (1898), 1-24; Cambridge History of India, chap. 11 ; and The Great Epic of India y Its Character and Origin (New York, London, 1902), chap. 5. See also Leopold von Schroeder, Indiens Literatur und Cultur (Leipzig, 1887), pp. 459ff.
In The Great Epic, pp. 397 8, Hopkins estimated that the Bharata (Kuru) lays were combined into one before 400 B.C. ; the Mahabharata tale with the Pandava heroes had been formed between 400 and 200 B.C.; the epic remade with Krsna as all-god, the intrusion of masses of didactic matter, addition of puranic material, multiplication of exploits, etc., 200 B.C. to 100 200A.D.; last books, introduction to first book, 200 400 A. D.; occasional amplifications, 400 A.D. +.
His dates were based in part on the belief that the Yavanas were Greeks, who came to India with Alexander, and I believe they are much too late for the geographical sections; see Taurvasavas, pp. 25 ff below.”
because the analysis of the work has not progressed far enough. Recent studies on early India show so much information that it might not be premature to begin work on a historical atlas of that period. When scholars have such an atlas, then perhaps ethnographic studies may show shifts of race and language during different centuries within that period. At this time we are fortunate when we find any clues to either race or language.
I have the impression that the "geography" was written not long after the Great Rebellion, judging by such items as Kuru-Pancala and the mention of most of the famous kingdoms referred to elsewhere in the Mahabharata. I would place the writing of the digvijayas a little later, partly because of their greater knowledge of the countries in the far south of India, partly because of the mention in Sahadeva's digvijaya of a city of the Yavanas either at the mouth of the Mahanada or of the Ganges, by which I believe they were referring to a Greek trading port if the word has not been corrupted in transmission. The dyuta list, confined to northern India, was probably made up earlier than the digvijayas.
Thus all three of these geographical lists probably were composed sometime after the Great Rebellion, although it is possible that some of the indications of a later date are due to late additions to the lists. But I think we may infer that the ethnographic descriptions of peoples in the Mahabharata was handed down by tradition and that they antecede the conflict. If this is correct, then the number of kingdoms and tribes known to the Aryans at the time of the Great Rebellion would be some- what less than the lists indicate; and the Aryanization of India had probably progressed somewhat farther than the maps would indicate. Yet historians have given such a preponderant role to the Aryans, that the accompanying map probably comes much closer to the ethnic- linguistic division during the period of the Great Epic than those of previous accounts.
For the location of the tribes and countries on the map see the Appendix.
