Addendum: The Indian Republics and the Rise of the Warrior Class 1300–300 BC (Part 2)
The Rigveda provided the cosmic-social foundation for the soldier/ruling class
Dear Reader,
I am happy to report that I am knee-deep in the study of the Vedic culture. And that is a good thing! It’s confusing and clarifying! I had never understood the Vedas, a source that Graeber constantly referred to. I at least know some of the important archaeological findings and what it means towards understanding the slavery-coinage-warfare complex.
The weather has been erratic. Too hot and too cold. It's pretty much on point for Dutch weather. Hence, normal. Two more weeks of idyllic summer left.
Regards,
Melanie
Knowledge Integration of the Early Vedic Period
The more I read about archaeological evidence in the region, the more confused I am, but also clearer. Does that make sense? I am reading the data with these objectives in mind:
We want to understand how the Kshatriya warrior class operates
We want to understand how the professional soldier class emerged by the time Alexander tried to conquer India.
From large to small communities: A timeline
The collapse of a large urban civilisation like Harappa resulted in the success of the smaller communities at its periphery. We know that the evidence is strong for a drying of the Indus River due to climate change. What do we know about the emergence of the multiple groups after the Harappan Civilisation fell in 1300 BC?
There was a population exodus from the Indus Valley River System. The direction of the movement was eastward, towards the more predictable Ganges-Yamuna River plain. This is based on the multiple archaeological finds that have been unearthed in the doab or the body of land that lies between the two rivers.
The OCP is the Ochre Coloured Pottery complex (2000 - 1500 BC) and is older than the Painted Grey Ware complex (1300 - 300 BC). The latter is said to be the successor to the former. Interestingly, the OCP existed concurrently with the Harappan Civilisation.
We can take away two points here:
It doesn’t matter if one succeeded the former. We are less interested in origin or continuity. It is important to understand that the small communities of the OCP and the Painted Grey Ware existed outside of the walls and culture complex of Harappa. The big and the small coexist.
The archaeological finds for both OCP and Painted Grey Ware indicate that these are primarily mixed farming communities. There is no indication of a warrior specialisation.
I surmise that the Harappan citizens also joined forces with these small pastoral communities. It might also include conversion to a new value system.
The interpretation of this period is complicated by the hypothesis of the Indo-Persian or Indo-Aryan migration into the region (2000 - 1500 BC). This hypothesis stems from linguistic reconstructions from Persia and the Rigveda, the oldest among the ancient Sanskrit Vedic documents, dated approximately 1200 - 1000 BC when it was still an oral tradition.
Much of what we know during this period is references from the Rigveda itself.
The Rigveda is the oldest Sanskrit text, composed in an archaic form of the language, known as Vedic or Vedic Sanskrit. It is a collection of over a thousand poems, composed by a number of different poets over the course of some considerable period of time. The poems are primarily hymns praising gods and ritual elements and procedures, designed to be recited during ritual performance;…they are liturgical compositions. However, they are also finely crafted and self-conscious literary productions of the highest quality. Jamison and Brereton (2014: 3)
Philologists estimate the Rigveda date using textual references (or its absence) to specific metals such as ayas or copper/metal ores.
Another way of comparative dating is by associating age with when the Vedas were compiled - the oldest being the first (Rigveda) and the newest the last book (Book X). Time is determined in descending order.
Collections of hymns were first made by the families of poets who produced them, and these early collections defined the various poetic traditions and helped train new poets within those traditions. At some point a unified consolidation was made of six family traditions, which formed the original collection of the Family Books, II-VII…the books were arranged from shortest to longest and the hymns of each book were organized according to the same principles. Then, probably at several intervals, the hymns of books I and VIII (except for the Vālakhilya hymns) were added, and book IX was assembled from hymns composed of poets of the other books of the Rigveda and from hymns of younger poets. The last major additions to the collection were the hymns of book X. Jamison and Brereton (2014: 14)
The text references inform the archaeological evidence and vice versa in the interpretation of Early Vedic culture. However, the connection between the two is tenuous at best. There is little to suggest that the artefacts correlate to the writers of the Vedas or vice versa. However, in this case, the shared timeline of two different materials makes a compelling though cautionary reconstruction of a culture.
This is relevant as we continue to rely on the Vedas in this and succeeding social analysis.
Early Vedic social structure
There is little archaeological evidence that points to a distinct ruler/ warrior during this period. However, the Rigveda provides an early conceptual formulation of what an ideal balanced social order looks like:
However, it is unclear whether the purported divisions in society materialised at this point. In Jamison and Brereton’s work, they argue that this social order is an ideal state but not to be taken literally.
There is no evidence in the Rigveda for an elaborate, much-subdivided, and overarching caste system such as pertains in classical Hinduism…so prominent in the later legal texts…this system seems to be embryonic in the Rigveda and, both then and later, a social ideal rather than a social reality.
The philologists are supported by the lack of evidence in burial practices or any settlement differentiation that mirrors a clear-cut social division. Does this indicate that people were not highly stratified? Or is there just a lack of systematic archaeological investigation? Perhaps, both.
We know that this social structure was at its nascent stage and would be used much later in Indian social and state formation. That said, the Rigveda itself indicate a highly complex set of priests to perform specific rites and rituals.
Brahmana: the priestly role
Since our reference for this period is a religious text, naturally, we know more about the priestly role. Philologists Jamison and Brereton explain the elaborate players involved in the rites.
There are four Vedas: the Rigveda, Sāmaveda, Yajurveda, and Atharvaveda. The first three are the provinces of individual priests, who function together to perform the solemn rituals of the Vedic liturgical system, later, in the middle Vedic period, known as śrauta rituals. Each of those three Vedas also represents a different type of ritual speech. Thus, the Rigveda belongs to the Hotar priest, who recites or chants the poetry; the Sāmaveda to the Udgātar priest, who sings the poetry to set tunes called sāmans. The vast majority of the verbal material in the Sāmaveda is borrowed from the Rigveda. The Yajurveda is the realm of the Adhvaryu priest; his verbal product is the yajus, a short verbal formula that generally accompanies the physical actions that are the main task of the Adhvaryu. Each of these three priests is accompanied by other priests who share their principal functions. So in the later soma ritual, for example the number of priests can be sixteen or seventeen.1 (Jamison and Brereton 2014: 4)
In the early period, we can estimate that the number of priests would be smaller and perhaps not full-time priests.
A ritual-based society seems to be archaeologically present in buried copper objects like swords, lances, and axes (typically called Copper Hoard) that can be very heavy weighing up to 6 kg to less than 100 grams. These items looked like new and did not indicate any everyday use. One interpretation is that these artefacts are ritual paraphernalia. However, there are multiple problems with dating and interpreting these artefacts because most of them are usually donated, found objects and separated from any context.
We can infer two things from these artefacts:
Craftsmen also fashioned objects specifically for burial or ritual use.
Craftsmen and blacksmiths had skills, designs, and manufacturing technology for hunting tools but potentially also for weaponry.
If these items are indeed religious/ritual in nature, we see how the economy also served their belief system.
Kshatriya: the warrior ruler role
The Rigveda has several references to the ruler/warriors and these usually are wishing for the gods to bless them or to admonish/remind them of their roles. The translation here by Dr. Tulsi Ram goes beyond transliteration by following Lucid English translation and the religious Aarsh Tradition framework.
Here is a verse imploring protection:
This one refers to the Kshatriyas as rulers during peacetime.
The Kshatriyas appear to be just as influential and powerful as the Brahmana. However, there is little evidence of their position in the archaeological record. Were they the same people who did oxen races? In our previous post, I mentioned horses for chariots but the more viable animals are oxen. If so, the shield and sword might be ceremonial or decorative in competitive races or fights.
As Jamison and Brereton mention, the Rigveda is written and practised by the elite members of society. In their translation, they find little reference to practices or life among the non-elites or the other two social classes.
…it is unwise to use the evidence in the Rigveda of the hymns uncritically to speculate on Vedic society. Not only does the text concern a very small percentage of the population, but even in that population its focus is very narrow. Moreover, everything we learn is shaped by the pragmatic purpose of the hymns as well as by the poetic sensibilities of their composers. Jamison and Brereton (2014: 57)
In the next post, we shall look at the Indian Republics in the Middle Vedic Period with this in mind.
Round-Up
Our knowledge of the early Vedic culture in 1300 - 100 BC relies primarily on two sources:
The Rigveda is an oral ancient Sanskrit tradition purportedly brought by the Indo-Persian or Indo-Aryan when they moved into Northwestern India. The linguistic evidence and associated tool references date it to around 1200 - 1000 BC as an oral tradition until it was written sometime in 300 BC or earlier.
The artefacts of the Ochre Coloured Pottery (OCP), Grey Ware Pottery, and Copper Hoard Culture provide material evidence of the populations in the same region of Northwestern India moving eastward toward the Ganges and Yamuna plains. Whether they are connected to the Indo-Aryan population or not is unclear. We just know that they are on the same timeline.
If we rely on the Rigveda, we can say that the artefacts may be related to the same group of people. However, as philologists Jamison and Brereton advise, the document refers to an elite group of ritual practitioners and does not have any specific information on the lives of non-elite populations. Therefore, the connection between the two types of evidence is even more tenuous.
Another way of approaching contrasting evidence is that the two pieces of evidence form two halves of the whole - the Rigveda as insight into the elite and the archaeology as evidence for the farming and blacksmith populations. Unlike what was written, it is folly to assume that people were specialists. Rather, in smaller communities, people occupy multiple roles and it is not unusual that this would be the case in the Early Vedic Period.
I took the time to outline the sources to show how the early period of Vedic culture remains a black box. The short answer to all our questions at the moment is, we do not know what is happening in this period. Nevertheless, we do know some basic constituents of the culture.
We do not know how the Kshatriyas supported themselves without money (the question itself is flawed)
we do know that they have a subsistence economy
therefore, the roles may not be exclusive or specialised; rather, people can move up and down or assume the role when needed
an unrecorded credit system is in place; money is unnecessary
How can we understand the different groups during this period?
Within communities, we know there is a clear ritual class performers and writers - the keepers of the oral tradition; they may or may not be full-time performers during this period
The communities rely on a mixed economy of seasonal agriculture and animal husbandry; a pastoral lifestyle to support the animals and oxen is evident
Some hymns and prayers mention the ruling and warrior class as an essential need in society; the Rigveda mentions conflict between different groups yet there is no specific evidence for small-scale warfare or differentiated burials for soldiers; we shall tackle this in more detail later
This early period created the conceptual model for a ruler/soldier class or a leader adept in war and peace. This would enable the switch to a specialist solider class culturally viable later in the timeline.
Re-read the previous post
Sources:
For a description of the Early Vedic Culture, Witzel talks briefly about the political structure which was derived from the text. We will come back to this text when we talk about the multiple kingdom republics. Witzel offers multiple cultural analyses from decades of translating the Vedas archived at the repository of Heidelberg.
Witzel, Michael. 1995. Early Sanskritization: Origin and Development of the Kuru State. Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol. 1-4, pp. 1-26.
I relied on the work by philologists, Stephanie W. Jamison and Joel P. Brereton (2014) The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India. Oxford: New York as the main reference. They provide a conservative interpretation of the Rigveda and its culture which I share. They do not subscribe to over-interpretation of other aspects of the culture beyond the text such as the date and place. They provide a detailed interpretation of the gods and rites.
For religious or Hindu transliteration and practical interpretation, I also found the work of Dr. Tulsi Ram (2013) Rigveda Volume I: (With Original Sanskrit Text, Transliteration & Lucid English Translation in the Aarsh Tradition of Maharshi Yasca and Swami Dayananda) accessible and helpful; you can easily discern the difference between academic and religious translations
To understand the problems of interpretation of multiple copper finds in the region, Paul Yule, et. al’s 1989 article on The Copper Hoards of the Indian Subcontinent points to the lack of provenance and context from the artefacts of this period. He also aggregates the different archaeological finds into a comprehensive document
For the chariot interpretation, refer to the 2020 paper by Indologist Asko Parpola, Royal “Chariot” Burials near Delhi and Archaeological Correlates of Pre-Historic Indo-Iranian Languages. Studia Orientalia Electronica Vol.8 (1)
I have only highlighted here the ritual aspect of the liturgy. The quote continues to explain the purpose of the Atharvaveda book. “The Atharvaveda stands outside of this ritual system and consists primarily of hymns and spells of a more “popular” nature, often magical or healing. Despite its lack of connection to the solemn ritual, the Atharvaveda is especially important for Rigveda studies because it is linguistically the closest text to the Rigveda and is thus the second oldest text in Sanskrit.”