Search

The paper develops the hypothesis that zebu cattle (depictions) are a marker of Indo-European population dispersal from the Indus Valley to Syria and Anatolia in 7000–1000 BC. It combines the exploration of the data on human genetics (full genomes and Y-Haplogroups originating from South Asia), bovine genetic admixture distribution maps (mitochondrial, autosomal and Y-chromosomal), archaeology (findings of zebu figurines, pictures, images and seals) and Indo-European linguistics.

This article deals with the relationship between Hindu nationalism and archaeology in India from the end of the twentieth century onwards. Archaeology has been closely linked to the political sphere since the nineteenth century, in particular through the existence of a state organization such as the Archaeological Survey of India. Organizations belonging to the Hindutva nebula, notably the BJP, started to resort largely to archaeology’s legitimizing discourse in the late 1980s and 1990s. They have turned it into a powerful political and ideological tool since then, using it to bolster their politics of exclusion. Archaeological data have enabled them to materialize their theses on identity and nation into actual places and objects and thus give them the appearance of empirical and scientific facts. Distortion and creation of archaeological evidence have become current practices so as to fit and promote the Hindutva agenda, as shown in two cases: the Ayodhya dispute and the controversies on origins, both being part of the Hindutva project to define the Indian nation as Hindu and confer upon modern Indians autochthonous ancestors, in contrast to Muslims.

Rigveda and Atharvaveda Shaunaka Samhitas have been carefully analyzed to check whether they mention copper or bronze swords. It has turned out that both texts do not know swords (only knives) and therefore must be dated in their habitats in the Northwest of the Indian subcontinent prior to the introduction of such weapons into the region. Swords have been archaeologically evidenced both in the Indus valley and in the Yamuna–Ganges Doab only after 2000 BC. This confirms the dating of Atharvaveda Shaunaka prior to 2000 BC, and of more archaic Rigveda – a few centuries earlier (prior to 2600 BC). Then all available data on the copper and bronze swords of different types (straight double-edged, machete–cleaver, sickle-shaped, ‘rapier’, ‘harpoon’) originating from the Old World and dating back to 3500–2000 BC have been collected and scrutinized. Thus Cyclades, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine/ Israel/ Canaan, North-Western Caucasus, Transcaucasia, Akkad, Sumer, Elam and Bactria–Margiana territories have been excluded from the possible homelands of Indo-Aryans in the periods when they already had copper or bronze swords. &nbsp

Communication between the Northern BlackSea and Macedonia can be traced during all historicalperiods, that is, since prehistory up untilthe middle ages. Processes originating from theperiods of the first use of the metal and the EarlyMiddle Age are the most referred ones in the literature.This paper focuses on facts and acknowledgements, which refer to relations between thesetwo geographical locations by the end of the 2ndmillennium up until the first few centuries of the1st millennium BC. Moreover, the already knownarchaeological facts will be supplemented withrelevant written sources referring to exact historicalevents and populations and their ethnonyms,toponyms and other cultural features. The article is based upon the thesis of the existence of intense relations between the Northern Black Seaand Macedonia towards the end of the 2nd and the beginning of the 1st millennium BC, confirmed with varioustraditions related to rivers. Toponyms and ethnonyms containing the following rootssind-, sinth-, sith-, aregiven as a first indicator, confirmed in both regions through ancient sources, thus considering its Indo-Aryaninterpretation as ariver. Such interpretation is considered in context of the theories of Indo-Aryans movingsouth of the Northern Black Sea at the second half of the 2nd millennium BC; the Balkans being one of theirdirections. This last trajectory is related to the presence of Cimmerians and Hyperboreans at this peninsula,also verified in ancient written sources. A special significance is given to the ancient reports ofAriaas theoldest name for Thrace. Numerous archaeological finds also refer to these motions, confirmed with a relevantliterature.Moreover, different traditions witnessed in ancient sources are noted regarding the role of rivers inthe spiritual culture of populations of both regions, especially in genealogical myths. Bull as a zoomorphic epiphanyof river gods is especially emphasized, manifested with similar traditions, among which the rootstaur-,taorfound in the toponymy, ethnonymy and the theonymy of both regions.

Straipsnyje bus apžvelgta vandenyno (jūros, marių) simbolika vedose – seniausiose indoarijų religinėse giesmėse, kurios galėjo būti sukurtos apie II tūkstantmečio pr. Kr. vidurį. Vedinė vandenų simbolika jau buvo nagrinėta pristatant „Rigvedos“ giesmių apie upes („Liaudies kultūra“, 2015, Nr. 4 ) ir Sarasvatę (2015, Nr. 6) vertimus, tačiau platūs vandenys taip pat pasižymi reikšminga simbolika, kuri, regis, dar išvis nėra tinkamai tyrinėta. Šiais laikais dažniausiai telkiamasi į „gamtinį“ vedų aiškinimą: vedų tekstuose minimiems vaizdiniams įtemptai ieškoma daiktiškųjų atitikmenų. Taip aiškindami klaustume, ar senovės indoarijai pažino jūrą, vandenyną šiuolaikine šio žodžio prasme. Gal įvaizdis atsineštas iš indoeuropiečių prosenovės? O gal buvo įkvėptas vietoje esančių plačių upių, didelių ežerų? Klasikinėje Vakarų indologijoje plačiau įsigalėjusi nuomonė, kad indoarijai vandenyno kaip tokio nepažino, o jo vaizdinys bus arba atsineštinis, arba įkvėptas vietinių upių santakų, arba dargi dangiškojo vandenyno metaforos1. Kita vertus, gausu veikalų, kuriuose įrodinėjama senovės arijus nuo seno gyvenus prie jūrų2. Apie tai dabar išvis nekalbėsime: mums rūpės įvairių vandens telkinių simbolika. Ocean or sea (samudra) is a common word in the ancient Indo-Aryan texts of the Rigveda and the Atharvaveda, and generally signifies any vast confluence of the waters. While the exact equivalents in the material world remain unknown, it is usually considered that the Vedic Indo-Aryans were ignorant about the sea (in the modern geographical sense), yet the word samudra unfolds through rich metaphorical and symbolical meanings. One of the most common images of samudra is the celestial ocean or the celestial river (called sindhu), which hovers in the midspace, called antarikṣa. Also, it is a space crossed by the ship of various gods, especially Aśvins who save Bhujyu from being drowned in the unsteady waters of samudra. While in this sense the Vedic ocean may mean instability of the passage of life, generally it signifies the vast vessel of songs and luminous thoughts and may be placed in the midst of the heart. The ocean (as salila or ‘lower’ ocean) may be the source of all the sacred chants, thoughts and vitality (all these are imagined as flowing rivers) and in the same time (as ‘upper’ ocean) it can be their destination. As water mythologically is considered as being an all-compassing entity, so the ocean, as the endless vastness of water, is universally used as a metaphor of the single God. Vedic texts indicate that the ocean is the abode of various gods or god (Varuṇa, Soma) and is the final destination of human life. This statement is supported by the Upanishads, where the ocean is equated to the supreme divinity, called brahman.

Straipsnio objektas – baltų ir indoarijų (senovės indų) mitinių-religinių tradicijų paralelės vadinamojo pagrindinio mito kontekste. Indoeuropiečių tradicijoje yra plačiai paplitęs griausmavaldžio ir gyvatės bruožų turinčio jo priešininko dvikovos motyvas, kuriam baltų tautosakoje atstovauja Perkūno ir Velnio nesantaika, o indoarijų mitologijoje – dievų karaliaus Indros ir slibino Vritros dvikova. Straipsnyje, pasitelkus leksinės-semantinės ir kritinės teksto analizės, taip pat lyginamąjį metodus, siekiama surasti ir palyginti tuos indoarijų ir baltų minėtų mitinių būtybių bruožus, kurie yra susiję su pagrindiniu mitu, ir atskleisti kai kurias šio mito interpretacijos galimybes. The narrative of the mythological duel between the Thunder-wielder and the Dragon recurs in numerous Indo- European traditions and folklore. In reference to this common Indo-European myth, the article deals in particular with the parallels between Baltic and Indo-Aryan mythoreligious traditions. The research includes a lexical-semantic analysis of original Rigveda and Baltic folklore texts, critical text analysis and comparative methods. The article begins by presenting the schema, proposed by Russian philologists V. Toporov and V. V. Ivanov, of the common Indo-European myth, consisting of six universal mythologems that evidently correlate with the patterns of the myths found in Baltic and Indo-Aryan mytho-religious traditions. The author then proceeds with analysis and comparison of the shared characteristics between Baltic and Indo-Aryan protagonists, namely Perkūnas and Indra, complementing the study by adding a marginal, yet important, Rigveda character — Parjanya. This part of the article also involves an endeavour to suggest three interpretations that explain the Thunder-wielder’s role in Indo-European mytho-religious worldview. These are as follows: the Thunder- wielder as a militant ruler that falls under the second category in G. Dumézil’s tripartite ideology; his cosmogonical acts; and his close connection to the cycles of nature and fertility. The second part of the article includes analysis and comparison of the myths’ antagonistic characters Vṛtra, Vala, Ahi Budhnya and Varuṇa on the Indo-Aryan side and Velinas or Velnias on the Baltic side. The analysis begins with etymological and semantic evaluation of the mentioned names and then proceeds to compare the attributes and functions of the characters. For example, their connection to the primordial waters and chaotic state of the universe, as well as livestock and stones, rocks. The antagonists also perform the judicial function of a sovereign and act as secondary agents in antagonistic deeds. The analysis and comparison of the above-mentioned characters showed that Baltic and Indo-Aryan myths about the Thunder-wielder’s and Dragon’s duel share a common pool of mythologems. The findings contribute to the research of links and parallels among Indo-European folks and provide a basis for deeper analysis.

This paper analyses the influence of Indo-Aryan research in Ugaritic studies. The main contribution to this historiographical trend was that of John Gray. Here we review his theories, their influence, their actual value and the criticisms they have received. El artículo analiza la influencia que la investigación indo-aria tuvo en los estudios ugaríticos. El principal exponente de esa tendencia historiográfica fue John Gray. En el presente trabajo se exponen sus teorías, la repercusión de las mismas, al tiempo que se intenta analizar su posible vigencia y las críticas recibidas.