04-28-2005, 05:13 AM
An ecological view of ancient India.
International Journal of Humanities and Peace; 1/1/2003; Frawley,
David
History and Ecology
Ecology is beginning to define how we look at the world and how we
look at ourselves. Each geographical region in the world constitutes
a special ecosystem--an interrelated habitat for plants and animals
shaped by climate and terrain. These ecological factors have a
strong effect on culture as well.
As part of nature ourselves, society arises out of an ecological
basis that we cannot ignore. Most of civilization, both in its
advance and decline, reflects how people are able to manage the
ecosystems in which they live and their natural resources. Human
culture derives largely from its first culture, which is
agriculture, our ability to work the land. This depends largely on
water, particularly fresh water that is found in rivers, and flat
land that can be easily irrigated.
However, so far we have looked at history mainly in a non-ecological
way, toting to define it according to political, economic or racial
concerns. Our account of ancient history, particularly that of
India, has not afforded an adequate regard to ecological factors. It
has put too much weight on migration, as if culture came from the
outside, rather than on the characteristics and necessities of the
ecosystems in which people live and must rely upon for developing
their way of life.
The Aryan invasion theory is such a product of the pre-ecological
age of historical theory that emphasized the movements of peoples
over the natural development of culture within well-defined
geographical regions. Nineteenth century thought, the product of a
colonial age, found it easy to see culture as something brought in
by intruders, rather than as developed by the inhabitants of a
region who had to develop unique methods to harness their natural
resources as shaped by the ecology around them.
Ancient River Civilizations and India, the Land of the Rivers
It is a well known fact that the main civilizations of the ancient
world of Egypt, Mesopotamia, India (Indus Valley), and China were
only possible because of the great river systems around which they
developed. The rivers made these civilizations possible, not simply
human invention or any special ethnic type who migrated there.
If we examine these four great riverine centers of early
civilization it is clear that the largest and most ideal river
region in the world for developing civilization is India. Egypt grew
up around one great river, the Nile that flowed through what was
otherwise a dry, rainless desert. Mesopotamia had two rivers but
only of moderate size, the Tigris and Euphrates, flowing through a
large desert as well. Both Egypt and Mesopotamia were in subtropical
regions that provided abundant warmth and sunshine for crops, but
otherwise suffered from the limited size of their One or two river
banks that were their sole steady. China had one large but
unpredictable river, the Yellow River, which frequently overflowed
its banks in various floods. It also received abundant rain. But it
was centered in a cold northern region, with a limited growing
season.
India, on the other hand, had a massive nexus of numerous great
rivers from the Indus in the West to the swamplands of the Gangetic
delta in the East. It had both a warm subtropical climate and
seasonal abundant rains. This river region included relatively diy
regions of the northwest to the very wet regions of eastern India
affording an abundance of crops both in type and quantity. The
Indian river system was much larger in size and arable land, and
better in climate than perhaps all the other three river regions put
together. No other region of the world could so easily serve to
create an agricultural diversity or the cultural richness that would
go with it.
Ecologically speaking, north India was the ideal place in the world
for the development of a riverine civilization via agriculture.
Bounded by the Himalayas in the north, and mountains on the West,
East and South, this north Indian river plain is a specific
geographical region and ecosystem, whose natural boundaries could
easily serve to create and hold together a great civilization. It
was also ideal for producing large populations that depend upon
agriculture for their sustenance.
This same network of rivers was ideal for communication. Not
surprisingly, the Rig Veda, the oldest book of the region, is full
of praise for the numerous great rivers of the region, the foremost
of which in early ancient times was the Sarasvati, which flowed east
of the Yamuna into the Rann of Kachchh, creating an unbroken set of
fertile rivers from the Punjab to Bengal. This Vedic Goddess of
speech was a river goddess. The Vedic idea of One Troth but many
paths (Rigveda 1.164) probably reflects this experience of life of
many rivers linked to the one sea.
The Need for An Ecological View of India's History
The main point of this article is that if we really want to
understand the development of civilization in ancient India we
cannot ignore such ecological and geographical factors. Ancient
India was the ideal ecological region for the development of
civilization in the ancient world. Therefore, we should look to an
indigenous development of civilization in the region. We need not
import its people, animals, plants, culture or civilization from the
outside, particularly from barren and inhospitable Central Asia, for
example, which would not have been suitable to India and which is
separated from it geographically by very hard to cross mountain and
desert barriers.
We need to take a new ecological look at the Vedas, which so far has
not been examined adequately ecologically but has been approached
mainly according to linguistic, Marxist or Freudian concerns that
easily miss the obvious geography or ecology of the text. If we do
this, we will discover that even the oldest Vedic text, the Rig
Veda, clearly describes a region of many vast rivers flowing to the
sea, the most important of which was the Sarasvati. The climate that
it describes of great rains and monsoons, the symbolism of the great
God Indra, is also clearly that of India. The flora and fauna
mentioned including the Brahma bull, water buffalo and elephant and
its sacred trees of the Pipal, Ashvattha and Shamali is also that of
India.
The fall of the Indus or Harappan culture, just as was the case for
many in the ancient world, was owing to ecological factors,
something that nineteenth and early twentieth century migrationist
views of history completely missed. It occurred not because of the
destruction wrought by the proposed Aryan invaders but by ecological
changes brought about by the drying up of the Sarasvati River around
1900 BCE. This didn't end civilization in the region but caused its
relocation mainly to the more certain waters of the Ganga to the
east. Such a movement is reflected in the shift from Vedic
literature that is centered on the Sarasvati to the Puranic
literature that is centered on the Ganges.
The great Indian river system from the Panjab to Bihar is perhaps
the greatest breadbasket or agricultural center in the world. Any
humans in the region would have been aided by the land, the waters
and the climate, affording them a great advantage in the development
of language and culture as well. The natural resources provided by
the riverine ecosystem of north India could uphold great
civilizations over the centuries. From it the peoples and literature
of the region had adequate support from nature to sustain their
traditions.
Southern River Regions
The type of civilization developed in the rivers of north India
could easily connect with the cultures developing on the rivers in
the south of the country that shared a common climate and
geographical ties. The other main great river region for India is
the basins of the Krishna and Godavari rivers in the southeast of
India, particularly Andhra Pradesh. This provides another important
agricultural center in the ancient world, which has also not been
examined properly.
Another important river area is the Narmada and Tapti rivers in
Gujarat and Maharashtra. As these were nearby the delta of the
Sarasvati, they could have been an extension of it (which is perhaps
why the Bhrigu Rishis of this region are so important in Vedic
literature).
That the civilization of north India could have bad connections with
these southern cultures is also ecologically based. For this we must
consider the ecological factors that existed when agriculture began
to arise in the world around 10,000 BCE. Before the end of the Ice
Age north India was much drier and cooler in climate. This means
that if there was any pre-Ice Age basis for agriculture in north
India it would have more likely come from these more suitable
southern river regions which had better rainfall at that time.
Conclusion
We need to look at the civilization of India according to
geographical and ecological imperatives that are far more certain
than historical speculation conditioned by simplistic ideas of
ethnicity, linguistics or migrations. In this regard the study of
the Sarasvati river system by the geologists of India and linking it
to the Sarasvati in Vedic literature is probably the key.
Civilization is like a plant that owes its existence to the land on
which it grows. We cannot ignore this important fact either for our
past or for our future. The current government of India plan to link
all the great rivers of the country represents such a responsible
ecological approach which, inchiding reconstituting the old Sarasvan
river channel, links the great future of the country with its great
past.
Dr. David Frawley is Director of American Institute of Vedic
Studies, P.O. Box 8357, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-8357.
email: vedicinst@aol.com
COPYRIGHT 2003 International Journal of Humanities and Peace
International Journal of Humanities and Peace; 1/1/2003; Frawley,
David
History and Ecology
Ecology is beginning to define how we look at the world and how we
look at ourselves. Each geographical region in the world constitutes
a special ecosystem--an interrelated habitat for plants and animals
shaped by climate and terrain. These ecological factors have a
strong effect on culture as well.
As part of nature ourselves, society arises out of an ecological
basis that we cannot ignore. Most of civilization, both in its
advance and decline, reflects how people are able to manage the
ecosystems in which they live and their natural resources. Human
culture derives largely from its first culture, which is
agriculture, our ability to work the land. This depends largely on
water, particularly fresh water that is found in rivers, and flat
land that can be easily irrigated.
However, so far we have looked at history mainly in a non-ecological
way, toting to define it according to political, economic or racial
concerns. Our account of ancient history, particularly that of
India, has not afforded an adequate regard to ecological factors. It
has put too much weight on migration, as if culture came from the
outside, rather than on the characteristics and necessities of the
ecosystems in which people live and must rely upon for developing
their way of life.
The Aryan invasion theory is such a product of the pre-ecological
age of historical theory that emphasized the movements of peoples
over the natural development of culture within well-defined
geographical regions. Nineteenth century thought, the product of a
colonial age, found it easy to see culture as something brought in
by intruders, rather than as developed by the inhabitants of a
region who had to develop unique methods to harness their natural
resources as shaped by the ecology around them.
Ancient River Civilizations and India, the Land of the Rivers
It is a well known fact that the main civilizations of the ancient
world of Egypt, Mesopotamia, India (Indus Valley), and China were
only possible because of the great river systems around which they
developed. The rivers made these civilizations possible, not simply
human invention or any special ethnic type who migrated there.
If we examine these four great riverine centers of early
civilization it is clear that the largest and most ideal river
region in the world for developing civilization is India. Egypt grew
up around one great river, the Nile that flowed through what was
otherwise a dry, rainless desert. Mesopotamia had two rivers but
only of moderate size, the Tigris and Euphrates, flowing through a
large desert as well. Both Egypt and Mesopotamia were in subtropical
regions that provided abundant warmth and sunshine for crops, but
otherwise suffered from the limited size of their One or two river
banks that were their sole steady. China had one large but
unpredictable river, the Yellow River, which frequently overflowed
its banks in various floods. It also received abundant rain. But it
was centered in a cold northern region, with a limited growing
season.
India, on the other hand, had a massive nexus of numerous great
rivers from the Indus in the West to the swamplands of the Gangetic
delta in the East. It had both a warm subtropical climate and
seasonal abundant rains. This river region included relatively diy
regions of the northwest to the very wet regions of eastern India
affording an abundance of crops both in type and quantity. The
Indian river system was much larger in size and arable land, and
better in climate than perhaps all the other three river regions put
together. No other region of the world could so easily serve to
create an agricultural diversity or the cultural richness that would
go with it.
Ecologically speaking, north India was the ideal place in the world
for the development of a riverine civilization via agriculture.
Bounded by the Himalayas in the north, and mountains on the West,
East and South, this north Indian river plain is a specific
geographical region and ecosystem, whose natural boundaries could
easily serve to create and hold together a great civilization. It
was also ideal for producing large populations that depend upon
agriculture for their sustenance.
This same network of rivers was ideal for communication. Not
surprisingly, the Rig Veda, the oldest book of the region, is full
of praise for the numerous great rivers of the region, the foremost
of which in early ancient times was the Sarasvati, which flowed east
of the Yamuna into the Rann of Kachchh, creating an unbroken set of
fertile rivers from the Punjab to Bengal. This Vedic Goddess of
speech was a river goddess. The Vedic idea of One Troth but many
paths (Rigveda 1.164) probably reflects this experience of life of
many rivers linked to the one sea.
The Need for An Ecological View of India's History
The main point of this article is that if we really want to
understand the development of civilization in ancient India we
cannot ignore such ecological and geographical factors. Ancient
India was the ideal ecological region for the development of
civilization in the ancient world. Therefore, we should look to an
indigenous development of civilization in the region. We need not
import its people, animals, plants, culture or civilization from the
outside, particularly from barren and inhospitable Central Asia, for
example, which would not have been suitable to India and which is
separated from it geographically by very hard to cross mountain and
desert barriers.
We need to take a new ecological look at the Vedas, which so far has
not been examined adequately ecologically but has been approached
mainly according to linguistic, Marxist or Freudian concerns that
easily miss the obvious geography or ecology of the text. If we do
this, we will discover that even the oldest Vedic text, the Rig
Veda, clearly describes a region of many vast rivers flowing to the
sea, the most important of which was the Sarasvati. The climate that
it describes of great rains and monsoons, the symbolism of the great
God Indra, is also clearly that of India. The flora and fauna
mentioned including the Brahma bull, water buffalo and elephant and
its sacred trees of the Pipal, Ashvattha and Shamali is also that of
India.
The fall of the Indus or Harappan culture, just as was the case for
many in the ancient world, was owing to ecological factors,
something that nineteenth and early twentieth century migrationist
views of history completely missed. It occurred not because of the
destruction wrought by the proposed Aryan invaders but by ecological
changes brought about by the drying up of the Sarasvati River around
1900 BCE. This didn't end civilization in the region but caused its
relocation mainly to the more certain waters of the Ganga to the
east. Such a movement is reflected in the shift from Vedic
literature that is centered on the Sarasvati to the Puranic
literature that is centered on the Ganges.
The great Indian river system from the Panjab to Bihar is perhaps
the greatest breadbasket or agricultural center in the world. Any
humans in the region would have been aided by the land, the waters
and the climate, affording them a great advantage in the development
of language and culture as well. The natural resources provided by
the riverine ecosystem of north India could uphold great
civilizations over the centuries. From it the peoples and literature
of the region had adequate support from nature to sustain their
traditions.
Southern River Regions
The type of civilization developed in the rivers of north India
could easily connect with the cultures developing on the rivers in
the south of the country that shared a common climate and
geographical ties. The other main great river region for India is
the basins of the Krishna and Godavari rivers in the southeast of
India, particularly Andhra Pradesh. This provides another important
agricultural center in the ancient world, which has also not been
examined properly.
Another important river area is the Narmada and Tapti rivers in
Gujarat and Maharashtra. As these were nearby the delta of the
Sarasvati, they could have been an extension of it (which is perhaps
why the Bhrigu Rishis of this region are so important in Vedic
literature).
That the civilization of north India could have bad connections with
these southern cultures is also ecologically based. For this we must
consider the ecological factors that existed when agriculture began
to arise in the world around 10,000 BCE. Before the end of the Ice
Age north India was much drier and cooler in climate. This means
that if there was any pre-Ice Age basis for agriculture in north
India it would have more likely come from these more suitable
southern river regions which had better rainfall at that time.
Conclusion
We need to look at the civilization of India according to
geographical and ecological imperatives that are far more certain
than historical speculation conditioned by simplistic ideas of
ethnicity, linguistics or migrations. In this regard the study of
the Sarasvati river system by the geologists of India and linking it
to the Sarasvati in Vedic literature is probably the key.
Civilization is like a plant that owes its existence to the land on
which it grows. We cannot ignore this important fact either for our
past or for our future. The current government of India plan to link
all the great rivers of the country represents such a responsible
ecological approach which, inchiding reconstituting the old Sarasvan
river channel, links the great future of the country with its great
past.
Dr. David Frawley is Director of American Institute of Vedic
Studies, P.O. Box 8357, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-8357.
email: vedicinst@aol.com
COPYRIGHT 2003 International Journal of Humanities and Peace