Origin of Hungarians

Who are hungarians?
Sumerians, Hurrians, Mitanni, Habiru, Hyksos, Kassites, Chaldeans, Medes, Khwarezmians, Scythians, Massagetas, Alans, Sabirs, Avars, Huns, Magyars, OnOgurs, Khazars, Uyghurs, Kushitic, Semitic and Japhetic , who are they?

Let us see Hungarian history for some view.

Early Hungarian History
Hungary is located in the heart of Europe, in the Carpathian Basin, surrounded by the Carpathian mountain chain, the Alps and the southern Slav mountains. This area has, since the dawn of civilization, been inhabited by human beings, a meeting point where cultures blended together. From the first century B.C. people on horseback - the Scythes - of Iranian extraction, and Indo-European tribes /Celtic, Illyrian and Thracian/ that pursued a more or less settled existence constantly replaced one another. In the final stages of the expansion of the Roman empire, for a short while the Carpathian Basin fell into the sphere of the Mediterranean, Greco-Roman civilization - town centers, paved roads, and written sources were all part of the advances to which the Migration of Peoples put an end. Germanic and Turkish /Hun and Avar/ tribes attacking from the east then appeared in the region. From the beginning of the 3rd century onwards Rome was gradually forced onto the defensive, and around the year 430 AD, bowing to Hun sieges, it ultimately surrendered its Carpathian Basin province of Pannonia.The famous Hun king, Attila, operated his powerful but short-lived empire from the River Tisza. Upon his death the Hun empire disintegrated and Germanic tribes again split up the region. However, their hegemony was soon smashed by the advent of the Avars. Their empire, established by the end of the 6th century, was destroyed by the wars launched by Charlemagne /around 790/ and Bulgarian attacks from the Danube. Transdanubia marked the eastern province of the declining Frankish empire. Bulgarians ruled the Hungarian Great Plain and Transylvania, while in the north there was the state of the Morvas, these peoples formed the status quo in the Carpathian Basin at the time of the arrival of the Magyars.

Magyar Migration Theory
The first temporary raids of ancient proto-Magyars in this territory occurred in the 860s. It was only in 895/896 that the Magyars decided to cross the Carpathians permanently. The chieftain Árpád is traditionally said to be the person who led the seven proto-Magyar tribes (including the Magyars proper) out of the steppes of Ukraine and into the Carpathian basin. These seven tribes later became the nucleus of the Kingdom of Hungary under Árpád's great-great-grandson, Stephen I of Hungary. Although Christianization of this territory began as early as in the 4th century AD, the newly-arrived Magyars were Christianized only at the end of the 10th century under Géza: this task was finished by Stephen I of Hungary, who was officially crowned king by the pope in 1000 AD.

By the end of the 11th century Hungary, which had risen to become a Central European power, acted as conqueror in the east and south. Campaigns launched into what is Galicia and Ukraine today were without success, but Croatia recognized the supremacy of the Árpád dynasty in 1091.

The relatively steady progress was interrupted in 1240 and 1242 by the dramatic incursion and ruthless ransacking of the country by Tartar /Mongol/ forces, who swept across the country scorching the land and forcing the king and his court to flee to the Adriatic. One third of the country's population was killed during the single year of the Tartar invasion.
King Béla IV /1235-1270/ was, with some justifications, dubbed the "second home founder" as he had to rebuild the scorched country practically from scratch. By establishing a series of stone castles he created a strong defensive system, he invited settlers to unsettled parts of the country, and reorganized life in the country by pursuing tolerant and persistent policies.

Theory of Gyula László Theory
The Hungarian archaeologist Gyula László has proposed a very controversial theory, also known as "theory of double conquest”, in recent decades. He has argued that the Magyars arrived in two separate waves, centuries apart, a notion which is still controversial. The theory argues that around 670 a new ethnic group moved into the Carpathian Basin, representing the late-Avar culture with a griffin-creeper pattern on their belt-clasp. The theory says that these latter Avars were actually Magyars and that they survived the centuries until the Árpád's Magyars arrival.

Theory of Grover Krantz:
In his book Geographical Development of the European Languages, anthropologist Grover Krantz argues that the Hungarian language must have been present in the Carpathian basin when the Indo-European languages diffused into Europe. His theory is based on the development of early forms of agriculture, to which the spread of the Proto-Indo-European language was tied. These agricultural developments and tools were such that the people relying on them were not able to penetrate the Carpathian basin, as a result the Indo-European languages avoided that region as they were diffusing.

Theory of Mario Alinei:
As part of his "theory of continuity", Mario Alinei, linguist at the University of Utrecht, sees the Etruscan language as an archaic form of Hungarian. The basis of the connection is the extraordinary resemblance of Etruscan and ancient Magyar magistrature names and other similarities: typologies, lexicon and historical grammar. This theory also contradicts the view that Magyars arrived in the Carpathian basin in 900 AD.

Let us see the legends of origins

Legend of White Stag.
The Legend of the White Stag ascribes the origin of the Hungarians to the merging of three peoples: Huns, Magyars and Alans. Since the Alans, together with the Yazyg and Roxlans are classified as Massagetas in early records and as Sarmatians in later ones, henceforth the terms "Alan", "Yazyg", "Roxlan" and "Massageta" will be mentioned as "Sarmatian" in order to make this essay more intelligible, avoiding synonymous or quasi-synonymous terms (unless specification is required). They are identified with the Moshkhi of the Assyrian chronicles and Meshekh of the Bible.

Sumerian Legend
This legend starts with Tana, that is undoubtedly the same as the Sumerian Etana of the city of Kish (Kush) and who is equivalent with the Biblical Kush, the father of Nimrod – The Kushan Scythians also had an ancestor called Kush-Tana. The Sumerian Etana was the first mighty one on earth who wanted to visit heaven, and did. This story coincides with the Biblical account concerning Nimrod, though it is feasible that Nimrod set up the construction of the Tower of Bavel on behalf of his father, being coherent with the Babylonian myth in which the founder of Babylon was Bel, the father of Ninus (Nimrud), that was the first king. In the Hungarian account, the son of Tana is Ménrót or Nemere (Nimrod), who had twin sons called Magor and Hunor. Also Nimrud's wife, Anuta/Bau, has similar names in the Hungarian version, Eneth/Boldog-asszony. The Assyrian accounts refer that Nimrud had twin sons, one of whose names was Magor, confirming the Hungarian myth.

Scythian Legend
The legend says that Hunor and Magor were pursuing a female stag that led them into a foreign land and there she vanished without leaving any trace. The disappointed hunters however, met there two sisters, princesses of the Sarmatians, kidnapped and married them, becoming the forefathers of the Huns and Magyars. The stag is also relevant in Scythian mythology.

Nimrod Legend
Hungarian legend the sons of Ménrót/Nemere were hunters, and Nimrod in the Bible is described as a "mighty hunter". His Sumerian name – or better, his title – was Nimb-ur-shag, meaning "Lord of the Panthers", which in Hungarian is translated "Parduc-Uraság", conveying the same meaning of the Hebrew name quoted in the Bible, related with the word "nimra", that means "panther, leopard", combined with the verb "rad", that is "to subdue". Therefore, the first part of the Sumerian name resembles the Hebrew one, but the second component is definitely quite similar to Hungarian. It is relevant that Nimrod had to "subdue" panthers in order to become a "mighty" hunter: this title is often misinterpreted as he being a leopard-hunter – because it was the most dangerous animal in those times – but the actual meaning is another; in fact, the "lord" or "subduer" of the panther, implies that he was able to tame these animals in order to use them as a valuable aid in hunting other wild beasts. Indeed, also the kings and notables of Central Asia (from where the Hungarians departed towards Europe) trained the panthers to employ them in hunting. Panther skin has traditionally been the most precious garment among Hungarian kings and leaders, recalling the very fashion in which Nimrod himself was portrayed. The historian Yosef ben-Gorion ha-Kohen, also known as Yosippon, thought that Ménrót was to be identified with the first Egyptian king Menes, later merged with the Mesopotamian Nimrod, and his wife Eneth with the Egyptian female deity Neith.

Legend of the Turul Hawk
A mythical bird identical to the Sumerian "Dugud", that is the emblem of both the house of Attila the Hun and the house of Árpád. This story is about Emeshe, a Sumerian princess that was sterile until the Turul hawk came down from heaven and gave her fertility. She was married to Ügyek, the king of Scythians, of the lineage of Magog – in agreement with the Assyrian chronicles, that report Magog as the founder of the Scythian nation in northern Mesopotamia. Emeshe conceived Álmos (the same name of Árpád's father, that was a descendant of Attila the Hun), and in her dream she saw her descent as a river flowing from her womb that was growing towards the west, passing over the mountains and from which a great golden tree arose, representing a royal lineage of kings ruling in a far away land in the west. This story recalls the dream of the Mede king Ištumegu (Astyages) concerning his daughter, from whose womb he saw spring a river that flooded the earth, and in a second dream he saw a grape vine growing from her womb that became a mighty tree that covered the continent. These dreams were interpreted as a royal line from his daughter's offspring that would have built an empire, though dethroning him. The parallelism between both legends is amazing. Indeed, there is a relationship between ancient Medes and Hungarians. The characteristic aspect of this story, that credits the actual Sumerian origin of Magyars, is that Álmos is described as dark complexioned and black-eyed, namely, a Kushite. His name means "dreamer", since according to the legend he was conceived after his mother's dream.

Finno-Ugrian theory
This thesis, however respectable it may be, lacks of proofs and leaves many enigmas unsolved, as it was formulated only in the later 18th century c.e. neglecting all the previously existing historic records. Even though the process of Germanization of the Hungarian people began with King Vajk (then christened as István) by the end of the 10th century c.e., it was under the Austrian rule that the need of a sharp distinction from the rival Ottoman Empire required a new theory of origins which placed the Hungarians definitely on the European side. Besides this, the religious leadership of Rome monopolized the official history of Europe, and Hungarians had to be "cleansed" of the ugly picture of the Huns portrayed by the Romans ‒ the alleged higher degree of civilization attributed to the Romans in comparison with Attila's Huns is strongly disputable, however. Consequently, a prestigious leading monarchy as the Austro-Hungarian could not acknowledge any non-European component, and the Ugro-Finnic theory, strongly supported by German linguists, was hallowed as the only feasible one that may have made of Hungarians a fully European, western people that with time would have finally forgotten its obscure, barbaric origins and recognized the valuable contribution of Germanic civilization to their cultural development .

Hurrian Theory
The land known by Sumerians as "Subar-Ki" or "Subar-Tu" was inhabited by the Hurrians, whose language was Indo-European languages So, the Hurrians cannot be directly related with Hungarians. Yet, they were not the only people in that region, the same country was known under different names, Assyrian documents as "Sapar-da", Egyptians as "Magor", in Persian as "Sabarda" and "Matiene/Mada", while the Biblical name Haran/Charan is obviously connected with the Hurrians. Greek refer to them as "Sapir/Sabir", "Makr/Magar" and "Matiene". All these terms point out to the denomination of two Hungarian tribes: Sabirs and Magyars. This is the basis of the theory Similar sounding names of Sabirs and Magyars.

Mittani Theory
Northern Mesopotamian region was also known as "Mada/Mata/Madja". The term that may be transliterated as "mat", "madh", "madj" means "country" or "district" in Sumerian, Subarian, Parthian, and other related languages, and it was also used by the Assyrians and Egyptians with the same meaning. Notice that in those languages, the phoneme "dh" or "dj" is equal to the modern Hungarian "gy", and "megye" is still "district" or "province" in Hungarian. Therefore, if the denomination has been transferred along the generations, the Magyars might be the ancient tribe of Mitanni, Claims this theory.

Habiru
Habiru are people of Meditaranean spread far and wide, they are group from which Israelites emerged. Based on the Nimrod legend links are made between Habiru and Hungarian. But Habiru are Semitic, so they cannot be Hungarian.

Hyksos
Based on the Habiru , further links are made to Hyksos , but this is just a far fetched theory.

Kassites
By the time of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt to Canaan, a mysterious people arose in Southern Mesopotamia: the Kassites (Kasu). and after they lost control of Babylon they retreated to the Zagros Mounts and had not any further history. Very likely, they and not the Neo-Babylonian Chaldeans were the authentic Kasdim. The Kassites apparently spoke a language similar to Sumerian, Kassites were excellent horse-riders, a feature that primarily distinguished the peoples of the north, By some Kassite king names, which are evidently Indic (for example: Shuriash = Surya, Maruttash = Marut, Inda-Bugash = Indra-Bhaga), The Kassite kingdom in the south preceded about 90 years the Mitanni kingdom in the north, and survived it for other 90 years. At this point, the other meaning of the word Kasdim, "Chaldeans", and their relationship with Sumerians allows us to link our reasoning again with the "Hungarian-Hebrew connexion".The dynasty that ruled over Babylon about 130 years after the Kassites were dethroned is known as "Chaldean", the one to which Nebukhadnetzar the Great belonged.

Chaldean
Chaldeans (Kasdim) are not a people but a kind of social class or caste associated with the magicians, enchanters, sorcerers, soothsayers. They probably belonged to a different people, as they had their own language, "the language of the Kasdim", but spoke to the king in Aramaic, the Assyrian tongue of Babylon. The likely hypothesis is that, after the Kassites were defeated by the joint Assyrian-Elamite armies and the 2nd Dynasty of Isin took the power, they withdrew to the Zagros Mountains. How this is related to Hungarian is not known, but this is the theory.

Medes
This theory is supported by Mittani theory and further development on that.

Alans, Massagetas,
The Legend of the White Stag ascribes the origin of the Hungarians to the merging of three peoples: Huns, Magyars and Alans. Since the Alans, together with the Yazyg and Roxlans are classified as Massagetas in early records and as Sarmatians in later ones, henceforth the terms "Alan", "Yazyg", "Roxlan" and "Massageta" This is the basis of the theory linking Alans, Massagetas and Hungarians.

Sabirs
is probably synonymous of "Hun" or "Magyar". In fact, Herodotus mentions them as Sapir/Sabir, Makr/Magar, in reference to Subarians and Mitanni. Other classical sources and historians always mention these two terms together (Sabir and Magor). In Persian inscriptions, Sapardia and Hunae are also consecutive. The descriptions of their mastery in the art of war and powerful cavalry and their somatic and cultural features lead to identify them with the Huns, so that they appear as the same people. The equation Subarians-Mitanni of old is paralleled in later times by the association Huns-Magyars.

Altaic
One of the major controversies among different scholars regards the common origin of Hungarians and Turks. Undoubtedly, Hungarians are not a Turkic people, and probably they never were. The cultural differences existing between these two groups, mainly after the Magyar settlement in the Carpathian Basin, generated the elaboration of a new "official" theory of origins supported by the Austro-Hungarian élite, followed by the Soviet-ruled Hungary and by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Khazars
Indeed, the last word is not said, because there were Turkic peoples that contributed to the definitive formation of the Hungarian nation: Khazars/Kabars, Kumans (Kipchak) and, in a lesser amount, the Besenyö (Pechenegs). Historically, the most relevant of them have been the Khazars, with whom the Magyars had intensive interaction as allies, subjects, confederates, neighbours or rivals. When the Khazar empire collapsed, they were welcomed by the Magyars in their already conquered Danubian land. Both peoples had similar languages, so that they were understandable to each other. The Khazar tongue was still spoken in Hungary until the 10th century c.e. Paradoxically and in apparent contrast with the purpose of this essay, the Khazars did not add any substantial contribution to the presumed Hebrew-Hungarian connexion: they were a Turkic people related with the Uyghurs that became famous for the adoption of Judaism of their leading class but they had not Jewish bloodline, facts that have generated a series of speculative theories mainly in an anti-Semitic sense. They arose from the collapsed kingdom of the Kök Turks and built their own empire, which was ethnically quite heterogeneous, composed by almost every Scythian-related tribe between Khwarezm and the Dniepr. The OnOgurs and Bulgars were consistent elements within the population of Khazaria, as well as Magyars, that had also their own realm by the western border.

Huns
The Huns are undoubtedly the most famous of the Hungarian ancestors, though much of what is known of them is tainted with biased accounts and legends that exalt their allegedly ferocious character, so that any horde of invaders is still qualified with this name. The western civilizations have received the Roman viewpoint first and the Catholic superstition later ‒ the mediaeval prayer "De sagittis hungarorum libera nos, Domine", that is "Save us from the arrows of the Hungarians, O Lord" was framed as an invocation for protection from the Magyars, enhancing the excellence of their archery. The Magyars were recognized as the same Huns that four and half centuries before rushed into the heart of Europe with their outstanding archers.

Avars
Avars, as exposed in the previous chapter, were culturally related with Scythian-Dahae tribes, but probably their early origin was Subarian/Habiri. Concerning their homeland, the Persian name Varkâna means "Land of Wolves", name that translated to modern Hungarian would be "Farkasok-földje/Farkasok-országa", but in old Hungarian it is correct to say "Farkasok-hona", which resembles to the historic Persian name. Even more similar is "Avarok-hona", meaning "Land of the Avars". Therefore, a possible sequence may be that the Persians adapted the Avar designation of the land, either translating the meaning (in case that the Avar name was actually "Land of Wolves") or else applying a meaning in Persian (converting the term "Avar" into "Wolf"); therefore, the modern Hungarian term was translated after the Persian historic name, being the complete sequence as follows: Farkasok-hona»Varkâna»Várkony, or Avarok-hona»Varkâna»Várkony. In this case we assume that the Avars' language was an old form of Hungarian, which is not unlikely considering that they were Subarian Habiri, speaking a transitional tongue between Emegir and Magyar. There are additional evidences to establish these facts: The Avars' arrival in Europe and subsequent settlement in the Danubian Basin is chronologically placed after that of Attila's Huns and previous to the HunOgurs and Árpád's Magyars. Even though these migratory waves are interpreted as different, as a matter of fact, they represent a continuity, a "proto-Hungarian" territorial claim. The Avars held the land previously conquered by the Huns as a permanent resistance force against European occupants. Indeed, contemporary sources were not able to explain a clear distinction between the Avars and the Huns that preceded them, nor did between them and the Magyars that followed. The Avars easily "assimilated" the remnants of Attila's Huns, and in the same way did the Magyars with the Hun/Avar/HunOgur inhabitants - having the same language, life-style, clothing, cooking, ornaments, metallurgy, etc.

Hephthalites or Hayathelaites:(White Huns)
Usually known as "White Huns", they had indeed not any real relationship with the Huns. Such association is caused by misleading name resemblances: apparently they called themselves "Hua", according to the Chinese accounts, while their Sanskrit name was "Huna", terms that historians have connected with the Huns. Refer to Article who are white Huns

Scythians

original Scythians came from the line of Magog, being an Indo-European people. Notwithstanding, this term was applied to every sort of wandering tribes, and since the Scythians were present in a very vast area of the continent, they have taken many cultural features of the peoples with whom they were in contact, usually as allied. Therefore, there is a wide range of peoples, from Europe to India, sharing several Scythian features and claiming Scythian ancestry, even peoples from opposite sides, Aryan and non-Aryan, Indo-Iranian and Eurasian, Turks, Slavs, Hungarians, Indian, etc. They apparently spoke an Iranic tongue (Zend). Their religion was centred in the worship of natural forces.

Conclusion

It appears therefore that a fundamental revision of early Hungarian history is necessary in order to arrive at a more accurate picture, and much research work remains to be done in this field. Based on the available information, it seems most probable that the Hungarians are a synthesis of the peoples which have settled in the Carpathian Basin since the Neolithic period up to the Middle Ages: the Sumerian-related peoples of Near-Eastern origin (Neolithic, Copper and Bronze Ages), followed by the Scythians (6th c. BC), the Huns (5th c. AD), the Avars (6th c.), the Magyars (9th c.), the Petchenegs (11th c.), and the Cumans (13th c.). This Hungarian synthesis is characterized by a remarkable ethno-linguistic homogeneity and has remained highly differentiated from the considerably more numerous surrounding Indo-European people. The conclusion which can be drawn from this is that the Hungarians were able to preserve their ethno-linguistic identity and to maintain a demographic majority or critical mass within the Carpathian Basin as a result of the periodical inflow of ethno-linguistically related peoples. These peoples were designated in the 19th c. as Turanians, and the Sumerians, Scythians, Huns, Avars and Magyars were all considered to belong to this ethno-linguistic group. So more research is needed and also may be Hungarians are a not one of the said groups but all the groups.

Related Posts

White Huns

Sumerian Legacy

Indo-European Origin

Dating Greek Civilization

Topics

Origin of Word Telugu

The etymology of Telugu is not known for certain.

Tri Linga

It is explained as being derived from trilinga, as in Trilinga Desa, "the country of the three lingas". According to a Hindu legend, Trilinga Desa is the land in between three Shiva temples namely Kaleshwaram, Srisailam and Draksharamam. Trilinga Desa forms the traditional boundaries of the Telugu region. The people who lived in these regions were also referred to as Telaga Caste seems to have been derived from Trilinga Desam. Other forms of the word, such as Telunga, Telinga, Telangana and Tenunga were also seen. It is also said that Trilinga, in the form "Triliggon" occurs in Ptolemy as the name of a locality to the east of the Ganga river. Other scholars compare Trilinga with other local names mentioned by Pliny, such as Bolingae, Maccocalingae, and Modogalingam. The latter name is given as that of an island in the Ganges. A. D. Campbell, in the introduction to his Telugu grammar, suggested that Modogalingam may be explained as a Telugu translation of Trilingam, and compared the first part of the word modoga, with mUDuga, a poetical form for Telugu mUDu, three. Bishop Caldwell, on the other hand, explained Modogalingam as representing a Telugu mUDugalingam, the three Kalingas, a local name which occurs in Sanskrit inscriptions and one of the Puranas. Kalinga occurs in the Ashoka Inscriptions, and in the form Kling, it has become, in the Malay country, the common word for the people of Continental India. According to K. L. Ranjanam, the word is derived from talaing, who were chiefs who conquered the Andhra region.

Telunga

M. R. Shastri is of the opinion that it is from telunga, an amalgamation of the Gondi words telu, meaning "white", and the pluralization -unga, probably referring to white or fair-skinned people. According to G. J. Somayaji, ten- refers to "south" in Proto-Dravidian, and the word could be derived from tenungu meaning "people of the South". The ancient name for Telugu land seems to be telinga/telanga desa. It seems probable that the base of this word is teli, and that -nga, or gu is the common Dravidian formative element. A base teli occurs in Telugu (teli meaning "bright" and teliyuTa meaning "to perceive").

Tenugu

Telugu pandits commonly state Tenugu to be the proper form of the word, and explain this as the ‘mellifluous language’ from tene or honey. However, this claim does not appear to be supported by scholarly opinion. The word Kalinga might be derived from the same base as Telugu kaluguTa, to live to exist, and would then simply mean "human".

Origin of Buddha Image

Today India is known for Idol Worship. All religions in India have in Form worship, either as symbols, letters, pictures or Idols. But this was not the case 2000Years ago. Any form of Form in Faith was not considered. In some places like Karnataka not even name of the dead Jain persons written on the Graves even until 400 AD. Hinduism , Jainism and Buddhism did not support gods in human form. So how did this extreme swing took place , from nothing everything in human forms. This explains the lack of Inscriptions, temples, Idols before 5th century BC. Classic study in this transformation is Buddhism. This was the religion at the prime when this transformation occurred. So Let us see how we got the Image of Buddha. Which will explain the transformation. Let us see if Image in Indian religion and the Origin of Buddha Image and associate controversies.

Vedic Hinduism.

Vedic religion says Absolute or Trancendental can be realized in diverse ways. Co-existence of Sakara(diety with Form) and Nirakara(Diety without Form) in the same household , with men with different Intellectual and moral denominations aspiring for spirituality in their respective ways. Kena Upanishad says man cannot comprehend God with his sense organs. That is God cannot be seen with Eyes. Svetasvatara upanishad says that Great one has not likeness to form. In Bhagavat Gita Arjuna asks Krishna in what forms and objects the Great one should be meditated. In response Krishna first Enumerated all phenomenal objects , all flora , all fauna and so on. Then Krishna gives Arjuna supernatural Eye , in which he sees entire universe, process of creation and process of destruction. Arjuna beholds God is identical with Cosmos. Later Supplements of Gita say God can be worshipped by Agni by Brahman, Devata(divinity) worshipped in the heart of Muni,Pratima(Image) is adored by men of Low intellect. While one whose sight is not limited can see God everywhere. Adi shankara preferred Formless and Ramanuja said he is prefers both Formless and With Form.

Jainism

Jainism says In the theist world the loftiest entity is The God. It has thousands of names like Paramatma (the ultimate soul), Bhagavan (the most glorious one), Siddha (the liberated), Buddha (the enlightened), The God, etc.

In the Jain tradition there are two forms of this entity-

(1) The formless God or Siddha (the liberated) and

(2) The God with a form or Tirthankar / Arihant.

The Tirthankar is a detached individual who is the ultimate altruist and benefactor of not only mankind but every living being. He propagates the religious path and preaches about it for their benefit. His benevolent voice promotes happiness, peace, and infinite bliss for every being.In the Jain tradition there have been twenty-four Tirthankars during the current descending cycle of time, Bhagavan Rishabhdev being the first and Bhagavan Mahavir being the last. For every Jain these Tirthankars are the entities to be worshipped and revered. The ultimate goal of Jainism is to tread the path shown by them and acquire infinite powers and virtues.

Buddhism

Thervada ban on Buddharupa( Buddha Image) is well known. An old Disciple of Buddha Vakali was eager to see Buddha before he died. One day buddha came and said to him “ O vakkali why do you crave to see this body of impure matter, one who perceives Dharma Perceives me. One who perceives me perceives Dharma” On different occasions through dialogues and sermons Buddha spoke against adoration of his Rupakaya or Buddha Rupa.

What does faith say?

The Trinity Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism say that God is formless ,but it does not go against worship of forms , saying that is done by lower intellectuals. So the form is also present in Indian Dharma along with Formless, which is the basic or ultimate. Now let us see how Buddha Image developed.

Origin of Buddha Image

Buddhist followers remained faithful to Buddha teaching of non-worship of buddha Image. The first to break the rule King Udyana of Vatsa or Kausambi, who was very devoted, The story goes that he was worried that Buddha would not return. Buddha's disciple Maudgalyayana used magic to send an artist (some say 32 of them) up to heaven to capture the likeness of the Buddha in a 5-foot figure carved out of sandalwood. This image was so accurate and imbued with devotion, that when Shakyamuni returned, it rose up to greet him. The Buddha acknowledged then, the power of the rupa to inspire and to teach the dharma to future generations. This story is not accepted by most Buddhists. For Five centuries after Buddha until 1st century BC , Buddha was represented by Symbols. Until 1st century AD he was never represented in Human Form. Immediately following this period the Graeco-Buddhist or Indo-Hellenistic or Ghandara period presents us with enormous anthromorphic images. Immediately we have suggestions from western world that the images were introduction from west , particularly from Greece. The present Image developed after the 5th century AD. Our main debate of the article comes here, Was the Concept of Image of God came from West (Persia, Middle east , Greece, Rome , etc).

Image or Icon in Indian Religions – History Debate.

In the First two decades of this 20th century Western scholars like Albert Foucher and John Marshall has concluded that Image or Icon was not the characteristic of Indian religions till the advent of Persians , West Asians and Greek. This Western Idea was supported by Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj and Prarthana Samaj. They maintained that Worship of Image was un - Vedic, Un - Brahminical and was the later development in Puranic age. Thervada buddhist also accepted this theory.

Other Hindus who held Pratima(Likeness = Image) was an Indigenous element nothing was foreign. Kashiprasad Jaiswal and Anand Coomaraswamy contended that Rupa (form) is integral part of the Vedic religion. At this time Indus Valley civilzation was unearthed, Archeologist R.P chanda found earliest representation of Siva Pasupathi and Yogi in the Indus valley. Also scholars pointed to Tibetans traditions and showed that Image was used before Mauryas. Also aborignals(Not Aryan and Dravidian) like Veddas and Nagas have their dieties and symbols of worship. So the worship of symbols and dieties is not totally absent.

Image worship in India

• Image worship as we have seen in the Formless debate was accepted and prevalent.

• Images of Shiva, mother Goddess,Yogi and wide variety of Terrocotta statues representing Human and Animal like forms. in Indus valley have proved beyond doubt that Image worship was prevalent.

• Aboriginal like Yaksha and Naga have dieties. We find numerous dieties in their settlements since earliest times. Which show that Idol worship was prevalent before vedic times(7000BC)

• Sakya, the clan Buddha was born in, had its own Yaksha deity, the Yaksha Sakyavardhana, the benevolent guardian of Sakyas. As prevailed the custom, soon after his birth, the child Buddha was presented to Yaksha Sakyavardhana for child's long life and glory.
  

So from the above points the worshipping of Forms and images was widely prevalent and the Idea is not Import from west. Let us move to the next point. Was the Buddha image creation due to influence of the west.

Foreign Influence.

Foucher argued that the Buddha Image is a eurasian one or Greek one. Let us analyse the facts.Before the Gandhara buddhist images there were Mathura Buddhist Images which were Indian in look and Indigenous. So there is no question of Gandhara images being the first buddhist images. Infact Gandhara images are continuation of mathura Images. Let us see the if there is any influence of Greek or western on the Gandhara images. Let us see one by one

Image

• The Asanas are all Indian. The early art shows five sitting postions with hands showing mudras (Dharmachakra Mudra, Dhyna Mudra, Bhumisparsa Mudra, Varada mudra, Abhaya Mudra)

• The Dress worn by Boddhisattvas are Indian.

• Physical attributes: Protuberance(usnisa) on the crown is evident, urna or turf in the fine hair between the brows is evident, Fingers are webbed, The Ears are elongated by wearing the ear rings before monastic robes.

• The Boddhisattvas represented in less rigid position holding attributes in the hands(vajra pani in Vajra, Padmapani by roselotus , Avalokitesvara by blue lotus, Maitreya Amrta Flask) These attributes can be held in any hand, but they are always held in Right hand by Indian Tradition.

• The Dieties are either seated or Standing on traditional Indian lotus Flower.

Symbols

All the Symbols used in the Art are indian such as bull, Sacred Tree,Mountain, River , many Solar ,Nandipada, Trishul, Swastik, Lotus , Bow and Arrow Etc. These are Hindu, Jain and Buddhist or Indian.

Art form

In Indian art (abstract) the emphasis is laid on the significance of the object not the appearance. In Greek art (naturalistic) the emphasis is laid on the object and its looks. Every art is a compromise between the abstract and naturalistic, but what we see in Gandhara and other Indian art is continuos concept of Abstract(whether one finds a sacred tree or Buddha Figure) , no swing from one style to another as seen during 19th century when there were wild swings to European art. The Gandhara artforms are infact reproduction of early mathura artforms.

Technology

The Technology , Craftsman were already present , when the need for buddha arise and they had no problem in making the images.

Conclusion

So we cannot say that the Buddha got the Image due to Western Influence. The Gandhara art shows lot of Influence of Hellenistic artform, but the Image is originally Indian. Hinduism , Jainism and Buddhism embodied accomodation of non-believers into their fold as they are , without losing anything. Unlike in Europe when pre-christian gods were banished once christianity took hold, Indian faith accepted aboriginal Yaksha and Naga dieties and symbols and absorbed them. This process continued and Buddhist and Jain elements were absorbed into Hindu fold. So the Image and Deity worship are essentially Indian , though they were not part of Hindu, Jain or Buddhist Dharma initially.

Ref:

The origin of Buddha Image by Ananda K Coomaraswamy

Dating Indian History - Towards a common Era

Most of disputes in history starts with dates, one claiming predating other. Let us see how difficult it is to know the exact year of existence of particular person from Inscriptions. We are restricting ourselves to Inscriptions as going to literature will open another Pandora box.

Inscriptions are dated in some many ways. Ranging from simple year date (regnal or era ) to detailed year month tithi(lunar day), week day and/or other calendrical or astronomical dates. Let us see the Era or dating used.

Regnal Year

This is practice dating records from regnal years of king , this method is used in most of the inscriptions. Beginning from Ashoka , continuing with satavahana, Ikshvaku, Vakatakas continued record in regnal years in their inscriptions, this continued in medieval period with Palas, Pallavas, Cholas, Pandyas. A typical inscription with regnal year, might say “ The great king of so-and-so with so-and-so titles with so-and-so achievements donated in the first year of of his reign “. The inscription may add the tithi or day of the week, or month in addition the regnal year. Unless additional reference date or another king or ruler or event is provided the dating of the inscription is not absolute. These inscriptions have to be dated by techniques similar to paleographic records or undated inscriptions. But sometimes due to historical synchronization we can find the year and sometimes month and date of the particular inscription, but this is not the case with most inscriptions. The successive rulers of dynasty have given inscriptions ,so we can date them successfully. But sometimes some successive rulers have same names which compounds the problem. The problem is with regnal years everything is relative and fluid, with change of date of one inscription every other inscription has to be re-dated. If Greek have not come to India , we will not be able to date Ashoka and with Ashoka the entire Indian History.  

Year of an Era

Beginning with First century BC some inscriptions dated the years in continuous era. In this practice the kings issuing the inscription dates the inscription in the regnal years of the previous kings instead of his accession. This system is seen in the Dynasties. Sometimes they are followed even when the dynasties have fallen and new one takes over. But this information is not absolute, the name of the era may be left out since it is a prevalent one and common knowledge. In addition the year may be given in numbers or words or both. Sometimes the year is given as chronogram(bhutasamkya), with digits expressed in words for items associated in particular order. The suggested numbers have to read in reverse order(according to the principle Ankanam Vamato gatih, numbers run leftward). Sometimes both common era and Regnal year can be found.

Let us see some of the Era's

Jain Nirvana Era

This date starts with Nirvana or salvation of Last Jain Tirthakarna Vardhamana Mahavir. While Vicarasreni(1310AD) in Merutunga(Prakrit) gives date as 470 Years to vikrama Era, Nemichandra(1084AD) in Mahaviracariam(prakrit) gives the date as 605 years and 5 Months to before the start of Saka Era. So the dispute will be there as the Mahavira date is not certain. The Sravanabelagola Inscription equating Vir- Nirvana year 2493, Vikrama 1888 and Saka 1752 is an example.

Buddhist nirvana Era

Cantonese records say each year after passing of Buddha was represented by a dot and so the date of Buddha is 486BC , the start of Buddhist nirvana Era. But there is no agreement in Buddhist world. So the dates are disputed.

Vikram Era

This Era starts in 50 BCE by King Vikramaditya. Vikramaditya regained his ancestral kingdom in Ujjain by expelling the Sakas from there after 9 years of their rule (66-57 BCE). In order to commemorate his victory over them, he introduced a new era called Vikram Samvat (or Malawa Samvat) in 57 BCE. This story is also disputed.

Shalivahana saka
The Inscription of Pulakeshi talks synchronises the era with Kali era and uses the term Shalivahana sake. This era is also called Saka era. This is the most consistently used era and also currently used by Govt of India as Well. Historically this marks the defeat of Saka ruler of Ujjain by Shalivahana of Paithan. This is era is used extensively in Karnataka, Maharastra and Andhra. The start of era is 78AD. However Indologists have many theories for this era. But it is generally agreed that Kanishka was the first to use Saka era , so the origin is given to him. But kushana chronology itself is debated. Saka era is labled in various ways such as saka-nrpa-Kale, saka-varsesv-atitesu, Saka-varse, Salivahana sake, sake and so on. Except the earliest years Saka era dates are labeled saka year. 

Kalachuri-Cedi Era

The date of origin of this era is also doubtful. The date of 248AD based on the accesion of Abhira king Isvara dutta is now not valid.

Vallabhi Era
Thisis used in Kathivad and neighbhourhood.It is synchronous with Karttikadi Vikrama year 376 (318-319AD) and Saka 242-42. Inscription in the era are available from 82 to 945. It is also said this is gupta era continued and the era corresponds to accession of Chandra gupta I. Guptas don't use the era in the earlier inscriptions. So the claim is questionable. Most historians attribute to Accession of Chandragupta I. The dates are calculated by adding years 319 to 322 years to that is found in the inscriptions.

Ganga (Gangeya Era)

Many inscriptions of Eastern Gangas and Eastern Kadambas in Karnataka , Andhra and Orissa. The Ganga Era is also disputed ,but it is generally agreed it starts in 475AD based on inscription of Kadamba feudatory Dharmakhedi.

Sri Harsa Era

Al-Biruni (11^th century AD)suggests that Harsa Era was prevalent in the area of Mathura-Kannuaj starting with 457BC. But there seems to be no common such era in India before Saka and Vikram Era. In fact Al-Biruni learnt in Kashmir that Sri Harsa era started with Sri Harshavardhana in 606AD, the Mathura pandits seems to have tricked Al-Biruni to such date.

Bhatika Era

The historical origin of Bhatika era is disputed. It starts at 623 to 625AD. The dispute here is due to association the close synchronisation and association with Islamic Hirja Era 622AD in western India and close to regions of Arab Incursions. Absence of Early inscriptions is explained as the solar modification of Muslim era. Mr.Dasharatha sharma says it represents era of Bhatia rajput Clan. Several unpublished inscriptions near Jaisalmar have cited to indicate Bhatika samvat. However Mr. Mirsa and Mr.Sarcar argue some of the inscriptions are Harsa Era.

Kollam Era

This era starts at 824AD, used in Kerala and around Kerala mostly in Malayalam and Tamil sometimes in Sanskrit as well. The reason for the start of the Era is controversial as it marks the starts of the foundation of Kollam, but Kollam existed prior to it. Some scholars say it is related to Saptarsi era, but the geographical distance makes the theory untenable.

Bhauma Kara Era

This era started by Bhauma Kara kings of orissa. The era starts in 831AD probably of ruler Ksemankaradeva. Earlier the era was considered to be harsa era.

Nepali or Newari Era

This era was started by Jayadevamalla. The era starts in 871AD. The earliest Nelpali inscriptions date themselves to Saka or Vikrama or Gupta or Licchavi Era.

Chalukya-Vikrama Era

This era was started by Chalukya Vikramaditya IV upon accession to throne in 1076AD. The Inscriptions of Vikramaditya mention this era ,many times the Saka era is also mentioned.

Lakshmana Sena era

This era starts in 1117AD in Gaya region of Bihar. This era is attributed to Accession of Sena King Lakshmana sena though the dates do not match.

Bengali San
The Era is Named Bengali San(Sen) is in use in Bengal. It is solar year and runs with saka era. The Months are however Lunar. It starts at 516 Shalivahana Saka.

Vilayati Year
This is another Solar Saka year used in parts of Bengal and Chiefly in Orissa. The Months like Bengali San is Lunar. The start of the Vilayathi year is same as Bengali San 516 Shalivahana Saka. There are two differences though, First begins solar year in Kanya which is bengali sen Ashvina or Assin. Second the months begin on the day of sanskranti instead of following 2nd or 3rd day.

Amli Era
This era is used in Orissa. The Amli commenses from the birth of Indradyumna, raja of orissa on Bhadrapada Sukla 12th and each month commenses the moment the sun enters the sign. Amli san is used in business transactions and in the courts of Law in orisssa.

Fasali Year
This is harvest year introduced by Akbar,originally derived from Mohammadan year and bearing the same number, but beginning in july. It was in most parts of India Solar year, but different customs in different parts of india has made it divergent. There is Luni Solar and North west Fasali year.

Maharatta sur san or Shakur san
This is sometimes called Arabi san. It is extensively used in Mahratta domains. This is nine years behind Fasali of Deccan.

Magi San
This is used in Chittagong. It is similar to Benglai san. The only difference is it is 45 years behind.

Simha Samvat
This era is used in Kathiavad. THe era starts in 1036-37 Saka

Lakshmana Sena era
used in Tirhut and Mithila, but always with Saka or Vikrama era. Era starts in 1105-6 AD.

Ilaki Era
The Tarlkh-i-Illahi or Mighty Divine era was established by Akbar. It dates to his Accession 14 Feb 1556 (Friday 2nd Rabi-us-sani AH 963) . It is extensively used in Coins of Akbar and Jahangir, but Shah Jahan seems to discontinued.

Rajyabhisheka Saka
It is also called Mahratta Raja Saka Era. Saka here is era. This era was established by Shivaji on the day of accession (Jyeshta sukla Trayodasi (13th) of Saka 1596 expired or 1597, Ananda Samvatsara)

Pseudo-historical Era's

Old Saka Era

Some of the early Khartoshi and Brahmi insciptions cannot be dated to Saka or Vikrama era's. So they are classified to Old Saka Era distinguishing from Saka Era 78 AD. But there are many disagreements between scholars on which inscriptions should fall to Saka Era and Old Saka Era. Evenmore controversial is the exact origin of the said Era. And still more controversial is the exact date of the historical epochs mentioned with this Era. So this can be said to be one of the speculative Era.

Aguptaiyaka Era

The Gokak inscription dates itself to 845 th regnal year of unknown Aguptaiyaka kings. The inscriptionbelong to 6^th century AD. So the era should start at 3^rd or 2^nd century BC. Speculation is it is connected with Chandragupta Maurya and local king Aguptaiyaka.

Other Era's

Some Inscriptions of Bengal are dated to Malla era starting at 694/695AD. Some Inscriptions of Bengal refer to Bengali Era (sana or Sala Era). Some orissa inscriptions refer to sana era as Amli era. There is also Siddha Hema Kumara Era(1142AD). Illahi Era (1556AD) instituted by Mughal Emperor Akbar. Some late inscriptions date themselves to Imgreji San or Isvi Era based on Christian era.

Phantom Era

Maurya Era

Some scholars studying the Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharvela have noted a Maurya Kala starting 324-300BC based on Chandragupta Accession. But sunsequent studies revealed that the inscription was stating Mukhya Kala (Sanskrit) not Maurya Kala. So that Era is hoax.

Astronomical

Kaliyuga Era

Kaliyuga era is supposed to begin with Kali aeon. Traditional associations with events Epics. Kaliyuga is creation of astronomers for chronological base for astronomical and calendrical calculations. The initial date corresponds to Friday, Feb 18 ,3102BC at the time of astronomical conjunction of Sun, Moon, Earth, and Planets at the point of naksatra mesa. Kali yuga is normally counted as expired. Earliest Kaliyuga era in inscription is Aihole inscription dated Kaliyuga 3735 and saka556 corresponding to 634 AD.

Saptarsi Era

Saptarsi Era also called Laukika,Sastra, Pahadi or Kacca is a imaginary cycle of 2700 years. The calculation is based on Saptarsi(Great Bear) which stands for 100 years in 27 nakshatras. Pahadi refers to the use in hills of Punjab and Kashmir. Lukika and Kacca refers to omission of hundreds. Since it is mainly used in Astrology it is called sastra Samvat. The puranas give different dates and confuses this era.

Grahaparivriti Cycle

This is based on Kaliyuga Era , But instead of 100 year cycle it follows 90 year cycle. It is followed in Madurai region of tamil nadu. This year is fabricated by Astrologers of that area.

Brahaspati 12 Year Cycle

Brahaspati cycle is based on twelve year cycle of sidereal revolution of Jupitor. Some Gupta Feudatories , Kadambas, Rastrakuta used this in some inscriptions.

Brahaspati 60 Year cycle

This is originally calculated by jupitor transistion from one rashi to another. Due to discrepancy of four days every year, the cycle of requires suppression of one jupitor year every eightyfive years. This sixty year cycle is usually dated in name of the years then in numbers.

Ref

Indian Epigraphy by Richard Salomon.

Indian Epigraphy by D.C . Sircar.

Ancient Indian History and Civilization by Sailendra nath Sen.

The Indian Calendar, with Tables for the Conversion of Hindu and Muhammadan Into A.D. Dates, and Vice Versa Front Cover Robert Sewell, Robert Schram

Origin of Indo - Europeans

The whole theory of Indo-European is based on the premise that if Latin, Greek and Sanskrit were similar, it should be branched out of earlier single Language. So next question comes , what is the original home of Indo – European people who spoke this language. Let us see the likeliest candidates.

First we have to see the characteristics of Indo – Europeans. Are they?

1. Hunter gatherers, Pastoral Nomads, Agriculturists etc

2. Vocabulary : Animals, Plants, Agriculture etc

3. Technical sophistication

4. Culture Level

5. Geography
   

Anatolia

Collin Renfrew says Indo-European homeland as Anatolia and they practiced agriculture around 7000BC. one of their groups moved westward to Europe, crossing the Bosporus and another -group, moving eastward, via the region south of the Caucasus mountains and the Caspian Sea, into Iran from where it must have subsequently entered Afghanistan and India. In an alternative scenario, Renfrew thinks that the Indo-Europeans split up after entering Europe and then the eastern branch went to south-central Asia, via north of the Black and Caspian Seas, whence it moved on to northeastern Iran, Afghanistan and India.

Theory fails on two counts

1. If Indians and Europeans lived together as farmers ,their vocabulary should have common words or words originating from common words. But there are none.

2. Secondly Hittite language from which the commonness is perceived is a minority language of Elite and basal language is non-European.
   

Caucasus

Gamkrelidze and Ivanov say Indo-European homeland between Black Sea and Caspian sea. This theory is based on linguistic paleontology. Since there is mountains , rivers, Lakes in the vacabulary. They also added that the Indo-European has lot of semitic loan words.

This theory fails because.

1. Many scholars have shown semitic loan words as misplaced theory.

2. Armenian language spoken in the area has large number of non Indo-European words, meaning there is another native language spoken. Which suggest that Indo-Europeans are not from that area.
   

Kurgan

Kurgan is steppes north of Black and Caspian Sea. There archaeological remains of Burial barrows (Kurgan in Slavic language) have been found. Maria Gimbutas says Indo- Europeans are essentially horse riding warriors who can thrust the weapons and can easily overrun the area. By 4000BC they reached central Europe.

This theory fails because

1. On the technology and cultural level kurgan were essentially pastrol nomads.

2. Mounted warriors were seen in Europe around 1000BC only says Renfrew

3. Linguistically there is no relation between pastrol Kurgan and Farming Indo – European says Kathrin Krell, Mallory and Schmitt
   

Sogdiana

Johanna Nichols says Sogodiana was their homeland, from there they spread to Aral sea and they split into two.

This theory fails on the basis

1. There seems to be only language spread with no people movement. It is unlikely to have happened when there was No TV , Radio or Internet.

2. There is no centre to periphery spread, there is no eastern spread of the language which is baffling.
   

Indian Subcontinent

According to this theory India is the home of Indo- European languages. This theory was put forward in 18th century but has no takers then. Why now? Because new findings have come which has resurrected the theory. They are

1. Mehrgarh neolithic are farming in wheat , domesticated animals in contrast to pastrol sheep and goat. So the Mehrgarh are Indigenous.

2. Journey from Early charcolithic to Indus valley civilization is continuous. After studying the skulls there was a Biological continuity as well right up to the present day from early charcolithic days.

3. Most Important one is finding the Indus valley and Rig veda people are same Mentioning of the River saraswathi which is cradle of Indus valley Civilization.

4. Geographical evidence of confirms to Rivers , Mountains , Lakes etc.

5. Boghaz Kuei inscription(1400BC), refers to Indra, Mitra, Nasatya and Varuna as witnesses to a treaty between the Mitanni king Matiwaza and the Hittite king Suppiluliuma.

6. T. Burrow came to the conclusion: “The Indo- Europeans appear in Mitanni from 1500 BC as the ruling dynasty, which means that they must have entered the country as conquerors from no where else but from India.
   

Conclusion

Indo- Europeans are from India. Whether the Greek , Latin and Sanskrit (Vedic) are related we will see in another article.

Source

The Homeland of Indo-European Languages And Culture: Some Thoughts

Author: Prof. B. B. Lal

Valentine's day Origin

There are more tales of the "origins" of Valentine's Day than arrows in Cupid's quiver.

Story I
what did Saint Valentine have to do with love notes and affection? Absolutely nothing! In fact, there’s a good chance he may never have existed. There are at least three St. Valentines in history

Story I.1
Most popular stories suggest that valentine day owes its origin to the Roman Empire during the reign of emperor Claudius II. As early as AD 260s, Emperor of Rome was in need for competent soldiers and thought soldiers must not get married. He believed that married soldiers were not fit for service in army and they kept worrying about their families, when they were fighting in the battlefield. He issued an edict then ordering soldiers not to marry; however, a priest in Rome named Valentine disobeyed this order and used to validate marriage contracts for soldiers secretly. When the emperor learnt of Valentine's story, he ordered his death on Feb. 14, 269 AD.

Story I.2
But there are different versions of the same story, which contradict above story. Some experts state that it originated from St. Valentine, a Roman who was martyred for refusing to give up Christianity. He died on February 14, 269 A.D., the same day that had been devoted to love lotteries.

Story I.3
Some experts state that it originated from St. Valentine, a Roman who was martyred for refusing to give up Christianity. He died on February 14, 269 A.D., Legend also says that St. Valentine left a farewell note for the jailer's daughter, who had become his friend, and signed it "From Your Valentine". Other aspects of the story say that Saint Valentine served as a priest at the temple during the reign of Emperor Claudius. Claudius then had Valentine jailed for defying him. In 496 A.D. Pope Gelasius set aside February 14 to honour St. Valentine.

Story II
In ancient Rome, February 14th was a holiday to honour Juno. Juno was the Queen of the Roman Gods and Goddesses. The Romans also knew her as the Goddess of women and marriage. The following day, February 15th, began the Feast of Lupercalia. The lives of young boys and girls were strictly separate. However, one of the customs of the young people was name drawing. On the eve of the festival of Lupercalia the names of Roman girls were written on slips of paper and placed into jars. Each young man would draw a girl's name from the jar and would then be partners for the duration of the festival with the girl whom he chose. Sometimes the pairing of the children lasted an entire year, and often, they would fall in love and would later marry. The pastors of the early Christian Church in Rome endeavoured to do away with the pagan element in these feasts by substituting the names of saints for those of maidens. And as the Lupercalia began about the middle of February, the pastors appear to have chosen Saint Valentine's Day for the celebration of this new feaSt. So it seems that the custom of young men choosing maidens for valentines, or saints as patrons for the coming year, arose in the same way as the case of origin of Christmas to Mothers day.

Story III
The day was begun by the residents of ancient Rome who wanted to honor the she-wolf that had raised Romulus and Remus. It was Romulus who founded Rome, after killing his brother Remus in a fit of rage. At least that’s the story they’ve been telling over the centuries. The Christian church seems to have replaced this story with their own.

Story IV British
So when did the practice of sending love notes and gifts to that special someone begin? Some believe it started in 16th century England and Scotland. In those days it was generally thought the birds mated on Feb. 14, and the atmosphere was so filled with love people naturally spent the day expressing their affection for others.

But this was not the age of smiley face missives and cartoon cards. By George, this was serious business. Just being someone’s valentine more often than not ended in marriage.

The Brits would hold lotteries. During the evening of Feb. 14 they would hold large parties. At these parties everyone there would place his, or her, name in the pot, the men’s on one side, and the women’s on the other.

The woman’s name drawn by each man was the one that counted. After drawing a woman’s name the man was supposed to entertain her with dances, feasts, and gifts — not for just that one day, but for as long as a week. Yeah, it was serious business — sometimes the lavish gifts received by a woman would have a value of several thousand dollars.

The Brits had another rather unique belief. Single British women believed they would marry the first man they saw on St. Valentine’s Day. One English lady spent the day in bed just to make sure she didn’t see any men, until her boyfriend came calling in the evening.

The Feast of Lubercus
The first interpretation has this celebration originating as a pagan tradition in the third century. During this time hordes of hungry wolves roamed outside of Rome where shepherds kept their flocks. The God Lupercus, was said to watch over the shepherds and their flocks and keep them from the wolves. Every February the Romans celebrated a feast called Lupercalia to honor Lupercus so that no harm would come to the shepherds and their flocks.

Conclusion
As you can see there is no certainty , it seems it started as pagan festival and later converted to Christian one. The Pagan element of Love lotteries have been given a noble meaning of exchanging love notes.
It is funny what is happening today. For pink chaddi's :-The love lottery angle seems to contradict all the parameters of Love like knowing your partner before you fall in love, All the gifts are today purchased by woman defying tradition that man purchase gifts to please woman. For muthaliks, sainiks and dal activist:- they are continuing the tradition of marrying of lovers set by valentine.

Myths of Rajput origin

Rajputs are a community in northern India and Gujarat consisting of a number of clans such as the Gujjars. While present-day Rajasthan Rajasthan and Gujarat have been the main centers of the Rajputs, their clans have had a long and significant presence in other states. This page examines certain facts regarding the origins of the Rajputs, based on information gathered from inscriptions, copper-plates, contemporary Prashastis and texts.

Rajput Origins
The term Rajputra first emerged as a title used by some of the rulers referring to their royal ancestors. The term was first used at the time of Harshavardhana and later by the Sena king Vijayasena, a Chahamana Chauhan officer named Jojal and by certain descendants of the Shahi clan of Kashmir. The term was used in inscriptions for the crown princes of the Kalachuri dynasty and by dynasties in Orissa, Bengal and Assam.



Any speculations as to the origins of the Rajputs has to be presaged with the caveat that in general, no single origin-theory can be held to be authoritative. The traditional occupations of the Rajput are war and agriculture. Many scholars have pointed out that these areas lend themselves uniquely to the ingress of groups that were not formerly affiliated with those professions. The gradual accommodation of the new entrants into the social and family circle of the traditional community is the essential quid pro quo of the sanskritization that the aspirant community essays. This phenomenon of gradual inclusion has indubitably obtained in the case of the Rajputs.

The Agni-kunda Legend
The Agni-kunda legend is the best-known traditional account that deals with the origin of the rajput Rajputs. This account begins with the puranic legend wherein the traditional kshatriya Kshatriyas of the land were exterminated by Parashurama, an avatara of Vishnu. Later, sage Vasishta performed a great Yagya or fire-sacrifice, to seek from the gods a provision for the defense of righteousness on earth. In answer to his prayer, one or more youths arose from the very flames of the sacrificial fire, according to different versions of the legend.

Sometime during 16-17th century, the legend came to be applied to the Pratiharas , Chauhans , Solankis , and Paramaras , Rahevars clans. The Gurjara-Pratiharas established the first royal Rajput kingdom in Marwar in southwestern Rajasthan in the 6th century 6th century, the Chauhans at Ajmer in central Rajasthan, the Solankis in Gujarat , and the Paramaras at Mount Abu. Evolution of the legendA large number of inscriptions and texts have come to light since the mid-19th century 19th century that allow us to trace the evolution of this legend in detail.

The Agnikunda story is first found in the Nava-sahasanka-charita by Padmagupta, a fictional romance where the hero is identifiable as Sindhuraja, the patron of the author Padmagupta. This work mentions that the progenitor of the Paramaras was created from fire by sage Vashishtha. During the period of decline of the Paramaras of Dhar, the story finds mention in several royal inscriptions. Later, the story is expanded to include two or three other Rajput clans. Eventually, some scholars proposed that all of the Rajputs were created from the Agnikunda.



Early Paramara Chronology
949 AD: First known Paramara copperplate Harsola copperplate. Mentions Paramara Siyaka as a feudatory of Rashtrakuta Akalavarsha. It mentions the Paramaras as being of the same clan ' as the Rashtrakutas.
975, 986 AD: Vakpati Munja assumes Rashtrakuta name Amoghavarsha and titles Srivallabha and Prathvivallabha, indicating that he regarded himself as being a succesor of the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta.

Thus, there is no mention of the Agnikunda legend in the early records; the Paramaras appear as a branch of Rashtrakutas, as proposed by D.C. Ganguli.

Chronology:
Gradual Evolution of the Myth

• 1005 AD: Padmagupta writes the fictional Navasahasanka-charita during the rule of the Parmar king Sindhuraj of Dhara. This is the first mention of the legend wherein the first Paramara is created from an Agnikinda by Vashista.
• 1000-1055 AD: Bhoja Bhoja no mention of Agnikunda in his copperplates or inscriptions.
• 1042 AD: Vasantgarh inscription mentiones Paramara origin from Agnikunda.
• 1070-1093 AD: Udayaditya, Udayapur prashasti mentions Paramara origin from Agnikunda.
• uncertain date: The Prathviraj Raso is composed, the oldest copies of which do not mention the Agnikunda legend. It is attributed to poet Chand who lived during the rule of Prithviraj Chauhan Prithviraj III , however the language of available manuscripts appears to be much more recent.Ain-i-Akbari by Abul Fazl mentions creation of a Dhanji from an Agnikunda, somewhere in the Deccan Deccan Plateau, to fight Buddhism Buddhism. That fire-born warrior goes to Malava and establishes his rule. When Puraraj, fifth in line from him, dies childless, a Paramara is selected to succeed him.
• 16th-17th century: Agnikunda legend inserted into the Prithviraj Raso, where three clans, Pratihar, Chalukya and Panwar, are mentions as having been created from the Agnikunda. The legend is not present in the Udaipur manuscript of 1585 CE.
• Uncertain date: Agnikunda legend in Bhavishya Purana. It mentions four clans: Paramara, Chauhan, Chalukya and Parihara, as having been created from fire to annihilate the Buddhists during the time of Ashoka.
• 1832 AD: James Tod presents his theory that the Agnikunda legend symbolizes the elevation of Sakas Indo-Scythians, etc. to the status of being Kshattriyas; by implication, all the Rajaputs are descendants of central Asian invaders.
• 1954 AD: Tod's view is repeated by A. L. Basham in his "The wonder that was India". By now, the view becomes accepted.

Rastrakuta origin
Parmar
There are three schools of thought about the origin of the Paramara clan. The most widely accepted school of thought is that the Paramaras – along with the Chauhans, the Pratiharas (Parihars) and the Solankis (Chalukyas) – were one of the four Agni kula ("fire-born") clans of the Rajputs. In a second school of thought, the Parmar clan is said to have been a tribe of central India that rose to political prominence as the feudatory of the Rashtrakutas. In a third school of thought, the Parmar clan is said to have originally been an inseparable part of the Rashtrakutas, which later branched out from the Rashtrakutas (Rathore)and declared themselves to be a distinct Rajput clan.

Rathore (earlier known as Rastrakutas)
At Hathundi, in what was formerly the princely state of Jodhpur , 10th century inscriptions have been found mentioning kings Harivarma, Vidagdha, Mammata, Dhavala and Balaprasada, all of the Rashtrakuta dynasty. This is not in fact surprising, since the Rashtrakutas held sway over Marwar in that era. However, as we have seen above, the Rathores first emerge in Rajasthan shortly after that same era; therefore, Rathores are offshoots of Rashtrakutas.


Chalukya Origin
Solanki
The Solanki (from Chalukya, an ancient Indian dynasty) are a Hindu clan who ruled parts of western and central India between the 10th and 13th centuries AD. The Solanki are a branch of the Chalukya dynasty of whose oldest known area of residence was in present-day Karnataka. The Solanki clan-name is found within the Rajput and Gurjar communities. The Chalukya gave raise to following clans Shakha- Baghel, Chalke, Ingale, Pisal, Rannavre, Dubal, Mahale and of Solanki: Salunke, Pandhare, Patankar, Patole, Shevale, Babar, Padwal, Magar, Randheer, Ranpise, Sonvane, Gunjal, Lahane, Vyavhare, Navale, Londhe

Kalachuri Origin
Kalachuris ruled North Maharastra during 6th century AD , Pulikesin defeated them and made them feudataries of Chalukyan Empire. After the death of Harshavardhan vinayaditya defeated the successor to Harsha and annexed his kingdom , kalachuries were given charge of vindyas and north of Vindyas. They had martial relationships with other kannada dyansties like Rastrakuta, Chalukya, Solankis , Sena, Malla and pala dynasties. Ruling from the centre of India they are one of the major contributors to Rajput Clan.



Conclusion
The Rajputs did not originate as a tribe or a single community. They emerge from history as a collection of clans ruling different regions. The term Rajput as it is used today refers to the set of intermarrying royal clans mostly with karnata roots. Two lists of 36 clans are found in Kumarpala Charita and the Prithviraj Raso, apparently compiled in the Gujarat/Rajasthan region with its own historical claim to aristocratic Gurjara or Gujjar titles. But as History shows the Rajput are of Kannada origin to start with with Rastrakuta, Chalukya background, when they ruled Rajasthan, Gujarat and North India.

origin of Brahmi Script

Brahmi Script
In the last centuries BC the script was divided into 3 varieties: northern, eastern, and southern. Dialectal differences consisted of the shape of the symbols, though the system remained the same. First separate branches emerged in the 5th century AD. The Brahmi script is the ancestor of all modern Indian writing systems, there are about 40 varieties of them nowadays, including Tibetan, Sinhalese, Sharada, Newari, Bengali, Oriya, Gujarati,Gurmukhi, , Kannada, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Burmese, Khmer, Lao, Thai, Devanagari. In addition, many other Asian scripts, even Japanese to a very small extent (vowel order), were also derived from Indian script. Languages which used Brahmi as their script: Indo-Aryan (Vedic, Sanskrit, Prakrits, Pali), Dravidian, Iranian (Sacian), Tocharic.

Brahmi origin
Brahmi origin has been controversial. one of the reason is the sudden appearance of fully developed script in the inscriptions during Ashokan period and l absence of inscriptions between Indus valley and Ashokan period(gap of 1500 years). Opinions of Brahmi is divided to into two camps Foreign origin by Foreigners and Indigenous independent development by Indians. Let us see the opinions behind claims.

Foreign origin
Foreign origin or derived script theory is based on the following theories

• Failure to find and identify actual specimens of between indus valley and pre-Ashokan writing.
• The testimony of Greek author Megasthenes to the absence of writing in India in the early Mauryan period
• The evident influence of Indian phonetic and grammatical theory on the structure of the early scripts
• Uniform appearance of Ashokan Brâhmî all over India.

Aramic origin
It is thought that the brāhmī drift of a Semitic writing like the imperial Aramean alphabet, as it is the case for the alphabet gāndhārī(khartoshi) which appeared at the same time in Northwest India, under the control of the empire of the Achéménides. Rhys Davids thinks that this writing could be introduced in India of the the Middle East by the merchants.The similarities between the scripts are just what one would expect from such an adaptation. For example, Aramaic did not distinguish dental from retroflex stops; in Brāhmī the dental and retroflex series are graphically very similar, as if both had been derived from a single prototype. Aramaic did not have Brāhmī’s aspirated consonants (k, t), whereas Brāhmī did not have Aramaic's emphatic consonants (q, ṭ, ṣ); and it appears that these emphatic letters were used for Brāhmī's aspirates: Aramaic q for Brāhmī kh, Aramaic (Θ) for Brāhmī th (ʘ). And just where Aramaic did not have a corresponding emphatic stop, p, Brāhmī seems to have doubled up for its aspirate: Brāhmī p and ph are graphically very similar, as if taken from the same source in Aramaic p. The first letters of the alphabets also match: Brāhmī a, which resembled a reversed κ, looks a lot like Aramaic alef, which resembled Hebrew .
Southern Semitic origin.
Brahmi is a syllabary, it consists of syllables only, if we state that single vowels are also syllables. Each character carries a consonant followed by the vowel "a", much like Old Persian or Meroïtic. However, unlike these two systems, Brahmi indicates the same consonant with a different vowel with extra strokes attached to the character. Brahmi is written from the left to the right. However in few coins right to left Brahmi is also found.

Phoenician Origin
Phoenician origin is based on the following points.

• Writing from left to right unlike aramic which is right to left.
• Striking similarity between theta and Brâhmî tha

Emphasising this two points to Brahmi phoenicaian origin is theory far fetched. Maybe there is influence but no such a thing as origin from Greek alphabet.

Greek and Brahmi
That the basic system of indication of post-consonantal vowels by diacritic marking was originally developed in and adapted from Khartoshi seems well established. But Falk's suggestion that the introduction into Brâhmî of distinct diacritics for short and long vowels was influenced by the model of Greek script is doubtful, since the notation of vowel quantity in Greek operates on entirely different principles. Whereas Greek uses distinct alphabetic characters, mostly derived from Semitic consonants, to represent, incompletely and inconsistently, short and long vowel pairs, Brâhmî has a complete and regular set of matched short/long pairs of post-consonantal diacritic signs.

Brahmi Numerals
Numerical notation system of Brâhmî. Because the use of distinct signs in Brâhmî for each of the digits (1 to 9) and the decades (10 to 90) a similar system used in early Chinese numerals. Also not only in system but also in the actual form of several of the numerical signs, between Brâhmî and heiratic and demotic Egyptian. we dont know which side influenced the other or Independent.

Indigenous origin

Independent origin
script appeared in India most certainly by the 6th century BC, but the fact it had many local variants, which suggests that its origin lies further back in time. The earliest inscription written in Brahmi date back to the 6th century BC in srilanka, and by 2nd century BC already there existed several varieties of it. Brahmi quickly became the official script of religious texts and cults, and therefore spread over all India.
Writting in Pre Ashokan Era

• J.D.M. Derrett argues Megasthanese talks only about written Legal document not generally writting in India.
• Nearchos, quoted by Strabo, to the Indians' practice of writing letters on cloth
• Panini mentions Lipi (Writting)
• Pali cannon makes reference to likhitako coro,lekha.m chindati (writting) in Vinaya-pi.taka

Ashoka Invention
Harry Falks believes as for him that the brāhmī was created under the Empire maurya. One often admits that it was an invention planned under the reign of Ashoka, necessary to the drafting of his edicts, case similar to that of the Hangul(Korean).

Indus origin
Brahmi script came from the Indus Valley Script. However, the lack of any inscription evidence between the end of the Harappan period at around 1900 BC and the first Brahmi and Kharosthi inscriptions at roughtly 500 BC makes the Indus origin of Brahmi highly questionable. However recent claims of deciphering the Indus script has strengthened this theory. Indus script have been found around 1500BC in Vaishai, bihar. And the theory derives the evidence from similarities as other theories. You can see in the picture .

Khartosi-Brahmi
Now the theory by western scholars is Khartoshi predated Brahmi and it was loose adoptation of Aramic. Khartoshi from Aramic is also not a good argument simply because several cases Khartoshi characters have different phonetic values from the Aramaic letters that they most closely resemble in shape. wide usage of Aramaicin the Ashokan Aramaic inscriptions, in the eastern regions of the Achaemenian empire.another theory is Brahmi is derived from Khartoshi. But this can be disproved on following points. Brâhmî ¤ ha , which can reasonably be derived from an Aramaic * he , but hardly from Khartoshi * ha , and * ta from Aramaic * taw ,
but not Khartoshi ¤ ta

Conclusion
We have to see that each theory putsforward the similarities and keeps silence on the other points. Brahmi is superior script all the others compared. And there is no easier explanation for the development of same.

Related Posts
Was Ancient India Literate
Indus Script Myths
Tamil Brahmi
Pallava Granta Script