FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

[admin]

Diogo do Couto
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 2/25/23

-- Da Asia De Diogo De Couto. Dos Feitos, Que Os Portuguezes Fizeram Na Conquista, E Descubrimento Das Terras, E Mares Do Oriente. Decada Quinta. Parte Primeira. Anno 1779. Of Asia. Of the feats that the Portuguese did in the conquest and discovery of the lands and seas of the East. Fifth Decade. Part One. Year 1779. By Diogo De Couto.
https://archive.org/stream/daasiadediog ... t_djvu.txt

The First European Account of the Vedas

It was only toward the end of the sixteenth century that the Vedas are first mentioned, by Agostinho de Azevedo, an Augustinian. Azevedo’s biography has been reconstructed by Georg Schurhammer, who thinks it possible he first went to India as a soldier before joining the Augustinian order in Goa in the 1570s. Azevedo was sent back to Portugal to ordain and train, returning to India in 1586. From 1589 to 1600 he was in Hormuz, from where he returned overland to Portugal, where he completed a Relação do Estado da Índia.16 Azevedo’s report provides an overview of Portuguese settlements in Asia from the Arabian Gulf to the spice islands, devoting particular attention to Hormuz and Ceylon. It is notable that in his accounts of both, Azevedo draws on local textual sources. For Hormuz, he claims that he read these sources himself, but for Ceylon he relied on an interpreter’s simultaneous translation of Sinhalese chronicles recited for him when he met Sinhalese princes in Goa around 1587. There is a similar emphasis on textual sources in his section on India, entitled “Of the opinions, rites, and ceremonies of all the gentiles of India between the river Indus and the Ganges and that which is contained in their original scriptures which their learned men teach in their schools.” The Brahmins, the “masters of their religion,” teach a unified doctrine of God, creation, and the corruption of creatures. They have, writes Azevedo,

many books in their Latin, which they call Geredão [Grantha] which contain everything they are to believe, and all the ceremonies they are to perform. These books are divided into bodies, limbs, and joints, whose origins are some [books] which they call Veados, which are divided into four parts, and these further into fifty-two parts in the following manner: six are called Xastra, which are the bodies; eighteen are called Purana, which are the limbs; twenty-eight called Agamon which are the joints.

Azevedo’s brief account of the content of the four “origins” makes clear that he had no real access to the Vedas themselves. When he comes to elaborate on the content of the fourfold Veda, he in fact names a series of other texts—all in Tamil. The first part of the Vedas, he writes, deals with the first cause

according to the books which they have called Tirumantiram and Tiruvācakam, which are summas of their theology which they read in the schools. They say that this first cause is God, and that he is a pure spirit, incorporeal, infinite, full of all power and knowledge and truth, and present everywhere, which they call Carvēsparaṉ [Xarves Zibarum] which means the creator of all.21

For the second part of the Vedas, “dealing with the regents who have dominion over all things,” Azevedo again cites a Tamil text: “They say that this supreme [being] which they call God has infinite names, given in a particular book called Tivākaram.”22 His account of the third part of the Vedas, on moral doctrine, singles out the author of Tirukkuṟaḷ as the great teacher of moral precepts. Like many later missionary authors, Azevedo suggests Tiruvaḷḷuvar had derived these from St Thomas. Finally, Azevedo refers to a further book, Cātikaḷ Tōṭṭam, on castes. This text is difficult to identify, but its southern provenance is confirmed by the names of the four primary castes: kings, brahmins, chettis, and vellalas.

Despite his claim, then, that the Vedas are the original scriptures that prescribe what the gentiles of India are to believe and what rites they are to perform, Azevedo’s actual sources are all much later Tamil sources: Tirumantiram, Tiruvācakam, Tivākaram, Tirukkuṟaḷ, and the text on caste. This combination—identification of the Vedas as the oldest authoritative sources, together with a reliance on quite different texts for the actual details of the religious practices of those who so acknowledged the Vedas—would be repeated in the works of many of those who wrote from India. But the identification of the Vedas as the oldest and most authoritative works meant that it was only the Vedas that gained widespread recognition in Europe as the sacred texts of the Indians.

Azevedo In Other Authors

Although Azevedo’s work was not published until the twentieth century, it had an extraordinary impact on European understanding of the Vedas in the seventeenth century. Diogo do Couto, who had met Azevedo in Goa, used Azevedo’s work in his continuation of João de Barros’s chronicle of the Portuguese Asian empire, the Décadas da Ásia (see n. 16 above). The third and fourth chapters of the sixth book of Couto’s fifth decade, published at Lisbon in 1612, are taken almost verbatim from Azevedo. Couto’s work, in turn, was used by João de Lucena in his life of Xavier. The Dutch chaplain, Abraham Rogerius, followed one or the other of these works very closely in the account of the Vedas in his De Open-Deure tot het Verborgen Heydendom (1651), adding only the names of the Vedas, which he is the first to report in print in Europe. Through his primary informant, a Tamil Brahmin named Padmanābha, Rogerius was even able to give a paraphrase of part of a Sanskrit text (the Nītiand Vairāgya-śatakas of Bhartṛhari), although he again relies on other sources including some in Tamil. While Rogerius emphasizes that the Brahmins “must submit themselves to the Veda, and cannot contradict it in the least or object when a text from it is cited,” he adds that there are often strong disputes over the sense of the text: “one interprets a word thus, the other so,” so that to resolve such disputes reference is made to the “śāstra, which betokens so much as an explanation or exposition.” This was perhaps suggested to him to explain why texts other than the Vedas were those to which he was referred, despite the Veda’s acknowledged ultimate authority. Burnell suggests that, rather than the Vedas, Rogerius’s work in fact reflects the Tamil Vaiṣṇava canonical collection, the Nālāyira Tiviyappirapantam. Rogerius’s work gives a great deal of detailed information on brahminical Hinduism, but it was his repetition of Azevedo’s summary content of the Vedas that was most important for their reputation in Europe.

Rogerius’s work was quickly translated into German (1663) and French (1670), plagiarized in Dutch by Philip Baldaeus (1672) and Olfert Dapper (1672), and extracted in English and French in the works of John Ogilby (1673) and of Jean-Frédéric Bernard and Bernard Picart (1723, 1731). Each of these included Azevedo’s summary of the Vedas, and in this way it was very widely disseminated in Europe. Even late in the eighteenth century, Azevedo’s account of the Vedas was repeated almost verbatim in the work of the Italian Capuchin, Marco della Tomba. Although Couto, who repeats almost the whole of Azevedo’s account, retained all the references to Tamil texts, none of these subsequent works (with the partial exception of Lucena, who retains only the reference to Tiruvaḷḷuvar) mention any of the Tamil sources, despite Azevedo’s claim that these are the “summas of their theology.” In this way the idea was firmly established in Europe that it was the Vedas, above all and almost to the exclusion of other texts, that were the sacred books of India.

___________

16. Georg Schurhammer, Francis Xavier: His Life, His Times, vol. 2: India 1541–1545 (Rome: Jesuit Historical Institute, 1980), 614–16. Two versions of Azevedo’s “Estado da Índia e aonde tem o seu principio,” from manuscripts in the British Library and the Bibliotheca Nacional de Madrid, are printed in António da Silva Rego and Luıś de Albuquerque, eds., Documentação ultramarina portuguesa (Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Históricos Ultramarinos, 1960–63), I: 197–263 and II: 40–147. I cite from the first version, except where noted. Schurhammer (Xavier, 2: 616–20) notes that there are close parallels in three sections of these texts with parts of the fifth of Diogo do Couto’s Décadas da Asiá. In the case of the first two—which relate to the history of Hormuz (210–12) and of Ceylon (235– 54)—Azevedo mentions that Couto had asked him to provide information (205, 235). Couto, who elsewhere does mention his sources, nowhere acknowledges Azevedo. There are also close parallels in the section on Indian religion in Azevedo and Couto and also with that which appears in João de Lucena in his life of Xavier. Lucena’s work was published in 1600, Schurhammer dates the final version of Azevedo’s text to 1603 (Xavier, 2: 616), and Couto’s work did not appear until 1612. Nevertheless it appears that Lucena used the manuscript of Couto’s fifth decade, a version of which was sent to Lisbon as early as 1597 (Marcus de Jong, ed., Década quinta da “Asia”: Texte inédit, publ. d’après un manuscrit de la Bibliothèque de l’Univ. de Leyde [Coimbra: Biblioteca da Universidade, 1937], 47). In a letter sent from Goa in November 1603, Couto complained bitterly about Lucena’s use of information which he claimed to have acquired at great effort and expense from the schools of the Brahmins in the kingdom of Vijayanagara (Schurhammer, Xavier, 2: 620). Despite Couto’s claim here that “in all my Decades I have given to each his due,” it seems likely that he had again used without acknowledgment material provided to him by Azevedo. The account of Indian religion was likely prepared by Azevedo during his second period in India between 1586 and 1589, and later incorporated into his Relação do Estado da Índia, completed in Lisbon by 1603....

21. The names of the texts in Rego’s transcription are “Ferum Mandramole e Trivaxigao” (Azevedo, “Estado da Índia,” 251) or “Tonem, Mandramolé e Trivaxigao” (Silva Rego, Documentação ultramarina portuguesa, II: 134). In the 1612 editio princeps of Couto these appear as “Terúm, Mandramole, Etrivaxigão.” From Couto’s work, Willem Caland was confident in identifying the latter as Tiruvācakam, less so the first as Tirumantiram (De ontdekkingsgeschiedenis van den Veda [Amsterdam: Johannes Müller, 1918], 273). Although neither Tirumantiram nor Tiruvācakam uses carvēsparaṉ, or the more common carvēccuraṉ (Sanskrit, sarveśvara), to refer to God, there can be no doubt that Tiruvācakam is meant here, and good reason to think that Tirumantiram could also have been intended.

22. Azevedo, “Estado da Índia,” 255. In both Rego’s transcriptions, and Couto, the title of the work is given as Tivarum. Although Caland (Veda, 318) suggests Tēvāram, Azevedo’s description of the content leaves little doubt that it is rather Tivākaram, an important early Tamil lexicon that begins with a list of the divine names, which is meant....

135. Caland concluded his 1918 essay by noting the limits of most Brahmins’ knowledge of the Vedas, adding that while it was not that there were no Brahmins who could have given Europeans a better and fuller account of the Vedas “do Couto, Rogerius and all the others knocked on the wrong door” (Veda, 303). Ludo Rocher expressed similar “reservations concerning the weight that has been given to the secrecy argument” (“Orality and Textuality in the Indian Context,” Sino-Platonic Papers, 49 [1994]: 5). Rocher was “convinced that there was, far more often, a second reason why Westerners were denied a knowledge of the Vedas; their Indian contacts, who were supposed to provide them with information on the Vedas, did not possess it themselves, and, therefore, were unable to communicate it” (“Max Müller and the Veda,” in Mélanges d’islamologie: Volume dédié à la mémoire de Armand Abel par ses collègues, ses élèves et ses amis, ed. Armand Abel and Pierre Salmon, vol. 2 [Leiden: Brill, 1974], 223).

-- The Absent Vedas, by Will Sweetman

The text which has served for the following translation comprises the Suktas of the Rig-Veda and the commentary of Sayana Acharya, printed, by Dr. Muller, from a collation of manuscripts, of which he has given an account in his Introduction.

Sayana Acharya was the brother of Madhava Acharya, the prime minister of Vira Bukka Raya, Raja of Vijayanagara in the fourteenth century, a munificent patron of Hindu literature. Both the brothers are celebrated as scholars; and many important works are attributed to them, — not only scholia on the Sanhitas and Brahmanas of the Vedas, but original works on grammar and law; the fact, no doubt, being, that they availed themselves of those means which their situation and influence secured them, and employed the most learned Brahmans they could attract to Vijayanagara upon the works which bear their name, and to which they, also, contributed their own labour and learning. Their works were, therefore, compiled under peculiar advantages, and are deservedly held in the highest estimation.

-- RigVeda Sanhita. A Collection of Ancient Hindu Hymns, Constituting the First Ashtaka, or Book of the Rig-Veda: The Oldest Authority for the Religious and Social Institutions of the Hindus. Translated from the Original Sanskrita by H.H. Wilson

With regard to the twelve MSS. of the Commentary to the first Ashtaka of the Riv-veda, I have only succeeded in reducing them to three independent classes. It is not very likely that MSS. should still be found in India contemporaneous with Sayana, though, if we could trust native authorities, copies of Sayana's works have been buried in the ground near Vidyanagara [Vijayanagara]. Excluding these MSS. the existence of which is extremely problematical, I am convinced that there are no Mss. at present which have any claim to be considered as exhibiting the Commentary exactly such as it came from the hands of Sayana....

It would have been equally wrong, however, to consider Sayana's commentary as an infallible authority with regard to the interpretation of the Veda. Sayana gives the traditional, but not the original, sense of the Vaidik hymns. These hymns -- originally popular songs, short prayers and thanksgivings, sometimes true, genuine, and even sublime, but frequently childish, vulgar, and obscure -- were invested by the Brahmans with the character of an inspired revelation, and made the basis of a complete system of dogmatic theology. If therefore we wish to know how the Brahmans, from the time of the composition of the first Brahmana to the present day, understood and interpreted the hymns of their ancient Rishis, we ought to translate them in strict accordance with Sayana's gloss. This is the object which Professor Wilson has always kept in view in his translation of the Veda; and for the history of religion, which in India, as elsewhere, represents the gradual corruption of simple truth into hierarchical dogmatism and philosophical hallucination, his work will always remain the most trustworthy guide. Nor could it be said, that the tradition of the Brahmans, which Sayana embodied in his work, after the lapse of at least three thousand years, had changed the character of the whole of the Rig-veda. By far the greater part of these hymns is so simple and straightforward, that there can be no doubt that their original meaning was exactly the same as their traditional interpretation. But no religion, no poetry, no law, no language, can resist the wear and tear of thirty centuries; and in the Veda, as in other works, handed down to us from a very remote antiquity, the sharp edges of primitive thought, the delicate features of a young language, the fresh hue of unconscious poetry, have been washed away by the successive waves of what we call tradition, whether we look upon it as a principle of growth or decay. To restore the primitive outlines of the Vaidik period of thought will be a work of great difficulty....

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

The princely and truly patriotic liberality of His Highness the Maharajah of Vijayanagara has enabled me to take up once more in the evening of my life that work which has occupied me during my youth and during my advancing years....

I received a letter from His Highness the Maharajah of Vijayanagara, offering to defray the whole expense of a new edition, if I were still willing to undertake the labour of revising the text.

-- Rig-Veda-Sanhita: The Sacred Hymns of the Brahmans, Together with the Commentary of Sayanacharya, edited by Dr. Max Muller

Already in Ricci's and de Nobili's time, around the beginning of the seventeenth century, the claim surfaced that the Vedas of India were the repository of ancient Indian monotheism. Of course, the approach of Nobili and his successors in the Jesuit Madurai mission was anchored in the idea that India had once been a land reigned by pure monotheism; but the locus classicus for the monotheism of the Vedas is the description in Diogo do Couto's Decada Quinta da Asia of 1612 (124Vff.). Schurhammer (1977:614-18) has shown that Couto plagiarized the report by the Augustinian missionary Agostinho de Azevedo, but it was through Couto that this view of the Vedas as a monotheistic scripture, hidden by the Brahmans from the people to whom they preached polytheism, became popular. Since Couto's description was a central source for Holwell, I will discuss it in more detail in Chapters 5 and 6; here its summary by Philip Baldaeus will suffice:

The first of these Books treated of God and of the Origin and Beginning of the Universe. The second, of those who have the Government and Management thereof. The third, of Morality and true Virtue. The fourth of the Ceremonials in their Temples, and Sacrifices. These four Books of the Vedam are by them call' d Roggo Vedam, Jadura Vedam, Sama Vedam, and Tarawana Vedam; and by the Malabars Icca, Icciyxa, Saman, and Adaravan. The loss of this first Part is highly lamented by the Brahmans. (Baldaeus 1703:891)

Though various descriptions based on Azevedo and Giacomo Fenicio made the rounds, no European had yet managed to get access to more than fragments of these prized Vedas....

De Guignes's "Indian Religion"

....

De Guignes from the outset based his view on two specific texts. He devoted the entire second part of his 1753 paper to their analysis and included partial translations from the Arabic and Chinese (de Guignes 1759:791-804). The first of these texts, the so-called Anbertkend (sometimes also spelled Ambertkend), is today known as the Amrtakunda (Pool of Nectar), a Hatha Yoga text of Indian origin that has nothing to do with Buddhism.... For him the Anbertkend was an important text of the so-called "Indian religion" that "contains the principles admitted by the Yogis, particularly those related to magic" (p. 791)." The second text discussed by de Guignes is presented as "the work of Fo himself that includes all the moral teachings he bequeathed to his disciples" (p. 791). While this second text is well known under the title Forty-Two Sections Sutra and is extant in Chinese, the Anbertkend or Amrtakunda is not exactly a household word. De Guignes described it as an Indian book that was "translated into the Persian language by the Imam Rokneddin Mohammed of Samarkand who had received it from a Brahmin called Behergit of the sect of the Yogis" and was subsequently translated into Arabic by Mohieddin-ben-al-arabi. D'Herbelot's Bibliotheque Orientale features the following information under the heading "Anbertkend" (1697:114):

Book of the Brachmans or Bramens which contains the religion and philosophy of the Indians; this word signifies the cistern where one draws the water of life. It is divided into fifty Beths or Treatises of which each has ten chapters. A Yogi or Indian dervish called Anbahoumatah, who converted to Islam, translated it from the Indian into Arabic under the title Merat al maani, The Mirror of Intelligence; but though it was translated, this book cannot be understood without the help of a Bramen or Indian Doctor.

Four decades after d'Herbelot, Abbe Antoine BANIER (1673-1741) widely disseminated the idea that the four Vedas contain "all the sciences and all religious ceremonies" whereas the Anbertkend "contains the doctrines of the Indians" (Banier 1738:1.128-29). De Guignes also thought that "this book is not at all the Vedam of the Indians" but regarded it as "a work of the contemplative philosophers who, far from accepting the Vedam, reject it as useless based on the great perfection they believe to have attained" (de Guignes 1759:791-92). This description very much resembles the one given by Bartholomaus Ziegenbalg and La Croze of the Gnanigol [Ganiguels] and their (Tamil Siddha) literature including the Civaviikkiyam. According to de Guignes, the Anbertkend is a "summary of the contemplatives of India" (p. 796) that advocates that "to become happy one must annihilate all one's passions, not let oneself be seduced by the senses, and be in the kind of universal apathy that is so much recommended in the book of Fo" (p. 793). Apart from this, the only apparent connection to Fo or Buddha is a mantra connected with the contemplation of the planet "Boudah or Mercury" (p. 800)....

Relying on several authors of European antiquity whose view of Indian religions La Croze had popularized, de Guignes accepted that in ancient India there were two main factions: the "ancient Brakhmanes," and the "Germanes, Sarmanes, or Samaneens" (p. 770). Supplementing the sparse information from Greek and Roman authors, de Guignes proposed to "make use of clarifications from Chinese and Arab authors in order to provide a more exact idea about the sect of the Samaneens by examining who their founder is, in which country it originated, and what doctrine he left to his disciples at his death" (p. 770)....

What I have reported based on the Greek and Latin writers compels me to believe that there is little difference between the Samaneens and the Brachmanes, or rather, that they are two sects of the same religion. In effect, one still finds in the Indies a crowd of Brachmanes who appear to have the same doctrine and live in the same manner [as the Samaneens described by Greek and Latin writers]; but those who resemble the ancient Samaneens most perfectly are the Talapoins of Siam: like them, they live retired in rich cloisters, have no personal possessions, and enjoy great reputation at court; but more austere ones exclusively live in woods and forests, and there are also women under the direction of these Talapoins. (p. 773)...

But what is this religion of which the Brachmanes and the Samaneens supposedly constitute two separate sects? De Guignes simply calls it "the Indian religion" (la religion Indienne; p. 779). It is likely that de Guignes was also inspired by Johann Jacob Brucker's treatise on Asian philosophy (Brucker 1744:4B.804-26) and by Nicolas FRERET (1688-1749), who had studied Chinese even before Fourmont and had read a paper in 1744 that advanced exactly this opinion (see the beginning of Chapter 7). Freret asserted that "La religion indienne" is extremely widespread in Asia; reigning in India as "la religion des Brahmes," "Indian religion" has also conquered Tibet, Bhutan, China since the year 64 C.E., Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Siam, Burma, and so on (Freret 1753:36). But while Freret sought the doctrine of this religion in Diogo do Couto's description of the Vedas and combined it with some Buddhist elements, de Guignes decided to take the Buddhist track and identified the founder of his "religion Indienne" as Buddha who is venerated under various names in different countries of Asia....

The Shastah and the Vedas

...

[H]ere we will concentrate on Couto whose report about sacred Indian literature, unlike Azevedo's, was used by Holwell who could handle Portuguese. Couto's report of 1612 describes Indian sacred literature as follows:

They possess many books in their Latin, which they call Geredaom, and which contain everything they have to believe and all ceremonies they have to perform. These books are divided in bodies, members, and articulations. The fundamental texts are those they call Vedas which form four parts, and these again form fifty-two in the following manner: Six that they call Xastra which are the bodies; eighteen they call Purana which are the members; and twenty-eight called Agamon which are the articulations. (Couto 1612:125r)

TABLE 11. Do COUTO'S VEDAS AND HOLWELL'S SACRED SCRIPTURES OF INDIA
Couto / Holwell (1767)
4 Vedas / I / 4 scriptures of divine words of the mighty spirit (Chartah Bhade Shastah of Bramah)
6 Xastras / II / 6 scriptures of the mighty spirit (Chatah Bhade of Bramah)
18 Puranas / III / 18 books of divine words (Aughtorrah Bhade Shastah)
28 Agamon / IV / Divine words of the mighty spirit (Viedam of Brummah)

The numbers four, six, and eighteen first made me think that Holwell's weird history of Indian sacred literature might be modeled on Couto's report. As we have seen, Holwell also mentioned four textual bodies. The number of scriptures of the first three bodies thus correspond exactly to Couto's, as shown in Table II....

[Holwell] must have preferred Couto's description of the Veda's content:

To better understand these [Vedaos] we will briefly distinguish all of them. The first part of the four fundamental texts treats of the first cause, the first matter [materia prima], the angels, the souls, the recompense of good, the punishment of evil, the generation of creatures, their corruption, what sin is, how one can attain remission and be absolved, and why. The second part treats of the regents and how they exert dominion over all things. The third part is all about moral doctrine, advice exhorting to virtue and obliging to avoid vice, and also for monastic and political life, i.e., active and contemplative life. The fourth part treats of temple ceremonies, offerings, and their festivals; and also about enchantment, witchcraft, divination, and the art of magic since they are much taken by this kind of thing. (Couto 1612:125r)

TABLE 12. CONTENTS OF Do COUTO'S FIRST VEDA AND THE FIRST BOOK OF HOLWELL'S SHASTAH
Couto's first Veda in Decada Quinta (1612:125r) / First book of Holwell's Shastah (1767:30)
first cause, materia prima / God and his attributes
angels / creation of angelic beings
souls (of angels in human bodies) / lapse of angelic beings
punishment, recompense / punishment, mitigation
remission, absolution / final sentence leading to remission

The comparison of this description with Holwell's summary (1767=30) of the contents of his Shastah (see Table 12) shows that they are also quite a good match. This common inspiration may explain another contradiction in Holwell's portrayal of Indian sacred literature, namely, why -- in spite of his rantings against the Veda as a late and degenerate text -- Holwell claimed that both his Shastah (Text I) and the Viedam (Text IV) were "originally one":

Both these books [the Viedam and Shastah] contain the institutes of their respective religions and worships, often couched under allegory and fable; as well as the history of their ancient Rajahs and Princes -- their antiquity is contended for by the partisans of each -- but the similitude of their names, idols, and a great part of their worship, leaves little room to doubt, nay plainly evinces, that both these scriptures were originally one. (Holwell 1765:1.12)

If Couto's summary of Veda content does not seem overly concerned with angels, the more detailed explanations (Couto 1612:125v) provide details that were certainly of great interest to a man so thoroughly converted to Jacob Ilive's system as Holwell. Couto wrote that Indian manuals of theology portray God as first cause and as "a pure, incorporal, infinite spirit, endowed with all might, all knowledge, and all truth" who "is everywhere, which is why they call him Xarues Zibaru which signifies creator of all" (p. 125v). According to Couto, the first Veda then describes three kinds of angels: the good angels that remain in heaven with God; the delinquent angels who must go through rehabilitation imprisoned in human bodies on earth; and the angels shut in hell. It furthermore treats of the immortality of souls and their transmigration during the rehabilitation process on earth: "They believe that the souls are immortal; but they think that a sinner's soul at death passes into the body of some living being where it continues purification until it merits rising to heaven" (p. 125v). Couto goes into considerable detail about the meaning of transmigration and its deep connection with the punishment of evil and recompense of good: the souls of the worst sinners transmigrate after death into the most terrible animals, and those of the good into an ever better body. In this way they can purify themselves and atone until they become ready to regain their original state before the fall (pp. 125v-126r)....

If Holwell was trying to find the Vedas, he was not alone; but Couto's description of the first Veda, which seemed so similar to Ilive's ideas, certainly brought more motivation and focus to his search. He knew that he was looking for an extremely ancient scripture treating of God, the creation Story, angels and their fall, the immortality of souls, the purification of delinquent angels in human bodies, transmigration, the punishment of evil and reward of good, and remission and salvation.

-- The Birth of Orientalism, by Urs App

Diogo do Couto
Born c. 1542
Lisbon, Kingdom of Portugal
Died 1616
Goa, Portuguese India
Nationality Portuguese
Occupation Historian
Diogo do Couto (Lisbon, c. 1542 – Goa, 10 December 1616) was a Portuguese historian.

Biography

He was born in Lisbon in 1542 to Gaspar do Couto and Isabel Serrão Calvos. He studied Latin and Rhetoric at the College of Saint Anthony the Great (Colégio de Santo Antão), an important Jesuit-run educational institution in Lisbon. He also studied philosophy at the Convent of Saint Dominic (Convento de São Domingos de Benfica) in Benfica.[1]

In March 1559 (Armada of Pêro Vaz de Sequeira) he traveled to Portuguese India. As a soldier he took part in the Surat campaign in March 1560, living in Bharuch in 1563.

He returned to Lisbon with D. António de Noronha in 1569.

He was a close friend of the poet Luís de Camões, and described him in Ilha de Moçambique in 1569, as indebted and unable to fund his return to Portugal. Couto and other friends took it upon themselves to help Camões, who was thus enabled to take his most significant work, the Lusiads, to the capital.

Couto arrived in Lisbon on board the Santa Clara in April 1570, only to discover that the port was closed due to plague. Upon receiving permission from the King of Portugal (who he met in Almeirim), the ship docked in Tejo.

Shortly after Couto returned to Goa in the Armada of D. António de Noronha, he married Luisa de Melo and worked in a supply warehouse.

In 1595, Couto was invited to organize the Goa archive (being appointed "Guarda-Mor do Tombo da India") and to continue writing the Décadas (a history of the Portuguese in India, Asia, and southeast Africa) of João de Barros.

The 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Décadas were published during his lifetime. After Couto died, his other works were in the hands of his brother-in-law, the priest Deodato da Trindade.

Works

• Decada Quarta (Dos feitos que os portugueses fizeram na conquista e descobrimento das terras e mares do Oriente, em quanto governaram na India Lopo Vaz de Sampaio e parte de Nuno da Cunha), Lisboa 1602;
• Decada Quinta (Dos feitos...em quanto governaram na India Nuno da Cunha, Garcia de Noronha, Estevão da Gama e Martim Afonso de Sousa), Lisboa 1612
• Decada Sexta (Dos feitos...em quanto governaram na India João de Castro, Garcia de Sá, Jorge Cabral e Afonso de Noronha), Lisboa 1614
• Decada Setima (Dos feitos... em quanto governaram na India Pedro de Mascarenhas, Francisco Barreto, Constantino Conde de Redondo, Francisco Coutinho e João de Mendonça), Lisboa 1616;
• Decada Oitava (Dos feitos...em quanto governaram na India Antão de Noronha e Luis de Ataíde), Lisboa 1673 (edited by Joao da Costa e Diogo Soares);
• Decada Nona (written in 1614, and stolen, with the OITAVA);
• Decada Décima (Dos feitos...em quanto governaram na India Fernão Telles, Francisco de Mascarenhas e Duarte de Menezes), Lisboa 1778
• Decada Undecima (lost or stolen, during the lifetime of the author);
• Decada Duodecima ("Tratado os Cinco Livros da Década XII"), Paris 1645;
• "Fala que fez em nome da Câmara de Goa ... a André Furtado Mendonça, em dia do Espírito Santo de 1609" (Lisboa 1810);
• Vida de Paulo de Lima Ferreira, Capitão Mor das Armadas do Estado da India
• O Soldado Prático (the original was stolen, and the author re-made it in 1610, and sent it to Manuel Severim de Faria), Lisboa 1790 (2nd ed. 1954, 3rd ed. 1980);
• Tratado de todas as cousas socedidas ao valeroso Capitão Dom Vasco da Gama primeiro conde da Vidigueira: almirante do mar da India: no descobrimento,e conquista dos mares, e terras do Oriente: e de todas as vezes que ha India passou, e das cousas que socederão nella a todos seus filhos, Lisboa 1998.

References

1. Couto, Diogo do; Caminha, Antonio Lourenço (1808). Obras ineditas de Diogo do Couto [New works by Diogo do Couto] (in Portuguese). Imperial e Real.

Bibliography

Loureiro, Rui Manuel, A biblioteca de Diogo do Couto, Macau, Instituto Cultural de Macau, 1998.

Diogo do Couto orador. Discursos oficiais proferidos na Câmara de Goa, edited by Maria Augusta Lima Cruz, Nuno Vila-Santa and Rui Manuel Loureiro, Portimão, Arandis/ISMAT, 2016.

Vila-Santa, Nuno, "O Primeiro Soldado Prático de Diogo do Couto e os seus contemporâneos" in Memórias 2017, Lisboa, Academia de Marinha, vol. XLVII, 2018, pp. 171–190. [1]

Vila-Santa, Nuno, "Diogo do Couto e Belchior Nunes Barreto: similitudes e diferenciações de dois interventores políticos contemporâneos" in Diogo do Couto. História e intervenção política de um escritor polémico, Edições Humus, Vila Nova de Famalicão, 2019, pp. 191–220. [2]

[admin]

Sutra of Forty-two Chapters [The Forty-Two Sections Sutra]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 2/25/23

In the course of my studies on this subject, I noticed that Church fathers like Eusebius and Lactantius, Renaissance admirers of hermetic literature like Marsilio Ficino, Jesuits like Athanasius Kircher and the figurist Joachim Bouvet, and numerous other "ancient theologians" including Chevalier Ramsay (Chapter 5) were all confronting other religions and tried to link their own religion to an "ancient" (priscus), "original," and "pure" teaching of divine origin. Reputedly extremely ancient texts such as hermetic literature, Chaldaic oracles, and the Chinese Yijing (Book of Changes) played a crucial role in establishing this link to primordial wisdom. However, I found the same endeavor also in non-Abrahamic religions such as Buddhism where neither the creator God nor Adam, Noah, or the Bible plays a role.

A good example is the Forty-Two Sections Sutra, one of the most important texts in East Asian Buddhism, which also happens to be the first Buddhist sutra translated into a European language. Though the text originated roughly 1,000 years after the birth of Buddhism [65 CE] and in China, it came to be presented as the original teaching of the Buddha (his first sermon after enlightenment) and thus also formed a link to an "original teaching." The case studies of this book show that such misdated texts -- and the urge to establish a link between one's own creed and a most ancient teaching -- played an extraordinary role in the Western discovery of Asian religions.

Many texts mentioned in our pages are concerned with some "Ur-tradition" -- God's instructions to Adam, Buddha's instructions to his closest disciples, the "original" doctrine of the Vedas revealed by Brahma, and so on. These texts are covered with the fingerprints of various reformers and missionaries. On the Forty-Two Sections Sutra I found fingerprints of an eighth-century reformist Zen master; on the Yijing those of Jesuit figurists; on the Upanishads those of Shankara and the Sufi Prince Dara; on the Ezour-vedam those of Jean Calmette and Voltaire; and on the Shastah of Bramah those of Holwell. As much as their respective agendas differ, they possess a common denominator in the obsession with vestiges of an ancient true religion that happens to support their mission. As discussed in Chapter 5, "ancient theology" thus reveals itself not as a unique European phenomenon but rather as a local form of a universal mechanism operative in the birth of religious or quasi-religious movements. This mechanism is characterized by the use of supposedly very ancient texts and unique transmission lines designed to legitimize new or reformist views by linking such views to a founder figure's old, "original" teaching....

2. The Chinese Model (Seventeenth Century)

The man who most systematically applied Japanese insights to Chinese religions, Joao Rodrigues, did extensive research on Japanese and Chinese religions and was an exceptional linguist capable of handling primary sources in both languages. He is a hitherto mostly ignored key figure whose views exerted a profound and lasting influence on European perceptions of Asian religions. Unlike Matteo Ricci, whose 1615 report about China and its religions had gained a broad readership in Europe and opened many a European's eye, Rodrigues remained in the background. His groundbreaking research on the history of Chinese religions, chronology, and geography was used by others but rarely credited to him. However, in the form of Martino Martini's publications and of documents that proved decisive in the Chinese Rites controversy, Rodrigues's ideas reached a relatively broad readership. His reports were intensively studied in missionary circles, and his distinction between esoteric and exoteric forms of Chinese and Japanese religions became widely adopted.

The two major divergent views of the China and India missions -- Ricci's and de Nobili's "good" monotheist transmission model versus Rodrigues's "evil" idolatry model -- spilled over into other realms and also had important repercussions in Rome, where Athanasius Kircher in 1667 published under the title of China Illustrata a synthesis of an enormous amount of data from the Jesuit archives and personal communication with travelers and missionaries. He thought, like Rodrigues, that the Brahmans of India were representatives of Xaca's religion who had infected the entire East with their creed. A Chinese Buddhist text helped in fostering this mistaken view: the Forty-Two Sections Sutra. Its preface explained that Buddhism was introduced to China from India in the year 65 C.E. This text played an extraordinary role not only in the European discovery of Buddhism but also in that of China, Japan, and even America (see Chapter 4)....

Couplet's Buddha

The essence of Jesuit knowledge about the religion of Foe (Ch. Fo, Buddha) in the second half of the seventeenth century is contained in the 106-page introduction of the famous Confucius Sinarum philosophus of 1687. Dedicated to King Louis XIV of France, this book -- and in particular its introduction signed (though not wholly written) by the Jesuit Philippe Couplet (1623- 93) -- played a central role in the diffusion of knowledge about Far Eastern religions among Europe's educated class and created quite a stir. A review in the Journal des Sravans of 1688 shows that it was especially Couplet's vision of the history of Chinese religions that attracted interest. The anonymous reviewer (who according to David Mungello [1989:289] was Pierre-Sylvain Regis) calculated on the basis of the chronological tables in Couplet's book that the Chinese empire had begun shortly after the deluge -- provided that one use not the habitual Vulgata chronology but the longer one of the Septuaginta (Regis 1688:105). The reviewer summarized Couplet's argument about the history of Chinese religions as follows:

Following this principle, Father Couplet holds that the first Chinese received the knowledge of the true God from Noah and named him Xanti [Ch. Shangdi, supreme ruler]. One must note that the first emperors of China lived as long as the [biblical] Patriarchs and that they therefore could easily transmit this knowledge to their descendants who preserved it for 2,761 years until the reign of Mim-ti [emperor Ming] ... who through a bizarre adventure strangely altered it. (pp. 105-6)

This "bizarre adventure" was the introduction of Buddhism in China as related by Matteo Ricci, who had, with almost Voltairian guile, transformed the Forty-Two Sections Sutra's story of Emperor Ming's embassy to India in search of Buddhism into a botched quest for Christianity.17 In its course, the Chinese ambassadors supposedly stopped "on an island close to the Red Sea where the religion of Foe (this great and famous idolater of the East Indies) reigned" and ended up bringing Foe's idolatry instead of Christianity to China (p. 106). The religion of Foe or Fo was thus seen as the major cause for the loss of true monotheism in China. The role of the Jesuit missionaries, by implication, is analogous to that of Chumontou in the Ezour-vedam: it was their task to show how the true original religion of the natives had become disfigured and to prepare the ground for its restoration and perfection under the sign of the cross....

Diderot's Oriental Blend

As explained at the beginning of this chapter, Diderot's encyclopedia article on the "Bramines" (1751:2.393-94) portrays them as "priests of the god Fo" who "principally revere three things, the god Fo, his law, and the books containing their constitutions." His description of these priests combines characteristics of Fo's esoteric teaching (as reported by Japan and China missionaries) with facets of Indian religions, for example, the doctrines of emanation, cosmic illusion (maya), and ascetic quietism as described by Bernier. According to Diderot, the Brahmin priests of Fo "assert that the world is nothing but an illusion, a dream, a magic spell, and that the bodies, in order to be truly existent, have to cease existing in themselves, and to merge into nothingness, which due to its simplicity amounts to the perfection of all beings" (trans. Halbfass 1990:59-60). Thrown into the blender were also some lumps from missionary reports about Zen as well as the Forty-Two Sections Sutra (see next chapter), for example, the notion that "saintliness consists in willing nothing, thinking nothing, feeling nothing, and removing one's mind so far from any idea, even that of virtue, that the perfect quietude of the soul stays unaltered" (Diderot 1751:2.393).11 Diderot's Brahmins pretend, as in Kircher, to have sprung from the head of the god Brahma, to possess "ancient books that they call sacred," and to have preserved the ancient language of these texts (p. 393). Diderot also associates these "Brahmin priests of Fo" with some of the doctrines that form the staple of descriptions of Indian religion since Henry Lord (1630) and Abraham Roger (1651).Under Diderot's label of philosophie asiatique, the readers of the Encyclopedie thus found a blend of "Asian" teachings and practices that were all associated with Brahmins who propagated the religion of Fo....

The Forty-Two Sections Sutra

De Guignes had a kind of Bible for all things Chinese. Whether he was writing about Chinese history or religion, on virtually every page he either refers to or quotes from the Wenxian tongkao (Comprehensive examination of literature) compiled by MA Duanlin (1245-1322). Published after twenty years of work in 1321, this masterpiece of Chinese historiography soon became indispensable because it provided thematically arranged extracts from a very wide range of other Chinese works. Students preparing for China's civil service examinations sometimes memorized Ma's chapter introductions, and missionaries and early Western Sinologists appreciated the giant work because it furnished so much (and so judiciously selected) textual material from original sources.

One can say that this excellent work is by itself equivalent to an entire library and that even if Chinese literature would only consist of this work it would be worth the trouble to learn Chinese just to read this. It is not only about China that one would learn much but also a large part of Asia, and regarding everything that is most important and noteworthy about its religions, legislation, rural economics and politics, commerce, agriculture, natural history, history, physical geography, and ethnography. One only has to choose the subject which one wants to study and then to translate what Ma Duanlin has to say about it. All the facts are reported and classified, all sources indicated, and all authorities cited and discussed. (Abel-Remusat 1829:2.170)

This was the work that men like de Visdelou and de Guignes always seemed to have at hand; and some China missionaries only appeared to be so well read because they failed to mention that Ma Duanlin was the source of their quotations from so many Chinese works (p. 171). It was in the Wenxian tongkao that de Guignes found much of the material for his History of the Huns, and the influence of this collection was so great that Abel-Remusat stated in 1829 that Ma Duanlin alone was at the origin "of the large part of positive knowledge that one has so far acquired in Europe about Chinese antiquity" (p. 171-72). While this may be a bit exaggerated in view of the translations of Chinese classics and histories of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, there is no doubt that for de Guignes this collection was of supreme importance. For example, fascicles 226 and 227 of Ma Duanlin's work, which deal with Buddhism and its literature, are the source of much of the solid information (as opposed to speculation) that de Guignes conveyed about this topic to his pan-European readership.

In the introduction to his Buddhism sections, Ma Duanlin recounts the traditional story about the dream of Emperor Ming of the Han dynasty (re. 58-75 CE.) and the introduction of Buddhism to China. The emperor saw a spirit flying in his palace courtyard, was told that this had to do with an Indian sage called Buddha, and sent an embassy to India. Accompanied by two Indian monks, this embassy brought the Forty-Two Sections Sutra and a statue of the Buddha on a white horse back to China in 65 CE. The famous White Horse Monastery (Baimasi) was built near the capital Chang'an (today's Xian) in order to store this precious text and China's first Buddha statue.

This is the story de Guignes was familiar with. But the more modern Sinologists led by Maspero (1910) learned about it, the more this Story turned out to be a classic foundation myth. Today we know that there is no evidence that such an embassy ever took place; that the oldest extant Story of Emperor Ming's dream had a man as leader of the ambassadors who had lived two hundred years earlier; that Buddhism was introduced to China before the first century of the common era; that the first references to a White Horse Monastery date from the third century CE.;16 and of course, as is the rule with such myths, that striking details -- such as the first Buddha image and the two Indian monks accompanying the white horse -- enter the game suspiciously late (here in the fifth century).

While this tale of the introduction of Buddhism to China is today regarded as a legend without any historical basis, the Forty-Two Sections Sutra itself has a reasonable claim to antiquity. It is an exaggeration to say that "most scholars believe that the original Scripture of Forty-Two Sections, whatever its origins, was indeed in circulation during the earliest period of Buddhism in China" (Sharf 2002:418). One can only state with confidence that some of its maxims and sayings are documented from the second century onward and that some of the vocabulary of the text indicates (or wants to indicate) an origin in the first centuries CE. The scholarly consensus in Japan holds that the text as we know it stems not from the first or second century but is a Chinese compilation dating from the fifth century CE. that combined passages and sayings from a number of different Buddhist texts (Okabe 1967).

Twentieth-century research has also revealed that there are three major versions of this text (Okabe 1967). The first, included in the Korean Buddhist canon, appears to more or less closely reproduce the original fifth-century compilation and is here called "standard version." The version used by de Guignes, by contrast, first emerged around 800 CE. and contains some sections that are strikingly different from the standard version. Figure 9 shows the genealogy of editions of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra.


Figure 9. Stemma of major Forty-Two Sections Sutra editions (Urs App)

Since exactly these modified sections (Yanagida 1955) are of central importance for de Guignes's interpretation of "Indian religion," a bit more information is needed here. The book entitled Baolin zhuan ("Treasure Forest Biographies") of 801 -- which was the first text to include the modified Forty-Two Sections Sutra -- is known as a scripture of the Chan or Zen tradition of Chinese Buddhism. Rather than a separate "sect" in the ordinary sense, this was a typical reform movement involving Buddhist monks of a variety of different affiliations who had a particular interest in meditation17 and wanted to link their reform to the founder's "original teaching." For this purpose, lineages of transmission were created out of whole cloth, and soon enough the founder Buddha was linked to his eighth-century Chinese "successors" by a direct line of Indian patriarchs at whose end stood Bodhidharma, the legendary figure who fulfills the role of transmitter and bridge between India and China. Needless to say, all this was a pious invention to legitimize and anchor the reform movement in the founder's "original" teaching that supposedly was transmitted "mind to mind" by an unbroken succession of enlightened teachers reaching back to the Buddha. According to this very creative Story line, the Buddha once showed a flower to his assembly and only one member, his disciple Mahakashyapa, smiled. He thus became the first Indian "Zen" patriarch who had received the Buddha's formless transmission. Such transmission lineages had much evolved since their modest beginnings in genealogies of Buddhist masters of Kashmir and in Tiantai Buddhist lore. In the eighth century, Zen sympathizers tested a number of variants until, in the year 801, a model emerged that carried the day (Yampolsky 1967:47-50). This was the model of the Baolin zhuan featuring twenty-seven Indian patriarchs and the twenty-eighth patriarch Bodhidharma, the legendary founder of Zen whom Engelbert Kaempfer had depicted crossing the sea to China on a reed (see Figure 10 below).

The partially extant first chapter of this "Treasure Forest" text presented the biography of the founder, Shakyamuni Buddha, and this chapter contained the modified text of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra. The setting is, of course, significant: the sutra is uttered just after the Buddha's enlightenment and thus constitutes the founder's crucial first teaching. This alone was quite a daring innovation that turned a collection of maxims, anecdotes, and rules into a founder's oration. But the ninth-century editor of the Baolin zhuan went one significant step further. Not content faithfully to quote the conventional text of the sutra, he changed various sections and added passages that clearly reflected his own reformist "Zen" agenda. This method of putting words into the founder's mouth was and is, of course, popular in many religions; but in this case it was a particularly effective ploy. Not only did the Buddha now utter things that furthered the editor's sectarian agenda-and turned the text into a "sutra" -- but he said these things in his very first speech after enlightenment! And this speech formed a text that was not just any text but the reputedly first and oldest text of Buddhism and for good measure also the first one to make its way to China and to be translated into Chinese! What better pedigree and vehicle for reformist teachings could one wish for?

The Zen movement as a whole was crowned with brilliant success, as Ma Duanlin's list of Buddhist literature in fascicle 227 of his work shows: more than one-third of the eighty-three listed texts are products of the Zen tradition (for example, the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch, Blue Cliff Record, and Records of Linji). The "Zen-ified" text of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra, too, was a smashing success. It became by far the most popular version of this sutra, was printed and reprinted with various commentaries, and in the Song period was even included as the first of the "three classics" (Ch. sanjing) of Buddhism.18 A copy of it found its way into the Royal Library in Paris, and this is the text de Guignes set out to translate in the early 1750S.19 It is worthy of note that it was exactly the most "Zen-ified" version of this text that served to introduce Europe to Buddhist sutras, that is, sermons purportedly uttered by the Buddha.20

The difference between the three major versions of the Forty- Two Sections Sutra is of great interest as it exhibits the motives of their respective editors. For example, the end of section nine of the standard version reads as follows:

Feeding one billion saints is not as good as feeding one solitary buddha (pratyekabudda). Feeding ten billion solitary buddhas is not as good as liberating one's parents in this life by means of the teaching of the three honored ones. To teach one hundred billion parents is not as good as feeding one buddha, studying with the desire to attain buddhahood, and aspiring to liberate all beings. But the merit of feeding a good man is [still] very great. It is better for a common man to be filial to his parents than for him to serve the spirits of Heaven and Earth, for one's parents are the supreme spirits. (Sharf 2002:424)

Whether one regards the portions of the text that are here emphasized by bold type as interpolations or not, their emphasis on filial piety clearly exhibits the Chinese character of this text and fits into the political climate of fifth-century China. The Imperial Zhenzong edition (Zen version A), which adopted a number of the "Zen" changes from the Baolin zhuan, leaves out part of the first phrase but also praises filial piety:

Feeding one billion saints is not as good as feeding one solitary buddha (pratyekabudda). Feeding ten billion solitary buddhas is not as good as feeding one buddha, studying with the desire to attain buddhahood, and aspiring to liberate all beings. But the merit of feeding a good man is [still] very great. It is better for a common man to be filial to his parents than for him to serve the spirits of Heaven and Earth, for one's parents are closest.

For a religion whose clergy must "leave home" (ch. chujia) and effectively abandon parents and relatives in order to join the family of the monastic sangha, this call for filial piety may seem a little odd; but this kind of passage certainly helped fend off Confucian criticism about Buddhism's lack of filial piety. Compared to the standard edition, the "imperial" edition (Zen version A) effectively sidelined the issue and made it clear that "feeding one buddha, studying with the desire to attain buddhahood, and aspiring to liberate all beings" is the highest goal. The Shousui text (Zen version B), by contrast, mentions not one word about filial piety and advocates a rather different ideal:

Feeding one billion saints is not as good as feeding one solitary buddha (pratyekabudda). Feeding ten billion solitary buddhas is not as good as feeding one of the buddhas of the three time periods. And feeding one hundred billion buddhas of the three time periods is not as good as feeding someone who is without thought and without attachment, and has nothing to attain or prove.

This goal reflects the agenda of the Zen sympathizer who edited the Forty-Two Sections Sutra around the turn of the ninth century and decided to put this novel teaching straight into the mouth of the newly enlightened Buddha. De Guignes, who used a "Zen version B" text, translated the part emphasized by bold type quite differently from my rendering above:

One billion O-lo-han are inferior to someone who is in the degree of Pie-tchi-fo, and ten billion Pietchi-fo inferior to someone who has reached the degree of San-chi-tchu-fo. Finally, one hundred billion Sanchi- tchu-fo are not comparable to one who no more thinks, who does nothing, and who is in a complete insensibility of all things. (de Guignes 1759:1.2.229)

This last passage played a crucial role in de Guignes's definition of the Samaneens and their ideal. He interpreted the different stages of perfection as stages of rebirth and purification. This conception lies at the heart of his view that the ideal Samaneens, who in the Zen version B text are credited with exactly such absence of discriminating thought and attachment, represent the ultimate stage of transmigration before union with the Supreme Being. Theirs is the "religion of annihilation" (la religion de l'aneantissemen) de Guignes found at the very beginning of the Sutra text where the Buddha says, "He who abandons his father, his mother, and all his relatives in order to occupy himself with the knowledge of himself and to embrace the religion of annihilation is called Samaneen" (de Guignes 1759:1B.227) The corresponding standard text defines the Samaneens as follows: "The Buddha said: Those who leave their families and their homes to practice the way are called sramanas." The Zen text version A and also version B used by de Guignes, by contrast, have: "The Buddha said: A home-leaver or sramana cuts off all desire and frees himself from attachment, understands the source of his own mind, attains the Buddha's profound principle, and awakens to the doctrine of wu-wei." This "doctrine of wu-wei" (literally, "nonaction") was interpreted by de Guignes as "religion of annihilation."21 It was thus exactly the eight-character-phrase [x] ("know the mind / reach the source / understand the doctrine of wu-wei") that the Zen editor had slipped into the opening passage that inspired de Guignes to define the religion of the Samaneens as a "religion of annihilation." He found this ideal confirmed in other passages of his Forty-Two Sections Sutra. The second section, which is also exclusive to the Zen versions, is shown in Table 7.

TABLE 7. SECTION OF DE GUiGNES'S FORTY-TWO SECTIONS SUTRA TRANSLATION

"Zen" version B (Shousui text) / English translation based on de Guignes (1756:I.2.228) / English translation based on the Chinese text (App)

[x] / A Samaneen, after having abandoned everything and smothered his passions, must always occupy himself with contemplating the sublime doctrine of Fo; / A "home-leaver" or sramana cuts off all desire and frees himself from attachment, understands the source of his own heart-mind, attains the Buddha's profound principle, and awakens to the doctrine of wu-wei.

[x] / then there is nothing to desire any more, his heart is no more bound, nothing touches him, and he thinks of nothing. / He has nothing to attain inside and nothing to search for outside; his heart-mind is not bound to the Way nor is he tied to karma. Free of thought and action, he has nothing to cultivate and nothing to prove.

De Guignes's translation in places reads more like a paraphrase; some phrases are left untranslated, and there is a very understandable ignorance of technical terminology. For example, de Guignes translates the text's "nor is he tied to karma" as "nothing touches him." The lack of specialized dictionaries and a tenuous grasp of classical Chinese grammar must have made translation not just a tedious but also a hazardous enterprise. So much more astonishing is the degree of confidence that de Guignes seemed to have in his skill as a translator and interpreter of Chinese texts.

The God of the Samaneens

An anonymous British reviewer once described de Guignes as a man who is "almost always wading through the clouds of philology, to snuff up conjectures."22 He must have been thinking of de Guignes's theories about the Egyptian origin of the Chinese people or his conviction, built on a flimsy legend in Ma Duanlin's work, that Chinese Buddhist missionaries had discovered America in the fifth century C.E. (de Guignes 1761). But de Guignes's tendency to take some ambiguous drop of information and to wring earth-shattering torrents of conclusions from it is already in evidence in his very first translation from the Forty-Two Sections Sutra. His interpretation of the first word of the sutra's preface, as it happens, was just such a "cloud of philology," and the house of cards de Guignes built on this one-legged stool was of a truly astonishing scale. This was de Guignes's first attempt to come to terms with the content and history of the creed that he called "Indian religion" and to introduce the central and oldest text by this religion's founder, so it is no surprise that many readers and other authors were inspired.23 De Guignes's mistranslation and misinterpretation of the first word of this preface thus not only set his own interpretation of Buddhism on the wrong footing but misled a generation of readers unable to read Chinese who naturally relied on de Guignes's "expertise."

Zen version B's short preface appears to have been authored by the editor of the Baolin zhuan around the turn of the ninth century. Since that editor wanted to portray the Forty-Two Sections Sutra -- which he had so cleverly used as a host for his reformist "Zen" agenda -- as the first sermon of the Buddha after his enlightenment, his "Zen Version B" text, of course, situated the action at the Deer Park in Saranath where the Buddha first taught (turned the dharma wheel of the Four Noble Truths); see Table 8.

TABLE 8. BEGINNING OF DE GUIGNES'S FORTY-TWO SECTIONS SUTRA PREFACE

Zen version B text / English tramslation based on de Guignes (1759:802-3) / English translation based on the Chinese text (App)

[x] / The veritable law of the adoration of Chi only consists in meditations, in the removal of one's passions, and in perfect apathy. The one who has reached the greatest perfection in this law, / When [Buddha] the World-honored One had attained the Way [buddhahood] he had the following thought: "To free oneself of desire and be calm is most excellent."

[x] / after having lost himself in profound contemplations, can submit the spirits, go in the middle of deserts, / Absorbed in a great state of meditation [samadhi], he subdued all demonic ways, and while in the Deer Park

[x] / traverse the revolutions of the four Ti, meditate on the five famous philosophers and particularly on Kiao-chin-ju, / he revolved the Dharma wheel of the Four [Noble] Truths. He converted Kaudinya, etc., the five companions.

[x] / and finally pass through the different degrees of sanctity that one acquires by practicing the law. / and had them attain the fruit of the Way.

De Guignes's translation of this preface makes one doubt his grasp of classical Chinese and confirms that he would hardly have been in a position to produce the translations in his History of the Huns without the constant help of de Visdelou's manuscripts. But translating such texts in mid-eighteenth-century Paris was an extremely difficult undertaking. Some reading of Buddhist texts would have quickly showed that "the world-honored one" is a very common epithet of the Buddha. But there were few such texts at hand, and the Chinese character dictionaries of the Royal Library (Leung 2002:196-97) as a rule did not list compounds. Still, the "subject-verb-past particle" structure should have suggested something like "XX having attained the Way ... " rather than de Guignes's wayward "the veritable law of the adoration of Chi only consists in ... " For de Guignes everything turned around this "adoration of Chi." In his view this "veritable law" consisted in "meditations, removal of one's passions, and in perfect apathy." Furthermore, de Guignes thought that this preface outlined a process through which those who practice this law "pass through the different degrees of sanctity" before reaching the greatest perfection, and used this as textual support for his conception of the Samaneens as the ultimate stage of the transmigration process. But ultimately de Guignes's interpretation hinged on the meaning of the first two characters that he translated as "adoration of Chi." The first character chi (which today is romanized as shi) usually means "century" or "world." But here it forms part of the compound shizun, which in Chinese Buddhist texts is one of the most common appellations of the Buddha. It literally means "the world-honored one" and is as common in Buddhist texts as in Christian texts the phrase "our savior" that, as everyone knows, refers to Jesus. Probably due to lack of exposure to Buddhist texts, de Guignes did not realize this and explained the meaning of the first character chi or shi as follows:

Chi, in the Chinese language, means century and corresponds to the Arabic word Alam, which the translator of the Anbertkend employed in the same sense; it is thus the adoration of the century that is prescribed in both works. What Masoudi reports of the Hazarouan-el-alam, a duration of 36,000 years (or according to others 60,000 years) was adopted by the Brahmins and is the same as this Chi of the Chinese. This Hazarouan possessed the power over things and governed them all. In the Indian system, the Chi or Hazarouan corresponds perfectly to this Eon of the Valentinians who pretend that the perfect Eon resides in eternity in the highest heaven that can neither be seen nor named. They called it the first principle, the first father. (de Guignes 1759:803)

In support of this view, de Guignes here referred to the famous two-volume Critical History of Mani and Manichaeism (1734/1739) by Isaac de BEAUSOBRE (1659-1738). Citing St. Irenaeus, Beausobre had characterized this Eon of the Valentinians as "invisible, incomprehensible, eternal, and alone existing through itself" and as "God the Father" who is also called "First Father, First Principle, and Profundity" (Beausobre 1984:578). Following Beausobre, de Guignes stated that these Christian heretics "admitted a perfect Eon, the Eon of Eons," and concluded without further ado that exactly this Eon of Eons "is the Chi of the Samaneens" (de Guignes 1759:804). For de Guignes and his readers this appeared to be solid textual evidence in support of a monotheistic interpretation of esoteric Buddhism, an interpretation that some had already encountered in Brucker (1742-44:48.821-22) or Freret (1753; see Chapter 7).

De Guignes's 1753 paper on the Samaneens thus ended with a monotheistic bang. Three years later, in the History of the Huns, he spelled out some of the implications. After having once more laid out his view of the exoteric and esoteric followers of Fo and described the Samaneen as a person who "is free of all these passions, exempt of all impurity, and dies only to rejoin the unique divinity of which his soul was a detached part" (de Guignes 1756:1.2.225), de Guignes explains the Samaneen vision of God in a manner that echoes Brucker:

This supreme Being is the principle of all things, he is from all eternity, invisible incomprehensible, almighty, sovereignly wise, good, just, merciful, and self-originated. He cannot be represented by any image; one cannot worship him because he is beyond any adoration, but one can depict his attributes and worship them. This is the beginning of the idolatric cult of the peoples of India. The Samaneen who is ever occupied with meditation on this great God, only seeks to annihilate himself in order to rejoin and lose himself in the bosom of the Divinity who has pulled all things out of nothing and is itself different from matter. This is the meaning that they give to emptiness and nothingness. (de Guignes 1756:1.2.226)

For de Guignes this sovereign Being, this "great God," is the one who in the "doctrine of the Samaneens or Philosophers has the Chinese name of Chi" (p. 226). This fact forms the core of de Guignes's conception of the real (monotheist) religion of Buddha. He even read a creator God into the last section of his 1756 translation of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra. That section contains a passage that compares the Buddha's "method of skilful means" (Ch. fangbianmen) to a magician's trick ([x]). Like a magician in his own right, de Guignes pulled nothing less than the creatio ex nihilo out of this simple phrase. He translated it by "the creation of the universe that has been pulled from nothingness [I regard as] just the simple transformation of one thing into another" (p. 233).

After his translation of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra, de Guignes summarized his view of it as follows:

I thought I had to report here the major part of this work that forms the basis of the entire religion of the Samaneens. Those who glance at it will only find a Christianity of the kind that the Christian heresiarchs of the first century taught after having mixed ideas from Pythagoras on metempsychosis with some other principles drawn from India. This book could be one of those false gospels that were current at the time. With the exception of a few particular ideas, all the precepts that Fo conveys seem to be drawn from the gospel. (pp. 233-34)

De Guignes's misunderstanding and mistranslation not only confirmed his fixed idea of the monotheism of the Samaneens but also led to an entirely original assessment of the history of their religion. Without making any attempt to help his confused readers, de Guignes suggested that the purportedly oldest book of this religion was an apocryphal Christian gospel of gnostic tendency from the early first century C.E. In a paper read in the fall of 1753 he also argued -- possibly inspired by de Visdelou's annotated translation of the Nestorian stele that repeatedly made the same point -- that the Chinese had mixed up Nestorian Christians with Buddhists.24 Not content with this narrow argument based on the text of the stele, he grew convinced that the Chinese mixup of Christianity with Foism happened on such a scale that they even "gave Jesus Christ the name of Fo!' (de Guignes 1764:810). In a sense, his theory about the Forty-Two Sections Sutra was a counterpart to the story line advanced by Ruggieri (Rule 1986:10) and Ricci that proposed that Emperor Ming's dream about a saint from the West had been about Jesus Christ and that the imperial embassy had mistakenly brought back the idolatry of Fo instead of the truth of Christianity. According to de Guignes, however, the Chinese ambassadors had imported a heretical kind of Christianity and fallen victim to the delusion that it was the religion of Fo.

But what about the origin of the religion of Fo around 1000 B.C.E. that de Guignes had found documented in so many Chinese and Arabic sources? Did he now believe that its exoteric and esoteric teachings were all from the common era? Where did Pythagoras learn about metempsychosis? What were those "other principles" from (presumably pre-Christian-era) India that were supposedly mixed in? Do the Vedas belong to this religion or are they older? In the 1750s de Guignes left these and many other questions unanswered; and when he revisited the theme two decades later, the Christian heresiarchs and the view of the Forty-Two Sections Sutra as an apocryphal gospel had vanished like a magician's doves and rabbits.

-- The Birth of Orientalism, by Urs App

The Sutra of Forty-two Chapters (also called the Sutra of Forty-two Sections, Chinese: 四十二章經) is often regarded as the first Indian Buddhist sutra translated into Chinese. However, this collection of aphorisms may have appeared some time after the first attested translations, and may even have been compiled in Central Asia or China.[1] According to tradition, it was translated by two Yuezhi monks, Kasyapa Matanga (迦葉摩騰) and Dharmaratna (竺法蘭), in 67 CE. Because of its association with the entrance of Buddhism to China, it is accorded a very significant status in East Asia.[2]

Story of translation

In the Annals of the Later Han and the Mouzi lihuo lun, Emperor Ming of Han (r. 58-75 C.E.) was said to have dreamed of a spirit, who had a "gold body" and a head which emitted "rays of light".[3] His advisers identified the spirit as Buddha, who was supposed to have the power of flight.[4] The emperor then ordered a delegation (led by Zhang Qian [5]) to go west looking for the Buddha's teachings. The envoys returned, bringing with them the two Indian monks Kasyapa Matanga and Dharmaratna, and brought them back to China along with the sutra. When they reached the Chinese capital of Luoyang, the emperor had the White Horse Temple built for them.[6]

They are said to have translated six texts, the Sutra of Dharmic-Sea Repertory (法海藏經), Sutra of the Buddha's Deeds in His Reincarnations (佛本行經), Sutra of Terminating Knots in the Ten Holy Terras (十地斷結經), Sutra of the Buddha's Reincarnated Manifestations (佛本生經), Compilation of the Divergent Versions of the Two Hundred and Sixty Precepts (二百六十戒合異), and the Sutra of Forty-two Chapters. Only the last one has survived.[7]

Scholars, however, question the date and authenticity of the story. First, there is evidence that Buddhism was introduced into China prior to the date of 67 given for Emperor Ming's vision. Nor can the sutra be reliably dated to the first century. In 166 C.E., in a memorial to Emperor Huan, the official Xiang Kai referred to this scripture multiple times. For example, Xiang Kai claims that, "The Buddha did not pass three nights under the [same] mulberry tree; he did not wish to remain there long," which is a reference to Section 2 of the scripture. Furthermore, he also refers to Section 24 of the scripture, when Xiang Kai tells the story of a deity presenting a beautiful maiden to the Buddha, to which the Buddha replies that "This is nothing but a leather sack filled with blood."[8] Nonetheless, while these sections seem to mirror the extant edition of the text, it is possible that the edition we now have differs substantially from the version of the text circulating in the second century.

Structure and comparison with other works

The Sutra of Forty-two Chapters consists of a brief prologue and 42 short chapters (mostly under 100 Chinese characters), composed largely of quotations from the Buddha. Most chapters begin "The Buddha said..." (佛言...), but several provide the context of a situation or a question asked of the Buddha. The scripture itself is not considered a formal sutra, and early scriptures refer to the work as "Forty-two Sections from Buddhist Scriptures" or "The Forty-two Sections of Emperor Xiao Ming."[9]

It is unclear whether the scripture existed in Sanskrit in this form, or was a compilation of a series of passages extracted from other canonical works in the manner of the Analects of Confucius. This latter hypothesis also explains the similarity of the repeated "The Buddha said..." and "The Master said," familiar from Confucian texts, and may have been the most natural inclination of the Buddhist translators in the Confucian environment, and more likely to be accepted than a lengthy treatise.[10] Among those who consider it based on a corresponding Sanskrit work, it is considered to be older than other Mahayana Sutras, because of its simplicity of style and naturalness of method.[11] Scholars have also been able to find the aphorisms present in this scripture in various other Buddhist works such as Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta, Anguttara Nikayas, and Mahavagga. Furthermore, scholars are also uncertain if the work was first compiled in India, Central Asia, or China.[12]

In fiction

Main article: The Deer and the Cauldron

In Jin Yong's novel The Deer and the Cauldron, the Sutra of Forty-two Chapters is the key to the Manchu's treasures. The Shunzhi Emperor, who is unwilling to let out the secret, spread rumours about it being the source of life of the invading Manchus. The protagonist, Wei Xiaobao, manages to get hold of all the eight books at the end of the novel.

In modern Buddhism

The Sutra in Forty-two Chapters is well known in East Asian Buddhism today. It has also played a role in the spread of Buddhism to the West. Shaku Soen (1859-1919), the first Japanese Zen master to teach in the West, gave a series of lectures based on this sutra in a tour of America in 1905-6. John Blofeld, included a translation of this scripture in a series begun in 1947.[13]

Notes

1. Sharf 1996, p.360
2. Kuan, 12.
3. Sharf 1996, p.360
4. Sharf 1996, p.360
5. Sharf 1996, p.360
6. Sharf 1996, p.361
7. Kuan, 19-24.
8. Sharf 1996, p.361
9. Sharf 1996, p.361-362
10. Soyen Shaku. "The Sutra of Forty Chapters". Zen for Americans. Retrieved 2007-03-21.
11. Beal, S. (1862). "The Sutra of Forty-two Sections". Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19, 337-349. Retrieved 2007-03-21.
12. Sharf 1996, p.362
13. Sharf 1996, p.362.

References

• Sharf, Robert H. "The Scripture in Forty-two Sections" Religions of China In Practice Ed. Donald S. Lopez, Jr. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1996. 360-364. Print.
• Cheng Kuan, tr. and annotater. The Sutra of Forty-two Chapters Divulged by the Buddha: An Annotated Edition. Taipei and Howell, MI: Vairocana Publishing Co., 2005.
• Urs App:
o "Schopenhauers Begegnung mit dem Buddhismus." [Schopenhauer and Buddhism, by Peter Abelsen] (PDF, 1.56 Mb, 28 p.) Schopenhauer-Jahrbuch 79 (1998), pp. 35-58.
o Arthur Schopenhauer and China. Sino-Platonic Papers Nr. 200 (April 2010) (PDF, 8.7 Mb, 164 p.) (This book contains a chart with the textual history of The Sutra of Forty-two Chapters, discusses its first translation into a European language by de Guignes, traces Western translations such as those by de Guignes, Huc, D. T. Suzuki, and Schiefner to specific text versions, and discusses the sutra's early influence on Schopenhauer).

Text of the Sutra

Translations

English

• Shaku, Soyen: Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro, trans. (1906). The Sutra of Forty-two Chapters, in: Sermons of a Buddhist Abbot, Zen For Americans, Chicago, The Open Court Publishing Company, pp. 3-24
• Matanga, Kasyapa, Ch'an, Chu, Blofeld, John (1977). The Sutra of Forty-Two Sections, Singapur: Nanyang Buddhist Culture Service. OCLC
• The Buddhist Text Translation Society (1974). The Sutra in Forty-two Sections Spoken by the Buddha. Lectures by the Venerable Master Hsuan Hua given at Gold Mountain Monastery, San Francisco, California, in 1974. (Translation with commentaries)
• Beal, Samuel, trans. (1862). The Sutra of the Forty-two Sections, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19, 337-348.
• Chung Tai Translation Committee (2009), The Sutra of Forty-Two Chapters, Sunnyvale, CA
• Sharf, Robert H. (1996). "The Scripture in Forty-two Sections". In: Religions of China In Practice Ed. Donald S. Lopez, Jr. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 360-364
• Heng-ching Shih (transl.), The Sutra of Forty-two Sections, in: Apocryphal Scriptures, Berkeley, Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2005, pp 31-42. ISBN 1-886439-29-X
• Matsuyama, Matsutaro, trans. (1892): The Sutra of forty-two sections and other two short Sutras, transl. from the Chinese originals, Kyoto: The Buddhist Propagation Society

German

• Karl Bernhard Seidenstücker (1928). Die 42 Analekta des Buddha; in: Zeitschrift für Buddhismus, Jg. 1 (1913/14), pp. 11–22; München: revised edition: Schloß-Verlag. (based on D.T. Suzuki's translation)

Latin

• Alexander Ricius, Orsa Quadraginta duorum capitum

[admin]

The Discourse of the Teaching Bequeathed by the Buddha (just before His Parinibbana) [Bequeathed Teachings of Buddha]
Translated into Chinese by the Indian Acarya Kumarajiva sometime prior to the year 956 Buddhist Era.
[Around 344-413 AD.]

Between the 1750s and the 1770s, de Guignes thus sought to find additional textual evidence for his pan-Asian religion of Indian origin with esoteric and exoteric branches. This search constituted, as we will also see in the next chapters, a powerful force that propelled traditional orientalism toward an ever more secularized modern form -- a form able to dispassionately and competently investigate ancient sacred texts and monuments.[???] The literature of the esoteric branch seemed increasingly voluminous to de Guignes who quoted various texts, from the Anbertkend (de Guignes 1781b:60) and a text excerpted by Dow, the Neadirsen (p. 63), to the so-called Bequeathed Teachings of Buddha (p. 61). The latter is an apocryphal Buddhist text grouped by a Zen monk of the Song dynasty with the "zen-ified" Forty-Two Sections Sutra and a text of his own Guishan lineage to form the so-called Fozu sanjing, the Three Sutras of Buddha and Patriarch (Ch. Fozu sanjing).

-- The Birth of Orientalism, by Urs App

I. OCCASION

WHEN LORD BUDDHA, Sage of the Sakyas, first turned the Wheel of the Dhamma, Venerable Annakondanna crossed over (the ocean of birth and death); while as a result of his last Discourse Venerable Subhadda crossed over likewise. All those who were (ready) to cross over, them he (helped) to cross over. When about to attain Final Nibbana, he was lying between the twin sala trees in the middle watch of the night. No sound disturbed the calm and silence; then, for the sake of the disciples (savaka), he spoke briefly on the essentials of Dhamma:

II. ON THE CULTIVATION OF VIRTUE IN THIS WORLD

1. Exhortation on keeping the Precepts

O bhikkhus, after my Parinibbana you should reverence and honor the Precepts of the Patimokkha. Treat them as a light which you have discovered in the dark, or as a poor man would treat a treasure found by him. You should know that they are your chief guide and there should be no difference (in your observance of them) from when I yet remained in the world. If you would maintain in purity the Precepts, you should not give yourselves over to buying, selling or barter. You should not covet fields or buildings, nor accumulate servants, attendants or animals. You should flee from all sorts of property and wealth as you would avoid a fire or a pit. You should not cut down grass or trees, neither break new soil nor plough the earth. Nor may you compound medicines, practice divination or sorcery according to the position of the stars, cast horoscopes by the waxing and waning of the moon, nor reckon days of good fortune. All these are things which are improper (for a bhikkhu).

Conduct yourselves in purity, eating only at the proper times and living your lives in purity and solitude. You should not concern yourselves with worldly affairs, nor yet circulate rumors. You should not mumble incantations, mix magic potions, nor bind yourselves in friendship to powerful persons, showing to them and the rich (special) friend-liness while treating with contempt those lacking (in worldly wealth, power and so forth). All such things are not to be done!

You should seek, with a steadfast mind, and with Right Mindfulness (samma sati), for Enlightenment. Neither conceal your faults (within), nor work wonders (without), thereby leading (yourself and) other people astray. As to the four offerings, be content with them, knowing what is sufficient. Receive them when offered but do not hoard them. This, briefly, is what is meant by observing the Precepts. These Precepts are fundamental (to a life based on Dhamma-Vinaya) and accord exactly with freedom (mokkha), and so are called the Patimokkha. By relying on them you may attain all levels of collectedness (samadhi) and likewise the knowledge of the extinction of dukkha (unsatisfactoriness). It is for this reason, bhikkhus, that you should always maintain the Precepts in purity and never break them. If you can keep these Precepts pure you possess an excellent (method for the attainment of Enlightenment), but if you do not do so, no merit of any kind will accrue to you. You ought to know for this reason that the Precepts are the chief dwelling-place of the merit which results in both body and mind (citta) being at rest.

2. Exhortation on the control of Mind and Body.

O bhikkus, if you are able already to keep within the Precepts, you must next control the five senses, not permitting the entry of the five sense desires by your unrestraint, just as a cowherd by taking and showing his stick prevents cows from entering another's field, ripe for the harvest. In an evil-doer indulging the five senses, his five desires will not only exceed all bounds but will become uncontrollable, just as a wild horse unchecked by the bridle must soon drag the man leading it into a pit. If a man be robbed, his sorrow does not extend beyond the period of his life but the evil of that robber (sense-desires) and the depredations caused by him bring calamities extending over many lives, creating very great dukkha. You should control yourselves!

Hence, wise men control themselves and do not indulge their senses but guard them like robbers who must not be allowed freedom from restraint. If you do allow them freedom from restraint, before long you will be destroyed by Mara. The mind is the lord of the five senses and for this reason you should well control the mind. Indeed, you ought to fear indulgence of the mind's (desires) more than poisonous snakes, savage beasts, dangerous robbers or fierce conflagrations. No simile is strong enough to illustrate (this danger). But think of a man carrying a jar of honey who, as he goes, heeds only the honey and is unaware of a deep pit (in his path)! Or think of a mad elephant unrestrained by shackles! Again, consider a monkey who after climbing into a tree, cannot, except with difficulty, be controlled! Such as these would be difficult to check; therefore hasten to control your desires and do not let them go unrestrained! Indulge the mind (with its desires) and you lose the benefit of being born a man; check it completely and there is nothing you will be unable to accomplish. That is the reason, O bhikkhus, why should strive hard to subdue your minds.

3. Exhortation on the moderate use of food.

O bhikkhus, in receiving all sorts of food and drinks, you should regard them as if taking medicine. Whether they be good or bad, do not accept or reject according to your likes and dislikes; just use them to support your bodies, thereby staying hunger and thirst. As bees while foraging among the flowers extract only the nectar, without harming their color and scent, just so, O bhikkhus, should you do (when collecting alms-food). Accept just enough of what people offer to you for the avoidance of distress. But do not ask for much and thereby spoil the goodness of their hearts, just as the wise man, having estimated the strength of his ox, does not wear out its strength by overloading.

4. Exhortation on sleeping.

O bhikkhus, by day you should practice good Dhamma and not allow yourselves to waste time. In the early evening and late at night do not cease to make an effort, while in the middle of the night you should chant the Suttas to make yourselves better informed. Do not allow yourselves to pass your lives vainly and fruitlessly on account of sleep. You should envisage the world as being consumed by a great fire and quickly determine to save yourselves from it. Do not (spend much time in) sleep! The robbers of the three afflictions forever lie in wait to kill men so that (your danger) is even greater than in a household rent by hatred. So, fearful, how can you sleep and not arouse yourselves? These afflictions are a poisonous snake asleep in your own hearts. They are like a black cobra sleeping in your room. Destroy the snake quickly with the sharp spear of keeping to Precepts! Only when that dormant snake has been driven away will you be able to rest peacefully. If you sleep, not having driven it away, you are men without shame (hiri). The clothing of shame (hiri) among all ornaments, is the very best. Shame can also be compared to an iron goad that can control all human wrong-doing; for which reason, O bhikkhus, you should always feel ashamed of unskillful actions (akusalakamma). You should not be without it even for a moment, for if you are parted from shame, all merits will be lost to you. He who has fear of blame (ottappa) has that which is good, while he who has no fear of blame (anottappa) is not different from the birds and beasts.

5. Exhortation on refraining from anger and ill will.

O bhikkhus, if there were one who came and dismembered you joint by joint, you should not hate him but rather include him in your heart (of friendliness -- metta). Besides, you should guard your speech and refrain from reviling him. If you succumb to thoughts of hatred you block your own (progress in) Dhamma and lose the benefits of (accumulated) merits. Patience (khanti) is a virtue which cannot be equaled even by keeping the Precepts and (undertaking) the Austere Practices. Whosoever is able to practice patience can be truly called a great and strong man, but he who is unable to endure abuse as happily as though he were drinking ambrosia, cannot be called one attained to knowledge of Dhamma. Why is this? The harm caused by anger and resentment shatters all your goodness and so (greatly) spoils your good name that neither present nor future generations of men will wish to hear it. You should know that angry thoughts are more terrible than a great fire, so continually guard yourselves against them and do not let them gain entrance. Among the three robbers (the afflictions), none steals merit more than anger and resentment: Those householders dressed in white who have desires and practice little Dhamma, in them, having no way to control themselves, anger may still be excusable; but among those become homeless (pabbajjita) because they wish to practice Dhamma and to abandon desire, the harboring of anger and resentment is scarcely to be expected, just as one does not look for thunder or lightning from a translucent, filmy cloud.

6. Exhortation on refraining from arrogance and contempt.

O bhikkhus, rubbing your heads you should deeply consider yourselves in this way: 'It is good that I have discarded personal adornment. I wear the russet robe of patches and carry a bowl with which to sustain life.' When thoughts of arrogance or contempt arise, you must quickly destroy them by regarding yourselves in this way. The growth of arrogance and contempt is not proper among those wearing white and living the household life: how much less so for you, gone forth to homelessness! You should subdue your bodies, collecting food (in your bowls) for the sake of Dhamma-practice to realize Enlightenment.

7. Exhortation on flattery.

O bhikkhus, a mind inclined to flattery is incompatible with Dhamma, therefore it is right to examine and correct such a mind. You should know that flattery is nothing but deception, so that those who have entered the way of Dhamma-practice have no use for it. For this reason, be certain to examine and correct the errors of the mind, for to do so is fundamental.


III. ON THE ADVANTAGES FOR GREAT MEN GONE FORTH TO HOMELESSNESS.

1. The virtue of few wishes.

O bhikkhus, you should know that those having many desires, by reason of their desire for selfish profit, experience much dukkha. Those with few desires, neither desiring nor seeking anything, do not therefore experience such dukkha. Straight-away lessen your desires! Further, in order to obtain all kinds of merit you should practice the fewness of desires. Those who desire little do not indulge in flattery so as to away another's mind, nor are they led by their desires. Those who practice the diminishing of desires thus achieve a mind of contentment having no cause for either grief or fear and, finding the things they receive are sufficient, never suffer from want. From this cause indeed, (comes) Nibbana. Such is the meaning of 'having few wishes.'

2. The virtue of contentment.

O bhikkhus, if you wish to escape from all kinds of dukkha, you must see that you are contented. The virtue of contentment is the basis of abundance, happiness, peace and seclusion. Those who are contented are happy even though they have to sleep on the ground. Those who are not contented would not be so though they lived in celestial mansions. Such people feel poor even though they are rich, while those who are contented are rich even in poverty. The former are constantly led by their five desires and are greatly pitied by the contented Such is the meaning of 'contentment'.

3. The virtue of seclusion.

O bhikkhus, seek the joy of quietness and passivity. Avoid confusion and noise and dwell alone in secluded places. Those who dwell in solitude are worshipped with reverence by Sakka and all celestials. This is why you should leave your own and other clans to live alone in quiet places, reflecting (to devdop insight) upon dukkha, its arising and its cessation. Those who rejoice in the pleasures of company must bear as well the pains of company, as when many birds flock to a great tree it may wither and collapse. Attachment to worldly things immerses one in the dukkha experienced by all men, like an old elephant bogged down in a swamp from which he cannot extricate himself. Such is the meaning of 'secluding oneself.'

4. The virtue of energetic striving.

O bhikkhus, if you strive diligently, nothing will be difficult for you. As a little water constantly trickling can bore a hole through a rock, so must you always strive energetically. If the mind of a disciple (savaka) becomes idle and inattentive, he will resemble one who tries to make fire by friction but rests before the heat is sufficient. However much he desires fire, he cannot (make even a spark). Such is the meaning of 'energetic striving'.

5. The virtue of attentiveness.

O bhikkhus, seek for a Noble Friend (kalyanamitta). Seek him who will best (be able to) aid you (in developing) the unexcelled and unbroken attention. If you are attentive, none of the (three) robbers, the afflictions, can enter your mind. That is why you must keep your mind in a state of constant attention, for by loss of attention you lose all merits. If your power of attention is very great, though you fall among (conditions favoring) the five robbers of sense-desire, you will not be harmed by them, just as a warrior entering a battle well covered by armor has nothing to fear. Such is the meaning of 'unbroken attention.'

6. The virtue of collectedness (samadhi).

O bhikkhus, if you guard your mind, so guarded the mind will remain in a state of steady collectedness. If your minds are in a state of collectedness, you will be able to understand the arising and passing away of the impermanent world. For this reason you should strive constantly to practice the various stages of absorption (jhana). When one of these states of collectedness is reached, the mind no longer wanders. A disciple who practices (to attain collectedness) is just like an irrigator who properly regulates his dykes. As he guards water, even a small amount, so should you guard the water of wisdom, thereby preventing it from leaking away. Such is the meaning of 'collectedness'.

7. The virtue of wisdom. (PRAJNA)

O bhikkhus, if you have wisdom, then do not hunger to make a display of it. Ever look within yourselves so that you do not fall into any fault. In this way you will be able to attain freedom from (the tangle of) the interior and exterior (spheres of senses and sense-objects--ayatana). If you do not accomplish this you cannot be called Dhamma practicers, nor yet are you common persons clad in white, so there will be no name to fit you! Wisdom is a firmly -bound raft which will ferry you across the ocean of birth, old age, sickness and death. Again, it is a brilliant light with which to dispel the black obscurity of ignorance. It is a good medicine for all who are ill. It is a sharp axe for cutting down the strangling fig--tree of the afflictions. That is why you should, by the hearing-, thinking- and development-wisdoms increase your benefits (from Dhamma). If you have Insight (vipassana) stemming from (development-wisdom), though your eyes are but fleshly organs you will be able to see clearly (into your own citta.) Such is the meaning of 'wisdom'.

8. The virtue of restraint from idle talk.

O bhikkhus, if you indulge in all sorts of idle discussions then your mind will be full of chaotic thoughts, and though you have gone forth to homelessness you will be unable to attain Freedom. That is why, O bhikkhus, you should immediately cease from chaotic thoughts and idle discussions. If you want to attain the Happiness of Nibbana, you must eliminate completely the illness of idle discussion.

IV. SELF EXERTION

O bhikkhus, as regards all kinds of virtue, you should ever rid yourselves of laxity, as you would flee from a hateful robber. That Dhamma which the greatly-compassionate Lord has taught for your benefit is now concluded, but it is for you to strive diligently to practice this teaching. Whether you live in the mountains or on the great plains, whether you sojourn beneath a tree or in your own secluded dwellings, bear in mind the Dhamma you have received and let none of it be lost. You should always exert yourselves in practicing it diligently, lest you die after wasting a whole lifetime and come to regret it afterwards. I am like a good doctor who, having diagnosed the complaint, prescribes some medicine; but whether it is taken or not, does not depend on the doctor. Again, I am like a good guide who points out the best road; but if, having heard of it, (the enquirer) does not take it, the fault is not with the guide.

V. ON CLEARING UP ALL DOUBTS

O bhikkhus, if you have any doubts regarding the Four Noble Truths: of unsatis-factoriness (dukkha) and the rest, (its arising. its cessation and the Practice-path going to its cessation), you should ask about them at once. Do not harbor such doubts without seeking to resolve them.

On that occasion the Lord spoke thus three times, yet there were none who question-ed him. And why was that? Because there were none in that assembly (of bhikkhus) who harbored any doubts.

Then the venerable Anuruddha, seeing what was in the minds of those assembled, respectfully addressed the Buddha thus: 'Lord, the moon may grow hot and the sun may become cold, but the Four Noble Truths proclaimed by the Lord cannot be otherwise. The Truth of Dukkha taught by the Lord describes real dukkha which cannot become happiness. The accumulation of desires truly is the cause of the Arising of Dukkha; there can never be a different cause. If dukkha is destroyed (the Cessation of Dukkha), it is because the cause of dukkha has been destroyed, for if the cause is destroyed the result must also be destroyed. The Practice path going to the Cessation of Dukkha is the true path, nor can there be another. Lord, all these bhikkhus are certain and have no doubts about the Four Noble Truths.

In this assembly, those who have not yet done what should be done (i. e., attained to Enlightenment), will, on seeing the Lord attain Final Nibbana, certainly feel sorrowful. (Among them) those who have newly entered upon the Dhamma-way and who have heard what the Lord has (just said), they will all reach Enlightenment (in due course) seeing Dhamma as clearly as a flash of lightning in the dark of the night. But is there anyone who has done what should be done (being an Arahant), already having crossed over the ocean of dukkha who will think thus: "The Lord has attained Final Nibbana; why was this done so quickly?"

Although the Venerable Anuruddha had thus spoken these words, and the whole assembly had penetrated the meaning of the Four Noble Truths, still the Lord wished to strengthen all in that great assembly. With a mind of infinite compassion he spoke (again) for their benefit.

"O bhikkhus, do not feel grieved. If I were to live in the world for a whole aeon (kappa), my association with you would still come to an end, since a meeting with no parting is an impossibility. The Dhamma is now complete for each and every one, so even if I were to live longer it would be of no benefit at all. Those who were (ready) to cross over, both among the celestials and men, have all without exception attained Enlightenment, while those who have not yet completed their crossing (of the ocean of Samsara to the Further Shore or Nibbana) have already produced the necessary causes (to enable them to do so in course of time).

From now on, all my disciples must continue to practice (in this way) without ceasing, whereby the body of the Tathagata's Dhamma will be ever lasting and indestructi-ble. But as to the world, nothing there is eternal, so that all meeting must be followed by partings. Hence, do not harbor grief, for such (impermanence) is the nature of worldly things. But do strive diligently and quickly seek for Freedom. With the light of Perfect Wisdom destroy the darkness of ignorance, for in this world is nothing strong or enduring.

Now that I am about to attain Final Nibbana, it is like being rid of a terrible sickness. This body is a thing of which we are indeed well rid, an evil thing falsely going by the name of self and sunk in the ocean of birth, disease, old age and death. Can a wise man do aught but rejoice when he is able to rid himself of it, as others might (be glad) when slaying a hateful robber?

O bhikkhus, you should always exert the mind, seeking the Way out (of the Wandering-on, or samsara). All forms in the world, without exception, whether moving or non-moving, are subject to decay and followed by destruction. All of you should stop. It is needless to speak again. Time is passing away. I wish to cross over to Freedom (from existence in this world). These are my very last instructions."

Print version published by The Buddhist Association of the United States (BAUS). Buddhism Study and Practice Group ( http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/buddhism/)

[admin]

Noble lie 2 [Royal Lie] [Pious Fiction] [Pious Fraud] [Pious Invention]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 4/27/22

-- Noble lie 1 [Royal Lie] [Pious Fiction] [Pious Fraud] [Pious Invention], by Wikipedia

However, considering on the one hand the long expectation and the just demands of the learned world, on the other the nature and composition of this work, I will confess, I have a desperate moment of my work. Indeed, the Rig-Veda is nothing but a collection of religious hymns, sung at the origin of Indian society, accumulated over time, and preserved in the memory of the sacerdotal races. And these religious hymns, can we not reproach them for bearing the imprint of this mythological spirit which some serious critics reject with a kind of disgust? She no doubt has her faults, this ingenious daughter mythology of the ancient East, this laughing fairy with two faces, this pleasant storyteller with double language, who does not blush to lie to make us accept the truth, who plays with things serious, and who philosophizes while bantering. But if mythology were only the exaggeration of a natural and true language in another respect, would it not be better to listen and try to understand this language than to reject it with disdain? If all idioms, in order to render a metetaphysical idea, are obliged to borrow their expression from the material world, how can one be surprised that myth comes to the aid of religious dogma which seeks to translate itself in the eyes of the mind, and that does he lend it the support of his broad and brilliant metaphors? A religion seems to me to be the representation, by means of external symbols, of the idea that a people has formed of the divine nature. The true philosopher must like to follow and grasp this idea under the mysterious veils with which the ancient hierophants enveloped it.

This is precisely the goal that the reader of this work will propose, supported by the curiosity of science in the midst of a sterile abundance of marvelous fictions and a prolix monotony of pious invocations, astonished by turns or by the childish naivete of thought, or of the poetic magnificence of style; for such are the qualities as well as the faults of this book. But a defect or perhaps a quality of all these ancient bards is to have no sequence, no system in their inventions. They have a capricious allure, which sometimes admits mythological allegory and sometimes rejects it, so as not to be able to hide their thought when they would like to disguise it, and to leave their fiction fully illuminated in advance of the day of truth. There is a certain pleasure in seeing, under the breath of the poet, all these divinities being born, coming to life, taking on variable and changing forms. But it also sometimes seems that, dissatisfied with his lying conceptions, the author shatters the god he has created, and returns to philosophical truth.

In nature there is a movement which is life, a regularity which is intelligence. The life, the intelligence, for the Indian of these first times, it is God; a God who has no name, who is designated only by his attributes. So he is cavi, intelligent; he is asura, author of movement; he is above all vedhas, that is to say that he exists within this inert substance, whose origin is not defined, which is perhaps only an appearance, but to which he communicates penny energy. God is in everything; but all is not God. Pantheism may be in worship, but not in dogma. Indeed, the man who is aware of his weakness seeks support around him; and, in the various parts of this nature which touches his senses, he recognizes the action of the invisible being whose help is necessary to him. He invokes him in the light that enlightens him, in the fire that warms him, in the air that refreshes him, in heaven and earth, in day and night. Wherever he sees a ray of that clarity, of that strength, of that abundance, of that charity which he needs, he worships God.

-- Rig-Veda Or Book Of Hymns, Translated from Sanskrit, by M. Langlois, Member of the Institut, 1848

In politics, a noble lie is a myth or untruth typically of religious nature, knowingly propagated by an elite to maintain social harmony or advance an agenda. The noble lie is a concept originated by Plato as described in The Republic.[2]

Do you not know, I said, that the true lie, if such an expression may be allowed, is hated of gods and men?

What do you mean? he said.

I mean that no one is willingly deceived in that which is the truest and highest part of himself, or about the truest and highest matters; there, above all, he is most afraid of a lie having possession of him.

Still, he said, I do not comprehend you.

The reason is, I replied, that you attribute some profound meaning to my words; but I am only saying that deception, or being deceived or uninformed about the highest realities in the highest part of themselves, which is the soul, and in that part of them to have and to hold the lie, is what mankind least like; — that, I say, is what they utterly detest.

There is nothing more hateful to them.

And, as I was just now remarking, this ignorance in the soul of him who is deceived may be called the true lie; for the lie in words is only a kind of imitation and shadowy image of a previous affection of the soul, not pure unadulterated falsehood. Am I not right?

Perfectly right.

The true lie is hated not only by the gods, but also by men?

Yes.

Whereas the lie in words is in certain cases useful and not hateful; in dealing with enemies — that would be an instance; or again, when those whom we call our friends in a fit of madness or illusion are going to do some harm, then it is useful and is a sort of medicine or preventive; also in the tales of mythology, of which we were just now speaking — because we do not know the truth about ancient times, we make falsehood as much like truth as we can, and so turn it to account.

Very true, he said....

Again, truth should be highly valued; if, as we were saying, a lie is useless to the gods, and useful only as a medicine to men, then the use of such medicines should be restricted to physicians; private individuals have no business with them.

Clearly not, he said.

Then if any one at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulers of the State should be the persons; and they, in their dealings either with enemies or with their own citizens, may be allowed to lie for the public good. But nobody else should meddle with anything of the kind; and although the rulers have this privilege, for a private man to lie to them in return is to be deemed a more heinous fault than for the patient or the pupil of a gymnasium not to speak the truth about his own bodily illnesses to the physician or to the trainer, or for a sailor not to tell the captain what is happening about the ship and the rest of the crew, and how things are going with himself or his fellow sailors.

Most true, he said.

If, then, the ruler catches anybody beside himself lying in the State,

Any of the craftsmen, whether he priest or physician or carpenter.15

he will punish him for introducing a practice which is equally subversive and destructive of ship or State.

Most certainly, he said, if our idea of the State is ever carried out....

Therefore, as I was just now saying, we must enquire who are the best guardians of their own conviction that what they think the interest of the State is to be the rule of their lives. We must watch them from their youth upwards, and make them perform actions in which they are most likely to forget or to be deceived, and he who remembers and is not deceived is to be selected, and he who falls in the trial is to be rejected. That will be the way?

Yes.

And there should also be toils and pains and conflicts prescribed for them, in which they will be made to give further proof of the same qualities.

Very right, he replied.

And then, I said, we must try them with enchantments that is the third sort of test — and see what will be their behaviour: like those who take colts amid noise and tumult to see if they are of a timid nature, so must we take our youth amid terrors of some kind, and again pass them into pleasures, and prove them more thoroughly than gold is proved in the furnace, that we may discover whether they are armed against all enchantments, and of a noble bearing always, good guardians of themselves and of the music which they have learned, and retaining under all circumstances a rhythmical and harmonious nature, such as will be most serviceable to the individual and to the State. And he who at every age, as boy and youth and in mature life, has come out of the trial victorious and pure, shall be appointed a ruler and guardian of the State; he shall be honoured in life and death, and shall receive sepulture and other memorials of honour, the greatest that we have to give. But him who fails, we must reject. I am inclined to think that this is the sort of way in which our rulers and guardians should be chosen and appointed. I speak generally, and not with any pretension to exactness.

And, speaking generally, I agree with you, he said.

And perhaps the word "guardian" in the fullest sense ought to be applied to this higher class only who preserve us against foreign enemies and maintain peace among our citizens at home, that the one may not have the will, or the others the power, to harm us. The young men whom we before called guardians may be more properly designated auxiliaries and supporters of the principles of the rulers.

I agree with you, he said.

How then may we devise one of those needful falsehoods of which we lately spoke — just one royal lie which may deceive the rulers, if that be possible, and at any rate the rest of the city?

What sort of lie? he said.

Nothing new, I replied; only an old Phoenician36 tale of what has often occurred before now in other places, (as the poets say, and have made the world believe,) though not in our time, and I do not know whether such an event could ever happen again, or could now even be made probable, if it did.

How your words seem to hesitate on your lips!

You will not wonder, I replied, at my hesitation when you have heard. Speak, he said, and fear not.

Well then, I will speak, although I really know not how to look you in the face, or in what words to utter the audacious fiction, which I propose to communicate gradually, first to the rulers, then to the soldiers, and lastly to the people. They are to be told that their youth was a dream, and the education and training which they received from us, an appearance only; in reality during all that time they were being formed and fed in the womb of the earth, where they themselves and their arms and appurtenances were manufactured; when they were completed, the earth, their mother, sent them up; and so, their country being their mother and also their nurse, they are bound to advise for her good, and to defend her against attacks, and her citizens they are to regard as children of the earth and their own brothers.

You had good reason, he said, to be ashamed of the lie which you were going to tell.

True, I replied, but there is more coming; I have only told you half. Citizens, we shall say to them in our tale, you are brothers, yet God has framed you differently. Some of you have the power of command, and in the composition of these he has mingled gold, wherefore also they have the greatest honour; others he has made of silver, to be auxillaries; others again who are to be husbandmen and craftsmen he has composed of brass and iron; and the species will generally be preserved in the children. But as all are of the same original stock, a golden parent will sometimes have a silver son, or a silver parent a golden son. And God proclaims as a first principle to the rulers, and above all else, that there is nothing which should so anxiously guard, or of which they are to be such good guardians, as of the purity of the race. They should observe what elements mingle in their off spring; for if the son of a golden or silver parent has an admixture of brass and iron, then nature orders a transposition of ranks, and the eye of the ruler must not be pitiful towards the child because he has to descend in the scale and become a husbandman or artisan, just as there may be sons of artisans who having an admixture of gold or silver in them are raised to honour, and become guardians or auxiliaries. For an oracle says that when a man of brass or iron guards the State, it will be destroyed. Such is the tale; is there any possibility of making our citizens believe in it?

Not in the present generation, he replied; there is no way of accomplishing this; but their sons may be made to believe in the tale, and their sons' sons, and posterity after them.

I see the difficulty, I replied; yet the fostering of such a belief will make them care more for the city and for one another. Enough, however, of the fiction, which may now fly abroad upon the wings of rumour, while we arm our earth-born heroes, and lead them forth under the command of their rulers. Let them look round and select a spot whence they can best suppress insurrection, if any prove refractory within, and also defend themselves against enemies, who like wolves may come down on the fold from without; there let them encamp, and when they have encamped, let them sacrifice to the proper Gods and prepare their dwellings.

Just so, he said.

-- The Republic, by Plato

In religion, a pious fiction is a narrative that is presented as true by the author, but is considered by others to be fictional albeit produced with an altruistic motivation. The term is sometimes used pejoratively to suggest that the author of the narrative was deliberately misleading readers for selfish or deceitful reasons. The term is often used in religious contexts, sometimes referring to passages in religious texts.

Plato's Republic

Main article: The Republic (Plato)

Plato presented the noble lie (γενναῖον ψεῦδος, gennaion pseudos)[3] in the fictional tale known as the myth or parable of the metals in Book III. In it, Socrates provides the origin of the three social classes who compose the republic proposed by Plato. Socrates speaks of a socially stratified society as a metaphor for the soul,[citation needed] wherein the populace are told "a sort of Phoenician tale":

...the earth, as being their mother, delivered them, and now, as if their land were their mother and their nurse, they ought to take thought for her and defend her against any attack and regard the other citizens as their brothers and children of the self-same earth...While all of you, in the city, are brothers, we will say in our tale, yet god, in fashioning those of you who are fitted to hold rule, mingled gold in their generation, for which reason they are the most precious—but in the helpers, silver, and iron and brass in the farmers and other craftsmen. And, as you are all akin, though, for the most part, you will breed after your kinds, it may sometimes happen that a golden father would beget a silver son, and that a golden offspring would come from a silver sire, and that the rest would, in like manner, be born of one another. So that the first and chief injunction that the god lays upon the rulers is that of nothing else are they to be such careful guardians, and so intently observant as of the intermixture of these metals in the souls of their offspring, and if sons are born to them with an infusion of brass or iron they shall by no means give way to pity in their treatment of them, but shall assign to each the status due to his nature and thrust them out among the artisans or the farmers. And again, if from these there is born a son with unexpected gold or silver in his composition they shall honor such and bid them go up higher, some to the office of guardian, some to the assistanceship, alleging that there is an oracle that the city shall then be overthrown when the man of iron or brass is its guardian.[4]

Socrates proposes and claims that if the people believed "this myth...[it] would have a good effect, making them more inclined to care for the state and one another."[5] This is his noble lie: "a contrivance for one of those falsehoods that come into being in case of need, of which we were just now talking, some noble one..."[6]

This story references the flaws of past societies.

Modern views

Karl Popper

-- The Open Society and Its Enemies, by Karl R. Popper

Main article: Karl Popper

Karl Popper accused Plato of trying to base religion on a noble lie as well. In The Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper remarks, "It is hard to understand why those of Plato's commentators who praise him for fighting against the subversive conventionalism of the Sophists, and for establishing a spiritual naturalism ultimately based on religion, fail to censure him for making a convention, or rather an invention, the ultimate basis of religion." Religion for Plato is a noble lie, at least if we assume that Plato meant all of this sincerely, not cynically. Popper finds Plato's conception of religion to have been very influential in subsequent thought.[7]

Leo Strauss

-- On Tyranny, by Leo Strauss

Main article: Leo Strauss

Strauss noted that thinkers of the first rank, going back to Plato, had raised the problem of whether good and effective politicians could be completely truthful and still achieve the necessary ends of their society. By implication, Strauss asks his readers to consider whether it is true that noble lies have no role at all to play in uniting and guiding the polis. He questions whether myths are needed to give people meaning and purpose and whether they ensure a stable society in contrast to the more skeptical attitude which posits that men dedicated to the relentless examination of, in Nietzschean language, "deadly truths" can flourish freely, all the while concluding with an inquiry into whether there can be a limit to the political and epistemic absolutes. In The City and Man, Strauss discusses the myths outlined in Plato's Republic that are required for all governments. These include a belief that the state's land belongs to it even though it was likely acquired illegitimately and that citizenship is rooted in something more than the accidents of birth. Seymour Hersh also claims that Strauss endorsed noble lies: myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.[8][9] In The Power of Nightmares, documentary filmmaker Adam Curtis opines that "Strauss believed it was for politicians to assert powerful and inspiring myths that everyone could believe in. They might not be true, but they were necessary illusions. One of these was religion; the other was the myth of the nation."[10]

Desmond Lee

Main article: Desmond Lee

"Plato has been criticized for his Foundation Myth as if it were a calculated lie. That is partly because the phrase here translated 'magnificent myth' (p. 414b) has been conventionally mistranslated 'noble lie'; and this has been used to support the charge that Plato countenances manipulation by propaganda. But the myth is accepted by all three classes, Guardians included. It is meant to replace the national traditions which any community has, which are intended to express the kind of community it is, or wishes to be, its ideals, rather than to state matters of fact."[11]

Allan Bloom

Main article: Allan Bloom

Translator Allan Bloom argued for a literal translation and interpretation of Plato's expression:

At Book III 414 Socrates tells of the need for a "noble lie" to be believed in the city he and his companions are founding (in speech). Cornford calls it a "bold flight of invention" and adds the following note: "This phrase is commonly rendered 'noble lie', a self-contradictory expression no more applicable to Plato's harmless allegory than to a New Testament parable or the Pilgrim's Progress, and liable to suggest that he would countenance the lies, for the most part ignoble, now called propaganda..." (ibid., p. 106). But Socrates calls it a lie. The difference between a parable and this tale is that the man who hears a parable is conscious that it is an invention the truth of which is not in its literal expression, whereas the inhabitants of Socrates' city are to believe the untrue story to be true. His interlocutors are shocked by the notion, but—according to Cornford—we are to believe it is harmless because it might conjure up unpleasant associations. This whole question of lying has been carefully prepared by Plato from the very outset, starting with the discussion with old Cephalus (331 b-c). It recurs again with respect to the lies of the poets (377 d), and in the assertions that gods cannot lie (381 e-382 e) and that rulers may lie (380 b-c). Now, finally, it is baldly stated that the only truly just civil society must be founded on a lie. Socrates prefers to face up to the issue with clarity. A good regime cannot be based on enlightenment; if there is no lie, a number of compromises—among them private property—must be made and hence merely conventional inequalities must be accepted. This is a radical statement about the relationship between truth and justice, one which leads to the paradox that wisdom can rule only in an element dominated by falsehood. It is hardly worth obscuring this issue for the sake of avoiding the crudest of misunderstandings. And perhaps the peculiarly modern phenomenon of propaganda might become clearer to the man who sees that it is somehow related to a certain myth of enlightenment which is itself brought into question by the Platonic analysis.[12]

Pious fiction

Examples

Religious context

• Mainstream historical interpretations of the Hebrew Bible (i.e. the Tanakh or the Protestant Old Testament) often consider much of the Tanakh/Jewish Bible to be a pious fiction, such as the conquests of Joshua[13] and the histories of the Pentateuch.[14][15][16] The Book of Daniel has also been described as a pious fiction, with the purpose of providing encouragement to Jews.[17]
• Mainstream historical-critical approaches often view stories in the New Testament such as the Virgin Birth, the Visit of the Magi to Jesus, and others, as pious fictions.[18]
• The Book of Mormon, one of the Standard Works of the Latter Day Saint Movement, has been described as a hoax or pious fiction, and it is not accepted as containing divine revelation by those outside the Latter Day Saint movement.[19]
• The Quran, the sacred text of Islam, has been described as a pious fiction by several authors.[20][21][22] The hadith, likewise, have been described as a collection of various pious fictions by several authors.[verification needed].[21][23]
• Dale Eickelman writes that Muslim jurists employ a pious fiction when they assert that Islamic law is invariant, when in fact it is subject to change.[24]
• The relationship between the modern celebration of Christmas and the historical birth of Jesus has also been described as such.[25][26][27]

Other contexts

• Fredrick Pike describes some morale-boosting efforts during the Great Depression as pious fictions.[28]

See also

• Alternative facts
• Big lie – Gross distortion of the truth
• Bokononism
• Fictionalism
• Lie-to-children
• Morality play
• Paternalism
• Paternalistic deception
• Plato's Laws
• Santa Claus

References

1. Aruffo, Madeline. "Problems with the Noble Lie." Archived 2017-05-17 at the Wayback Machine Boston University. Accessed 4 December 2017.
2. Brown, Eric (2017), "Plato's Ethics and Politics in The Republic", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2019-11-26
3. Translator Allan Bloom explains, "The word is generation which is, primarily, 'noble' in the sense of 'nobly born' or 'well bred'..." and refers to Plato's Republic 375a and 409c for comparison (p. 455 n. 65, The Republic of Plato, 2nd edition, New York: Basic Books, 1991).
4. Book 3, 414e–15c
5. Book 3, 415c–d
6. 414b–c
7. "Positive Liberty » Open Society VI: On Religion as a Noble Lie". Archived from the original on 2007-12-09. Retrieved 2019-01-15.
8. Seymour M. Hersh, "Selective Intelligence", The New Yorker, May 12, 2003, accessed June 1, 2007. Archived October 16, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
9. Brian Doherty, "Origin of the Specious: Why Do Neoconservatives Doubt Darwin?" Archived 2008-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, Reason Online, July 1997, accessed February 16, 2007.
10. The Rise of the Politics of Fear; Episode 1: "Baby It's Cold Outside"
11. Plato: The Republic, Penguin Classics, translated by Desmond Lee, p177
12. pp. xviii-xix, The Republic of Plato, 2nd edition, New York: Basic Books, 1991.
13. Borras, Judit, Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, BRILL, 1999, p 117: ".. the overwhelming consensus of modern scholarship is that the conquest tradition of Joshua is a pious fiction composed by the deuteronomistic school …"
14. Pete Enns. "Briefly, 3 Edgy Things about How the Old Testament Works". Pete Enns. Retrieved 2019-01-15.
15. Pete Enns. "3 Things I Would Like to See Evangelical Leaders Stop Saying about Biblical Scholarship". Pete Enns. Retrieved 2019-01-15.
16. Stanley, Christopher, The Hebrew Bible: A Comparative Approach, Fortress Press, 2009, p 123: "Minimalists begin with the fact that the Hebrew Bible did not reach its present form until well after the Babylonian exile … most the that the story was formulated by a group of elites who wanted to justify their claims to dominate … In other words, the narrative [of the Hebrew Bible] is a pious fiction that bears little relation to the actual history of Palestine during the period it purports to narrate."
17. Carson, D. A. For the Love of God: A Daily Companion for Discovering the Riches of God's Word, Good News Publishers, 2006, p 19: "Many critics doubt that the account of Daniel 4 is anything more than pious fiction to encourage the Jews."
18. Jones, Maurice. New Testament in the Twentieth Century. p. 63.
19. Skousen, Royal, The Book of Mormon: the earliest text, Yale University Press, 2009, p x: "Outsiders generally consider this book [the Book of Mormon] a nineteenth-century hoax or pious fiction …"
20. Berkey, Jonathan P. (2008). The formation of Islam : religion and society in the Near East, 600-1800 ([Online-Ausg.] ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 286. ISBN 978-0-521-58813-3.
21. Jump up to:a b Crone and Cook, Patricia and Michael (1980). Hagarism: the Making of the Islamic World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 277. ISBN 978-0-521-29754-7.
22. Luxenberg, Christoph (2007). The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: a Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran. Verlag Hans Schiler. p. 349. ISBN 978-3-89930-088-8.
23. Brown, Jonathan (2011). The Canonization of al-Bukhari and Muslim: the Formation and Function of the Sunni Hadith Canon. Brill Academic Publishers. p. 431. ISBN 978-90-04-21152-0.
24. Eickelman, Dale, Muslim politics, Princeton University Press, 2004, p 26: "Emendations and additions to purportedly invariant and complete Islamic law (sharia) have occurred throughout Islamic history…. Muslim jurists have rigorously maintained the pious fiction that there can be no change in divinely revealed law, even as they have exercised their independent judgment (ijtihad) to create a kind of de facto legislation."
25. Michael White, L. (4 May 2010). Scripting Jesus: The Gospels in Rewrite - L. Michael White - Google Books. ISBN 9780061985379. Retrieved 2011-09-27.
26. Top 20 football chants (2006-12-21). "How December 25 became Christmas Day... - Features, Unsorted". Independent.ie. Retrieved 2011-09-27.
27. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 405481.ece[dead link]
28. Pike, Fredrick, FDR's Good Neighbor Policy: sixty years of generally gentle chaos, University of Texas Press, 1995, p 79:

"In the Depression era, a great many Americans, north and south of the border, succumbed to the pious fiction that underlay the Krausist-Areilist-Marxist nonmaterial rewards aspect of good neighborliness… Without the occasional seasoning of pious fictions, concocted by intellectuals who in their delusions of grandeur try to introduce elements of dream live into crude reality, might not the real world be a far more vicious jungle than it is?"

[admin]

Mannus [Manu] [Menes]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/2/23

-- Manu (Hinduism), by Wikipedia
-- Manusmriti, by Wikipedia
-- Institutes of Hindu Law: Or, The Ordinances of Menu, According to the Gloss of Culluca. Comprising the Indian System of Duties, Religious and Civil, Verbally translated from the original Sanscrit, With a Preface, by Sir William Jones
-- Matsya, by Wikipedia
-- Sethona. A Tragedy. As it is Performed at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-Lane, by Alexander Dow
-- Menes [Mneues], by Wikipedia
-- Mannus, by Wikipedia

As for human history, the Rig-Veda has only a few documents to provide us with: it is a fairly sterile field in this genre, from which, however, we can draw a slight harvest. These hymns were composed for tribes coming from the banks of the Indus, and living in the middle of the plains watered by the Ganges. These people seemed to belong to that great branch of the human race known as Arya. He brought with him a gentle and simple civilization, patriarchal mores, a polite language, which, modified according to the character of all the sister-nations which spoke it originally, has remained the unknown and revered stock of the Indo idioms. -germanic. These Aryas, by establishing themselves in India, pushed back before them ancient populations who were going to confine themselves in the forests and on the mountains, and who, because of their savage habits and their murderous depredations, formed for them the type of those bad geniuses they portrayed in their books. At the head of the first colony was to be a prince of the nation of Aryas, called Manu, whom traditions represent as the father of humans. The names Manu, Anou, and Pourou are used in a general way to designate man; and it is no doubt an honor that posterity has bestowed on the founder of Indian society and on two of his descendants. Manu instituted religious ceremonies, and especially the cult of fire. He had a daughter renowned for her wisdom and piety; her name was Ila. Here a difficulty arises which is inherent in the nature of the book in which this document is found: it is a question of knowing whether to consider Ila as a fictitious or real character. The word Ila is used to designate the hymn of sacrifice, and a religious poet can well compose the family of Manu in this way. This embarrassment must take place many times: thus, in reading the names of the Angiras and the Ribhous, one must doubt whether they are names of priestly races, or personifications of prayers and rites.

-- Rig-Veda Or Book Of Hymns, Translated from Sanskrit, by M. Langlois, Member of the Institut, 1848

Mannus, according to the Roman writer Tacitus [56-120 A.D.], was a figure in the creation myths of the Germanic tribes. Tacitus is the only source of these myths.[1]

Tacitus wrote that Mannus was the son of Tuisto and the progenitor of the three Germanic tribes Ingaevones, Herminones and Istvaeones.[2] In discussing the German tribes Tacitus wrote:

In ancient lays, their only type of historical tradition, they celebrate Tuisto, a god brought forth from the earth. They attribute to him a son, Mannus, the source and founder of their people, and to Mannus three sons, from whose names those nearest the Ocean are called Ingvaeones, those in the middle Herminones, and the rest Istvaeones. Some people, inasmuch as antiquity gives free rein to speculation, maintain that there were more sons born from the god and hence more tribal designations—Marsi, Gambrivii, Suebi, and Vandilii—and that those names are genuine and ancient. (Germania, chapter 2)[3]

Several authors consider the name Mannus in Tacitus's work to stem from an Indo-European root;[4][5] see Manu and Yemo#Linguistic evidence.

Cognates [sets of words in different languages that have been inherited in direct descent from an etymological ancestor in a common parent language] deriving from the Proto-Indo-European First Priest *Manu ('Man', 'ancestor of humankind') include the Indic Mánu, legendary first man in Hinduism, and Manāvī, his sacrificed wife; the Germanic Mannus (from Germ. *Manwaz), mythical ancestor of the West Germanic tribes; and the Persian Manūščihr (from Av. Manūš.čiθra, 'son of Manuš'), Zoroastrian high priest of the 9th century AD.

From the name of the sacrificed First King *Yemo ('Twin') derive the Indic Yama, god of death and the underworld; the Avestan Yima, king of the golden age and guardian of hell; the Norse Ymir (from Germ. *Yumiyáz), ancestor of the giants (jötnar); and most likely Remus (from Proto-Latin *Yemos), killed in the Roman foundation myth by his twin brother Rōmulus. Latvian jumis ('double fruit'), Latin geminus ('twin') and Middle Irish emuin ('twin') are also linguistically related.

-- Manu and Yemo, by Wikipedia

The Latinized name Mannus is evidently of some relation to Proto-Germanic *Mannaz, "man".[6]

Mannus again became popular in literature in the 16th century, after works published by Annius de Viterbo[7] and Johannes Aventinus[8] purported to list him as a primeval king over Germany and Sarmatia.[9]

What is left of Berossus' writings is useless for the reconstruction of Mesopotamian history. Of greater interest to scholars is his historiography, using as it did both Greek and Mesopotamian methods. The affinities between it and Hesiod, Herodotus, Manethon, and the Hebrew Bible (specifically, the Torah and Deuteronomistic History)...

Each begins with a fantastic creation story, followed by a mythical ancestral period, and then finally accounts of recent kings who seem to be historical, with no demarcations in between....

In 1498, Annius of Viterbo (an official of Pope Alexander VI) claimed to have discovered lost books of Berossus. These were in fact an elaborate forgery. However, they greatly influenced Renaissance ways of thinking about population and migration, because Annius provided a list of kings from Japhet onwards, filling a historical gap following the Biblical account of the Flood. Annius also introduced characters from classical sources into the biblical framework, publishing his account as Commentaria super opera diversorum auctorum de antiquitatibus loquentium (Commentaries on the Works of Various Authors Discussing Antiquity). One consequence was sophisticated theories about Celtic races with Druid priests in Western Europe.

-- Berossus, by Wikipedia

In the 19th century, F. Nork wrote that the names of the three sons of Mannus can be extrapolated as Ingui, Irmin, and Istaev or Iscio.[10] A few scholars like Ralph T. H. Griffith have expressed a connection between Mannus and the names of other ancient founder-kings, such as Minos of Greek mythology, and Manu of Hindu tradition.[11]

Whether Menu or Menus in the nominative and Meno's in an oblique case, was the same personage with Minos

Minos was a mythical king in the island of Crete, the son of Zeus and Europa. He was famous for creating a successful code of laws; in fact, it was so grand that after his death, Minos became one of the three judges of the dead in the underworld.

-- Minos, by Wikipedia

let others determine; but he must indubitably have been far older than the work, which contains his laws, and though perhaps he was never in Crete, yet some of his institutions may well have been adopted in that island, whence Lycurgus, a century or two afterwards, may have imported them to Sparta.

There is certainly a strong resemblance, though obscured and faded by time, between our Menu with his divine Bull, whom he names as Dherma himself, or the genius of abstract justice, and the Mneues [Menu] of Egypt with his companion or symbol Apis...

-- Institutes of Hindu Law: Or, The Ordinances of Menu, According to the Gloss of Culluca. Comprising the Indian System of Duties, Religious and Civil, Verbally translated from the original Sanscrit, With a Preface, by Sir William Jones, 1796

Guido von List incorporated the myth of Mannus and his sons into his occult beliefs which were later adopted into Nazi occult beliefs.[12]

The Moon was mani or Mannus, the progenitor of humanity, which once more forms a special section in the [Blavatsky's] Secret Doctrine. It has already been said above that the Ases could only create the bodies of humans and their lower soul, the intellect, and only Wuotan -- as All-Father (he who is one with his father in heaven) -- could give them the divine human soul. Now, the Secret Doctrine says that the Moon was the father of the Earth, and in a state of torpor -- much like that of death -- it shriveled up and became smaller than the Earth and was forced to follow along in the orbit of the Earth as its satellite, and it gave up its developed inhabitants to the Earth and these form the race of men here on the Earth in contrast to those formed from the earthly animal kingdom. These spirits descended from the Moon -- the lunar ancestors -- whom the All-Father incarnated into the bodies of those created by the other two Ases (Hoenir and Lodur) to form the human race, and for this reason Mannus, the Moon, is called the progenitor of humanity. Here too there are two signs, i.e. for the Moon itself and for Mannus or Mene, the spiritual Moon (Psychomena). The third, Mars is Tyr, Zio, also Zeizzo or Erich, the one-armed sword-god, the "generator." His hieroglyph also consists of the sign of Ur and the Tyr-rune , which symbolizes the solar ray, the solar arrow as impregnator (phallus). His sword, his one-arm, his phallus erectus, clearly designates him as the provider of increase, the multiplier or generator under whose guardianship marriages stood, but war as well, since war increased property through the taking of booty and drove out vermin. The fourth, Mercury , is Wuotan, whose rune (othil ) is in this instance reversed and connected to the sign of increase to form , indicating the increaser, bringer of luck, the wish-god. But the hieroglyph of the bull, which appears here combined with the sign of increase , already in itself consists of the Ur-sign combined with the hieroglyph of the Moon (Mannus) , and means primeval generation, or "the one who generates things out of the Ur"; for this reason the same sign is to be found once more in the Zodiac as that of the bull (Taurus) or the primeval generator....

Our seven-day week is also derived from the "Seven Gods," and we only need a little help in order to grasp the meanings of the names immediately. Sunday and Monday do not require much further interpretation, since the Sun is seen as a symbol of the All-Father and the Moon (man, mene, mannus) is seen as a symbol of the lunar ancestors of terrestrial humanity, personified in the form of Mannus as the progenitor of all of humanity....

Armanism has, as we have shown above, already long since recognized and explained this chasm between the animal kingdom and the world of humanity on this Earth, which modern science has not yet been successful in filling in or bridging. Nor will it ever be successful in this as long as it persists in its purely materialistic theories of today. Wuotanism knows Mannus as the progenitor of humanity; Armanism, however, sees in this name a code-word, which is clear enough: man = "man" and "Moon," and us = "out of" [aus], i.e. "The man from the Moon," or the lunar ancestors.

A high secret of the "high secret Acht" is this anthropogenesis in that it reveals that the Moon is older than the Earth and is its father, but that the Moon is today in a transformational state -- of passing away to a new arising. The Moon shrank up, became smaller and weaker, and gave over its living spirits to the earth which now compels it -- as its captive -- to follow the Earth as a satellite. Since, as the older and more evolved of the two, the Moon had a population spiritually far superior to that of the Earth, this population was transplanted to Earth in the form of humanity, which explains the spiritual ascendancy of terrestrial humanity descended from lunar ancestors, as compared to those who spiritually belong to the Earth and who had by and by evolved as the highest living beings of the animal kingdom. The lunar ancestors also brought with them the formation of the human body, a property which they bequeathed to the Earth, and for this reason the human body manifests a special characteristic form which distinguishes it as something which arose suddenly and not as something that emerged in the course of evolution from an animal body. Therefore the missing link between the animal kingdom and the plane of humanity is nowhere to be found, for it never existed. However, there have been certain reversions to type evolving humans back to the level of animals -- the ape-men (see the investigations of Dr. J. Lanz von Liebenfels). The animal kingdom of the earth will also be lifted to the level of humanity in the coming cycles of the earth in the ages of the Sixth and Seventh Root Races, and at the end of the seventh cycle they too will reach the level of divinity for themselves.

-- The Religion of the Aryo-Germanic Folk: Esoteric and Exoteric, by Guido von List

See also:

• Manu (Hinduism)
• Manu and Yemo
• Man (word)

The term man (from Proto-Germanic *mann- "person") and words derived from it can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their sex or age. In traditional usage, man (without an article) itself refers to the species or to humanity (mankind) as a whole.

The Germanic word developed into Old English mann. In Old English, the word still primarily meant "person" or "human," and was used for men, women, and children alike. The sense "adult male" was very rare, at least in the written language. That meaning is not recorded at all until about the year 1000, over a hundred years after the writings of Alfred the Great and perhaps nearly three centuries after Beowulf. Male and female gender qualifiers were used with mann in compound words.

Adopting the term for humans in general to refer to men is a common development of Romance and Germanic languages, but is not found in most other European languages (Slavic čelověkъ vs. mǫžь, Greek ἄνθρωπος vs. άνδρας, Finnish ihminen vs. mies etc.).

Etymology

According to one etymology, Proto-Germanic *man-n- is derived from a Proto-Indo-European root *man-, *mon- or *men- (see Sanskrit/Avestan manu-, Slavic mǫž "man, male").

-- Man (word), by Wikipedia

• Ask and Embla - the first humans in Norse mythology
• Mannaz rune
• Tvashtar (cf. Tuisto)
• Frankish Table of Nations - (Mannus' sons are mentioned)

References

1. Publishers, Struik; Stanton, Janet Parker, Alice Mills, Julie (2007-11-02). Mythology: Myths, Legends and Fantasies. Struik. pp. 234–. ISBN 9781770074538. Archived from the original on 2014-07-04. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
2. The Phonology/paraphonology Interface and the Sounds of German Across Time, p.64, Irmengard Rauch, Peter Lang, 2008
3. Tales of the Barbarians: Ethnography and Empire in the Roman West, p. 40, Greg Woolf, John Wiley & Sons, 01-Dec-2010
4. "Word and Power in Mediaeval Bulgaria", p. 167. By Ivan Biliarsky, Brill, 2011
5. Mitra-Varuna: An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations, p. 87, by Georges Dumézil, Zone, 1988. The question remains whether one can phonetically link this Latin mani- "(dead) man" the *manu- which, apart from the Sanskrit Manu (both the name and the common noun for "man"), has given, in particular, the Germanic Mannus (-nn- from *-nw- regularly), mythical ancestor of the Germans (...), the Gothic manna "man" ... and the Slavic monžǐ."
6. "man | Origin and meaning of man by Online Etymology Dictionary". http://www.etymonline.com. Archived from the original on 2020-08-14. Retrieved 2020-09-28.
7. Germany and the Holy Roman Empire: Volume I: Maximilian I to the Peace of Westphalia, 1493-1648, p.110, Joachim Whaley, Oxford University Press, 2012
8. Historian in an age of crisis: the life and work of Johannes Aventinus, 1477-1534, p. 121 Gerald Strauss, Harvard University Press, 1963
9. William J. Jones, 1999, "Perceptions in the Place of German in the Family of Languages" in Images of Language: Six Essays on German Attitudes, p9 ff.
10. Populäre Mythologie, oder Götterlehre aller Völker, p. 112, F. Nork, Scheible, Rieger & Sattler (1845)
11. "A Classical Dictionary of India: Illustrative of the Mythology, Philosophy, Literature, Antiquities, Arts, Manners, Customs &c. of the Hindus", p. 383, by John Garrett, Higginbotham and Company (1873)
12. Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas (1992). The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence on Nazi Ideology. NYU Press. pp. 56–. ISBN 9780814730607. Archived from the original on 4 July 2014. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
• Grimm, Jacob (1835). Deutsche Mythologie (German Mythology); From English released version Grimm's Teutonic Mythology (1888); Available online by Northvegr © 2004-2007: Chapter 15, page 2 Archived 2012-01-14 at the Wayback Machine File retrieved 12-08-2011.
• Tacitus. Germania (1st Century AD). (in Latin)

[admin]

Menes [Mneues] [Mannus] [Manu]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/2/23

-- Manu (Hinduism), by Wikipedia
-- Manusmriti, by Wikipedia
-- Institutes of Hindu Law: Or, The Ordinances of Menu, According to the Gloss of Culluca. Comprising the Indian System of Duties, Religious and Civil, Verbally translated from the original Sanscrit, With a Preface, by Sir William Jones
-- Matsya, by Wikipedia
-- Sethona. A Tragedy. As it is Performed at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-Lane, by Alexander Dow
-- Menes [Mneues], by Wikipedia
-- Mannus, by Wikipedia

Menes
Africanus: Mênês
Eusebius: Mênês
The cartouche of Menes on the Abydos King List
Pharaoh
Reign c. 3200–3000 BC[1] (First Dynasty)
Successor Hor-Aha (possibly)
Royal titulary

Menes (fl. c. 3200–3000 BC;[1] /ˈmeɪneɪz/; Ancient Egyptian: mnj, probably pronounced */maˈnij/;[6] Ancient Greek: Μήνης[5]) was a pharaoh of the Early Dynastic Period of ancient Egypt credited by classical tradition with having united Upper and Lower Egypt and as the founder of the First Dynasty.[7]

The identity of Menes is the subject of ongoing debate, although mainstream Egyptological consensus identifies Menes with the Naqada III ruler Narmer[2][3][4][8] or First Dynasty pharaoh Hor-Aha.[9] Both pharaohs are credited with the unification of Egypt to different degrees by various authorities.

Name and identity

The commonly-used name Menes derives from Manetho, an Egyptian historian and priest who lived during the Ptolemaic Kingdom. Manetho noted the name in Greek as Μήνης (transliterated: Mênês).[5][10] An alternative Greek form, Μιν (transliterated: Min), was cited by the fifth-century-BC historian Herodotus,[11] but this variant is no longer accepted; it appears to have been the result of contamination from the name of the god Min.[12] The Egyptian form, mnj, is taken from the Turin and Abydos King Lists, which are dated to the Nineteenth Dynasty, whose pronunciation has been reconstructed as */maˈnij/. By the early New Kingdom, changes in the Egyptian language meant his name was already pronounced */maˈneʔ/.[13] The name mnj means "He who endures", which, I.E.S. Edwards (1971) suggests, may have been coined as "a mere descriptive epithet denoting a semi-legendary hero [...] whose name had been lost".[5] Rather than a particular person, the name may conceal collectively the Naqada III rulers: Ka, Scorpion II and Narmer.[5]

Narmer and Menes


Two Horus names of Hor-Aha (left) and a name of Menes (right) in hieroglyphs.

Main article: Narmer

Ivory tablet of Menes


The ivory label mentioning Hor-Aha along with the mn sign.


Reconstructed tablet.

The almost complete absence of any mention of Menes in the archaeological record[5] and the comparative wealth of evidence of Narmer, a protodynastic figure credited by posterity and in the archaeological record with a firm claim[3] to the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt, has given rise to a theory identifying Menes with Narmer.

The chief archaeological reference to Menes is an ivory label from Naqada which shows the royal Horus-name Aha (the pharaoh Hor-Aha) next to a building, within which is the royal nebty-name mn,[14] generally taken to be Menes.[5][a] From this, various theories on the nature of the building (a funerary booth or a shrine), the meaning of the word mn (a name or the verb endures) and the relationship between Hor-Aha and Menes (as one person or as successive pharaohs) have arisen.[2]

The Turin and Abydos king lists, generally accepted to be correct,[2] list the nesu-bit-names of the pharaohs, not their Horus-names,[3] and are vital to the potential reconciliation of the various records: the nesu-bit-names of the king lists, the Horus-names of the archaeological record and the number of pharaohs in Dynasty I according to Manetho and other historical sources.[3]

Flinders Petrie first attempted this task,[3] associating Iti with Djer as the third pharaoh of Dynasty I, Teti (Turin) (or another Iti (Abydos)) with Hor-Aha as second pharaoh, and Menes (a nebty-name) with Narmer (a Horus-name) as first pharaoh of Dynasty I.[2][3] Lloyd (1994) finds this succession "extremely probable",[3] and Cervelló-Autuori (2003) categorically states that "Menes is Narmer and the First Dynasty begins with him".[4] However, Seidlmayer (2004) states that it is "a fairly safe inference" that Menes was Hor-Aha.[9]

Two documents have been put forward as proof either that Narmer was Menes or alternatively Hor-Aha was Menes. The first is the "Naqada Label" found at the site of Naqada, in the tomb of Queen Neithhotep, often assumed to have been the mother of Horus Aha.[15]

The commonly used name Hor-Aha is a rendering of the pharaoh's Horus-name, an element of the royal titulary associated with the god Horus, and is more fully given as Horus-Aha meaning Horus the Fighter.

Manetho's record Aegyptiaca (translating to History of Egypt) lists his Greek name as Athothis, or "Athotís".

-- Hor-Aha, by Wikipedia

The label shows a serekh of Hor-Aha next to an enclosure inside of which are symbols that have been interpreted by some scholars as the name "Menes". The second is the seal impression from Abydos that alternates between a serekh of Narmer and the chessboard symbol, "mn", which is interpreted as an abbreviation of Menes. Arguments have been made with regard to each of these documents in favour of Narmer or Hor-Aha being Menes, but in neither case is the argument conclusive.[ b]

The second document, the seal impression from Abydos, shows the serekh of Narmer alternating with the gameboard sign (mn), together with its phonetic complement, the n sign, which is always shown when the full name of Menes is written, again representing the name “Menes”. At first glance, this would seem to be strong evidence that Narmer was Menes.[19] However, based on an analysis of other early First Dynasty seal impressions, which contain the name of one or more princes, the seal impression has been interpreted by other scholars as showing the name of a prince of Narmer named Menes, hence Menes was Narmer's successor, Hor-Aha, and thus Hor-Aha was Menes.[20] This was refuted by Cervelló-Autuori 2005, pp. 42–45; but opinions still vary, and the seal impression cannot be said to definitively support either theory.[21]

Herodotus, after having mentioned the first king of Egypt, Min, he wrote that Linus, called by the Egyptians Maneros, was "the only son of the first king of Egypt" and that he died untimely.[22]

Dates

Egyptologists, archaeologists, and scholars from the 19th century have proposed different dates for the era of Menes, or the date of the first dynasty:[23][c]

• John Gardner Wilkinson (1835) – 2320 BC
• Jean-François Champollion (Published posthumously in 1840) – 5867 BC
• August Böckh (1845) – 5702 BC
• Christian Charles Josias Bunsen (1848) – 3623 BC
• Reginald Stuart Poole (1851) – 2717 BC
• Karl Richard Lepsius (1856) – 3892 BC
• Heinrich Karl Brugsch (1859) – 4455 BC
• Franz Joseph Lauth (1869) – 4157 BC
• Auguste Mariette (1871) – 5004 BC
• James Strong (1878) – 2515 BC
• Flinders Petrie (1887) – 4777 BC

Modern consensus dates the era of Menes or the start of the first dynasty between c. 3200–3030 BC; some academic literature uses c. 3000 BC.[1]

History

Ebony plaque of Menes in his tomb of Abydos





By 500 BC, mythical and exaggerated claims had made Menes a culture hero, and most of what is known of him comes from a much later time.[24]

Ancient tradition ascribed to Menes the honour of having united Upper and Lower Egypt into a single kingdom[25] and becoming the first pharaoh of the First Dynasty.[26] However, his name does not appear on extant pieces of the Royal Annals (Cairo Stone and Palermo Stone), which is a now-fragmentary king's list that was carved onto a stela during the Fifth Dynasty. He typically appears in later sources as the first human ruler of Egypt, directly inheriting the throne from the god Horus.[27] He also appears in other, much later, king's lists, always as the first human pharaoh of Egypt. Menes also appears in demotic novels of the Hellenistic period, demonstrating that, even that late, he was regarded as an important figure.[28]

Menes was seen as a founding figure for much of the history of ancient Egypt, similar to Romulus in ancient Rome.[29] Manetho records that Menes "led the army across the frontier and won great glory".[10][26]

Capital

Manetho associates the city of Thinis with the Early Dynastic Period and, in particular, Menes, a "Thinite" or native of Thinis.[10][26] Herodotus contradicts Manetho in stating that Menes founded the city of Memphis as his capital[30] after diverting the course of the Nile through the construction of a levee.[31] Manetho ascribes the building of Memphis to Menes' son, Athothis,[26] and calls no pharaohs earlier than Third Dynasty "Memphite".[32]

Herodotus and Manetho's stories of the foundation of Memphis are probably later inventions: in 2012 a relief mentioning the visit to Memphis by Iry-Hor—a predynastic ruler of Upper Egypt reigning before Narmer—was discovered in the Sinai Peninsula, indicating that the city was already in existence in the early 32nd century BC.[33]

Cultural influence


Labels from the tomb of Menes

Diodorus Siculus stated that Menes had introduced the worship of the gods and the practice of sacrifice[34] as well as a more elegant and luxurious style of living.[34] For this latter invention, Menes' memory was dishonoured by the Twenty-fourth Dynasty pharaoh Tefnakht and Plutarch mentions a pillar at Thebes on which was inscribed an imprecation against Menes as the introducer of luxury.[34]

In Pliny's[clarification needed] account, Menes was credited with being the inventor of writing in Egypt.

[T]he date and the mechanism of the creation of hieroglyphs are much harder to determine.

An obvious point for the date would be the beginning of the first dynasty. Here, according to Egyptian tradition, Menes of This in Upper Egypt conquered the Delta, unified the country, founded Memphis as his capital, and introduced many of the traits of classical Pharaonic culture; although, interestingly, he is not credited with the invention of hieroglyphs. A minimalist modern interpretation of what happened at the beginning of Egyptian history would be that there was no Menes, the search for him among the historical records is therefore meaningless, and that there was probably no unification either; all that happened was that the Egyptians invented writing and began to record their history systematically. The date for this can be obtained by a combination of astronomical data and dead reckoning from later king-lists such as the Turin canon: 3089 + x B.C., where x is the length of the obscure 'first intermediate period'. Considerable attempts have been made by historians to reduce this figure, but it is rather supported by some of the most recent Carbon-14 calibrations (see most cautiously Shaw 1984). A date of 3100 would not be far wrong, therefore, in which case there is a suitable time-lag behind the Mesopotamian introduction of writing.

The problem, however, is complicated by the known existence of Egyptian kings before Menes. The Palermo Stone, essentially a fifth-dynasty composition (although almost certainly a much later copy), clearly shows, on a separate fragment, the existence of kings wearing the crown of united Egypt well before 'Menes' and the supposed unification. Names of nine kings of Lower Egypt are also preserved, and outlandish they are, at least by later standards; this may be explicable by their Lower Egyptian origin, or more likely some form of oral tradition has been at work, but the very existence of these names must make us cautious (Sethe 1903). More disturbing are the contemporary monuments of kings, principally from the royal cemetery at Abydos but also from elsewhere, with names such as the increasingly attested Ro or Iry, the obscure Ka or Sekhen, and the better-known Scorpion (reading uncertain), who seems to be almost a prototype of Menes in his achievements (Barta 1982). The embarrassment caused by the existence of these kings is reflected in the term 'Dynasty O' which is frequently applied to them. Names of these kings appear clearly on contemporary monuments such as jars, and even the Scorpion macehead, and this leaves us in no doubt that writing existed in Egypt before the first king of Dynasty I. Our date of 3100 must therefore be raised to 3150 or even slightly earlier, and it is always possible that archaeological discovery will upset this picture even more. 'Menes', therefore, was not the inventor of hieroglyphs.

-- The emergence of writing in Egypt, by John D. Ray

Crocodile episode

Diodorus Siculus recorded a story of Menes related by the priests of the crocodile god Sobek at Crocodilopolis, in which the pharaoh Menes, attacked by his own dogs while out hunting,[35] fled across Lake Moeris on the back of a crocodile and, in thanks, founded the city of Crocodilopolis.[35][36][37]

Gaston Maspero (1910), while acknowledging the possibility that traditions relating to other kings may have become mixed up with this story, dismisses the suggestions of some commentators[38] that the story should be transferred to the Twelfth Dynasty pharaoh Amenemhat III and sees no reason to doubt that Diodorus did not correctly record a tradition of Menes.[35] Later, Edwards (1974) states that "the legend, which is obviously filled with anachronisms, is patently devoid of historical value".[36]

Death

According to Manetho, Menes reigned for either 30, 60 or 62 years and was killed by a hippopotamus.[10][39]

In popular culture

Alexander Dow (1735/6–79), a Scottish orientalist and playwright, wrote the tragedy Sethona, set in ancient Egypt. The lead part of Menes is described in the dramatis personæ as "next male-heir to the crown" now worn by Seraphis, and was played by Samuel Reddish in a 1774 production by David Garrick at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane.[40]

-- Sethona. A Tragedy. As it is Performed at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-Lane, by Alexander Dow

https://archive.org/stream/sethonatrage ... a_djvu.txt

-- History of Hindostan; From the Earliest Account of Time, To the Death of Akbar; Translated From the Persian of Mahummud Casim Ferishta of Delhi: Together With a Dissertation Concerning the Religion and Philosophy of the Brahmins; With an Appendix, Containing the History of the Mogul Empire, From Its Decline in the Reign of Mahummud Shaw, to the Present Times,(1768), by Alexander Dow.

-- History of Hindostan, Translated from the Persian. To Which are Prefixed Two Dissertations; The First Concerning the Hindoos, and the Second on the Origin and Nature of Despotism in India, A New Edition. In Three Volumes, Volume I (1812), by Alexander Dow, Esq.

See also

• First Dynasty of Egypt family tree
• Mannus, ancestral figure in Germanic mythology
• Minos, king of Crete, son of Zeus and Europa
• Manu (Hinduism), Progenitor of humanity
• Nu'u, Hawaiian mythological character who built an ark and escaped a Great Flood
• Nüwa, goddess in Chinese mythology best known for creating mankind
• Min (god)
• Hor-Aha

Notes

1. Originally, the full royal title of a pharaoh was Horus name x nebty name y Golden-Horus name z nesu-bit name a Son-of-Ra name b. For brevity's sake, only one element might be used, but the choice varied between circumstances and period. Starting with Dynasty V, the nesu-bit name was the one regularly used in all official documents. In Dynasty I, the Horus-name was used for a living pharaoh, the nebty-name for the dead.[3]
2. In the upper right hand quarter of the Naqada label is a serekh of Hor-Aha. To its right is a hill-shaped triple enclosure with the “mn” sign surmounted by the signs of the “two ladies”, the goddesses of Upper Egypt (Nekhbet) and Lower Egypt (Wadjet). In later contexts, the presence of the “two ladies” would indicate a “nbty” name (one of the five names of the king). Hence, the inscription was interpreted as showing that the “nbty” name of Hor-Aha was “Mn” short for Menes.[16] An alternative theory is that the enclosure was a funeral shrine and it represents Hor-Aha burying his predecessor, Menes. Hence Menes was Narmer.[17] Although the label generated a lot of debate, it is now generally agreed that the inscription in the shrine is not a king’s name, but is the name of the shrine “The Two Ladies Endure,” and provide no evidence for who Menes was.[18]
3. Other dates typical of the era are found cited in Capart, Jean, Primitive Art in Egypt, pp. 17–18.

References

1. Kitchen, KA (1991). "The Chronology of Ancient Egypt". World Archaeology. 23 (2): 201–8. doi:10.1080/00438243.1991.9980172.
2. Edwards 1971, p. 13.
3. Lloyd 1994, p. 7.
4. Cervelló-Autuori 2003, p. 174.
5. Edwards 1971, p. 11.
6. Loprieno, Antonio (1995). Ancient Egyptian: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge University press. ISBN 0-521-44384-9.
7. Beck et al. 1999.
8. Heagy 2014.
9. Seidlmayer 2010.
10. Manetho, Fr. 6, 7a, 7b. Text and translation in Manetho, translated by W.G. Waddell (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1940), pp.26–35
11. Herodotus: 2.4.1, 2.99.1ff.
12. Lloyd 1994, p. 6.
13. Loprieno 1995, p. 38.
14. Gardiner 1961, p. 405.
15. Naqada Label | The Ancient Egypt Site
16. Borchardt 1897, pp. 1056–1057.
17. Newberry 1929, pp. 47–49.
18. Kinnear 2003, p. 30.
19. Newberry 1929, pp. 49–50.
20. Helck 1953, pp. 356–359.
21. Heagy 2014, pp. 77–78.
22. Herodotus (1958). The Histories of Herodotus of Halicarnassus. Translated by Harry Carter. Haarlem, Netherlands: Joh. Enschedé en Zonen. p. 122. OCLC 270617466.
23. Budge, EA Wallis (1885), The Dwellers on the Nile: Chapters on the Life, Literature, History and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, p. 54, Many dates have been fixed by scholars for the reign of this king: Champollion-Figeac thought about BC 5867, Bunsen 3623, Lepsius 3892, Brugsch 4455, and Wilkinson 2320.
24. Frank Northen Magill; Alison Aves (1998). Dictionary of World Biography. Taylor & Francis. pp. 726–. ISBN 978-1-57958-040-7.
25. Maspero 1903, p. 331.
26. Verbrugghe & Wickersham 2001, p. 131.
27. Shaw & Nicholson 1995, p. 218.
28. Ryholt 2009.
29. Manley 1997, p. 22.
30. Herodotus: 2.99.4.
31. Herodotus: 2.109
32. Verbrugghe & Wickersham 2001, p. 133.
33. P. Tallet, D. Laisnay: Iry-Hor et Narmer au Sud-Sinaï (Ouadi 'Ameyra), un complément à la chronologie des expéditios minière égyptiene, in: BIFAO 112 (2012), 381–395, available online
34. Elder 1849, p. 1040.
35. Maspero 1910, p. 235.
36. Edwards 1974, p. 22.
37. Diodorus: 45
38. Elder 1849, p. 1040, ‘in defiance of chronology’.
39. "Comparing the King Lists of Manetho".
40. Dow 1774.

Bibliography

• Beck, Roger B; Black, Linda; Krieger, Larry S; Naylor, Phillip C; Shabaka, Dahia Ibo (1999), World history: Patterns of interaction, Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell, ISBN 0-395-87274-X
• Cervelló-Autuori, Josep (2003), "Narmer, Menes and the seals from Abydos", Egyptology at the dawn of the twenty-first century: proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists, vol. 2, Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, ISBN 978-977-424-714-9.
• Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica, vol. 1
• Dow, Alexander (1774), Sethona: a tragedy, as it is performed at the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, Collection of plays. [1767-1802] ;v. 1, no. 5, London: T. Becket, hdl:2027/uc2.ark:/13960/t2z31pr8f
• Edwards, IES (1971), "The early dynastic period in Egypt", The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Elder, Edward (1849), "Menes", in Smith, William (ed.), Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, vol. 2, Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown.
• Faber, George Stanley (1816), "The origin of pagan idolatry: ascertained from historical testimony and circumstantial evidence", 3, London: F&C Rivingtons, vol. 2.
• Gardiner, Alan (1961), Egypt of the Pharaohs, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• of Halicarnassus, Herodotus, The Histories.
• Heagy, Thomas C. (2014), "Who was Menes?", Archeo-Nil, 24: 59–92. Available online "[1]"..
• Lloyd, Alan B. (1994) [1975], Herodotus: Book II, Leiden: EJ Brill, ISBN 90-04-04179-6.
• Maspero, Gaston (1903), Sayce, Archibald Henry (ed.), History of Egypt, Chaldea, Syria, Babylonia, and Assyria, vol. 9, Kessinger Publishing, ISBN 9780766135017.
• ——— (1910) [1894], Sayce, Archibald Henry (ed.), The dawn of civilization: Egypt and Chaldæa, translated by McClure, M L, London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, ISBN 978-0-7661-7774-1.
• Manley, Bill (1997), The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Egypt, London: Penguin, ISBN 0-14-051331-0.
• Rachewiltz, Boris de (1969), "Pagan and magic elements in Ezra Pound's works", in Hesse, Eva (ed.), New approaches to Ezra Pound, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Ryholt, Kim (2009), "Egyptian historical literature from the Greco-Roman period", in Fitzenreiter, Martin (ed.), Das Ereignis, Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Vorfall und Befund, London: Golden House.
• Schulz, Regine; Seidel, Matthias (2004), Egypt: The World of the Pharaohs, HF Ullmann, ISBN 978-3-8331-6000-4.
• Shaw, Ian; Nicholson, Paul (1995), The Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, Harry N Abrams, ISBN 0-8109-9096-2.
• Seidlmayer, Stephan (2010) [2004], "The Rise of the State to the Second Dynasty", Egypt: The World of the Pharaohs, ISBN 978-3-8331-6000-4.
• Verbrugghe, Gerald Paul; Wickersham, John Moore (2001) [1996], Berossos and Manetho, introduced and translated: Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, ISBN 978-0-472-08687-0.
• Waddell, Laurence A (1930), Egyptian civilization: Its Sumerian origin, London, ISBN 978-0-7661-4273-2.

External links

• Menes, Ancient Egypt.
• "The Contendings of Horus and Seth", Egypt, IL: Reshafim, archived from the original on 2010-09-24, retrieved 2007-07-22.
• "Menes", Ancient Egyptian Civilization (image), Aldokkan.
• "Menes" . New International Encyclopedia. 1905.

**************

Menes, king of Egypt [Alternate titles: Aha, Mena, Meni, Min, Narmer, Scorpion
by Britannica
Accessed: 3/2/23

Alternate titles: Aha, Mena, Meni, Min, Narmer, Scorpion
Flourished: c.2930 BCE - c.2900 BCE


Figure perhaps representing Menes on a victory tablet of Egyptian King Narmer, c. 2925–c. 2775 BCE. Courtesy of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo; photograph, Hirmer Fotoarchiv, Munich

Menes, also spelled Mena, Meni, or Min, (flourished c. 2925 BCE), legendary first king of unified Egypt, who, according to tradition, joined Upper and Lower Egypt in a single centralized monarchy and established ancient Egypt’s 1st dynasty. Manetho, a 3rd-century-BCE Egyptian historian, called him Menes, the 5th-century-BCE Greek historian Herodotus referred to him as Min, and two native-king lists of the 19th dynasty (13th century BCE) call him Meni. Modern scholars have inconclusively identified the legendary Menes with one or more of the archaic Egyptian kings bearing the names Scorpion, Narmer, and Aha.

In addition to crediting Menes with the unification of Egypt by war and administrative measures, a tradition appearing in the Turin Papyrus and the History of Herodotus credits him with diverting the course of the Nile in Lower Egypt and founding Memphis—the capital of ancient Egypt during the Old Kingdom—on the reclaimed land. Excavations at Ṣaqqārah, the cemetery for Memphis, revealed that the earliest royal tomb located there belongs to the reign of Aha. Manetho called Menes a Thinite—i.e., a native of the nome (province) of Thinis in Upper Egypt—and, in fact, monuments belonging to the kings Narmer and Aha, either of whom may be Menes, have been excavated at Abydos, a royal cemetery in the Thinite nome. Narmer also appears on a slate palette (a decorated stone on which cosmetics were pulverized) alternately wearing the red and white crowns of Lower and Upper Egypt (see crowns of Egypt), a combination symbolic of unification, and shown triumphant over his enemies. Actually, the whole process probably required several reigns, and the traditional Menes may well represent the kings involved. According to Manetho, Menes reigned for 62 years and was killed by a hippopotamus.

**************************************

Menes: Legends Say He United Egypt Under its First Dynasty … But Did He Even Exist?
by Alicia McDermott
Ancient Greece (ancient-origins.net)
December 21, 2018

Much like the ancient Romans had Romulus and Remus to thank for the foundation of their civilization, so too did the ancient Egyptians have a legendary figure that united the Upper and Lower lands – King Menes. And like the Roman brothers, there is much mythology tied into Menes’ story. Controversy also surrounds the king, with scholars questioning if Menes was his real name, or if he even existed.

He Who Endures

Menes appears in several ancient texts. He is the first human king after the divine and demi-god rulers in the Turin Canon and has the first cartouche in the Abydos King List of Seti I. The Ramesseum Min reliefs also name Menes as the first king of Egypt. It’s worth noting that Menes is, however, absent on a seal listing the first six rulers of the First Dynasty that was found at Umm el-Qaab. In fact, nothing that has been found from the time Menes would have lived names him as a king. One explanation is that kings in the Early Dynastic period were identified by a Horus name, not a private name.


The cartouche of Menes on the Abydos King List. (Olaf Tausch/ CC BY 3.0 )

And Menes was a man of many names; Manetho's Chronology from the 3rd century BC names him as Menes, but two Egyptian 19th dynasty king lists write his name as Meni. The Greek historian Herodotus called him Min and he was Manas to another Greek historian - Diodorus Siculus. Jewish historian Josephus gives him yet another name – Minaios.

Many modern scholars suggest that the name Menes, which means “He Who Endures”, may actually be a reference to Menes being a figure that encompassed all the kings that worked to unify Egypt. But not everyone agrees.


Limestone head of a man thought to be the 1st Dynastic King of Egypt, Menes or Narmer. Egyptologist Flinders Petrie believed it was the latter. (Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin FRCP(Glasg)/CC BY SA 4.0)

Who was King Menes?

There is little that can be said of Menes’ life for certain, however it is generally agreed that if he existed, he was born in either Hierakonpolis (Nekhen) or Thinis and he ruled sometime between about 3000 BC to 3100 BC. Ancient sources also tend to agree that he ruled for more than 60 years.


An ancient Nekhen tomb painting in plaster with barques, staffs, goddesses, and animals - possibly the earliest example. (Francesco Raffaele/ CC BY SA 3.0 )

Apart from those aspects of his life, there are many stories that seem to mix fact with myth. Combine that with a lack of archaeological evidence and it is near impossible to ascertain more details of Menes’ life. This had led some to question if he even was a real historical figure, or if King Menes solely acted as a legendary founding father and hero for ancient Egyptians.

I another theory, as others suggest, Menes was the personification of the Naqada III rulers Ka, Scorpion II and Narmer. Narmer in particular has been singled out as the pharaoh who inspired the story of Menes, or who really was Menes. Aha, possibly Narmer’s son and the second dynastic king, has also been proposed as the true identity of Menes due to the appearance of ‘Mn’ (signifying ‘Menes’) in some ancient Egyptian sources beside the names of both men.


The ivory label mentioning Hor-Aha along with the mn sign. (Public Domain)


Reconstruction of the Narmer-Menes Seal impression from Abydos. (Heagy1/ CC BY SA 4.0)

The well-known Egyptologist Flinders Petrie believed that ‘Menes’ was actually a title, not a personal name, and said Narmer was the first real Egyptian pharaoh. It is true that some of the stories line up. For example, Narmer is also credited with having completed the process of unifying Upper and Lower Egypt. (Although some ancient sources have also credited Aha with this.)

Pharaoh Menes Unifies Egypt

The biggest accomplishment that has been credited to Menes is the unification of Egypt. It has been said that King Menes used both political strategy and force to do so. A possible marriage with a member of the southern royal family has been named as one of the ways he unified Upper and Lower Egypt. And once the lands were joined, policies were put in action to maintain peace and bring order to his realm.

While it sounds great for one king to have managed such an incredible feat, most historians agree that there were probably several rulers who worked over time to eventually reach that goal. Yet the naming of one central figure as having completed the arduous task would have been important to the ancient Egyptians. In this light, Menes acts as a beginning in history for the ancient Egyptians.


The smiting side of the Narmer Palette. ( Public Domain ) Scholars have interpreted this as a representation of the pharaoh conquering Lower Egypt.

Menes’ Other Achievements

Menes has been credited with many other accomplishments in the ancient Egyptian culture, including the introduction of sacrifice and worshipping the gods. It has been said that a ‘Golden Age’ set in after Egypt was unified and that positive period has also been attributed to Menes. For example, Pliny claims Menes introduced papyrus and written script to the ancient Egyptians. And Diodorus Siculus wrote that he was the first Egyptian law-giver. Manetho wrote of Menes as a strong warrior that expanded his kingdom’s borders and then provided a sense of order.

In the Turin Papyrus and also Herodotus’ ‘ History’, Menes is said to have had a dam constructed in the Nile to divert the flow over the land where Memphis lies. He is credited with founding the city and making it luxurious. But a 2012 discovery of a relief describing the visit of a pre-dynastic ruler to Memphis in the early 32nd century BC means that this story is nothing more than a tall tale.


Monuments from the ancient city of Memphis. (Gabriel Indurskis/ CC BY NC 2.0)

Regardless, Memphis as a capital for Egypt was a good choice. The land around it was fertile and its location was strategic. In that city, Menes allegedly taught the residents to live elegant, luxurious lives – ones that included less work and more time for hobbies, and even beautiful cloths covering couches and tables. For many of Menes’ people, life was good, food was plenty, and peace was prevalent.

A Crocodile and a Hippopotamus – The End of a Legend

No article on Menes would be complete without mention of two tales involving the king and iconic ancient Egyptian animals.

In the first, Menes is given credit for founding the city of Crocodilopolis. All because he rode a crocodile to safety when his hunting dogs turned on him. The king decided a city was a suitable way to honor the animal for saving his life.


Crocodiles of various ages mummified in honor of the crocodile god Sobek. The Crocodile Museum, Aswan. (JMCC1/ CC BY SA 3.0)

But it is another well-known Egyptian animal that ended that life. Manetho and others write that Menes was either killed or carried off by a hippopotamus. This was considered one of the worst ways to die in ancient Egypt. His tomb lies in Saqqara – Memphis’ necropolis.


View of Saqqara necropolis, including Djoser's step pyramid (center), the Pyramid of Unas (left) and the Pyramid of Userkaf (right). (Hajor/ CC BY SA 3.0 )

Following the tragic event, Djer, Menes’ son, ascended the throne as an infant and his widowed wife, Queen Neithotepe, acted as regent until the child came of age.

_______________

References

Boddy-Evans, A. (2018) ‘The Story of Menes, the First Pharaoh of Egypt.’ ThoughtCo. Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/who-was-the-f ... gypt-43717

Gill, N.S. (2017) ‘Menes-First King of Egypt.’ ThoughtCo. Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/menes-first-k ... ypt-119800

Heagy, T. ( 2014) ‘Who Was Menes?’ Archéo-Nil 24, pp. 59-92. Available at: https://www.narmer.org/menes

KingtutOne.com (n.d.) ‘Menes the 1st Pharaoh.’ KingtutOne.com. Available at: http://kingtutone.com/pharaohs/menes/

Kinnaer, J. (2014) ‘Menes.’ The Ancient Egyptian Site. Available at: http://www.ancient-egypt.org/who-is-who/m/menes.html

New World Encyclopedia. (2014) ‘Menes.’ New World Encyclopedia. Available at: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Menes

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2018) ‘Menes: King of Egypt.’ Encyclopaedia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Menes

[admin]

The emergence of writing in Egypt
by John D. Ray
World Archaeology
Volume 17 No. 3
©R.K.P. 1986

In Pliny's account, Menes was credited with being the inventor of writing in Egypt.

-- Menes [Mneues] [Mannus] [Manu], by Wikipedia

Abstract

The cultural history of ancient Egypt is markedly different from that of contemporary Mesopotamia, and the adoption of the idea of writing by the Egyptians conforms to a general pattern, which shows the tendency of Egypt to adopt and perfect inventions made elsewhere in the Near East. Theories of a conquering 'dynastic race', which gave rise to Egyptian civilisation, are unnecessary. Hieroglyphs show many of the signs of deliberate invention, probably in association with the royal court, appearing suddenly, and developing rapidly. They are so well suited to the underlying language, one of the Afroasiatic group, that their creation seems to be deliberate. Uniconsonantal, or 'alphabetic', signs are a striking and unique feature of the system, which was essentially complete by 3000 B.C.

Egyptology and Assyriology can be seen as complementary sciences, celestial twins or ugly sisters, depending on the standpoint of the describer. Egyptology is the slightly older sister - if we take the date of the respective decipherments to represent the moments of their birth as disciplines - and both have a similar history of development, liberating themselves slowly from Biblical and classical studies, and gradually finding their own places. Egyptology is also the more romantic and popular of the two, and perhaps the more extrovert; Assyriology compensates for this in the range of material, especially texts, at its disposal, and the growing challenges that it presents to its admirers.

Comparisons between the two disciplines go hand-in-hand with attempts to characterise the two civilisations which gave rise to them, and the best-known example is probably the one which occupies most of Before Philosophy, otherwise known as The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man (Frankfort). Such comparisons are designed to stimulate as much as to illuminate, and it is in the same spirit that we can suggest another, superficial and light-hearted though it has to be: the political, and to some extent the cultural, history of Egypt has several points in common with that of modern France, whereas if we look for a parallel with that of Mesopotamia, we can see things which remind us of modern Germany. The situation of Egypt in the ancient world was relatively secure: her borders were easily defended, except for the vulnerable section in the north-east, and this relative isolation was reinforced by a favourable climate and the ability to support a comparatively large population. Within the country political unity, although by no means constantly achieved in Egyptian history, was fairly easy to maintain and tended to centre upon a royal court with far-reaching powers. Local regionalism existed, and could assume a strong form, but in general the monarchy was able to overcome this, either by force or by inducement. With the rise of this centralised state - the first in history - went a pattern of culture which was essentially imposed from above by the courtly circles; and the strong visual sense, and all-pervading sense of style, as in France, is one of the most noticeable and appealing aspects of ancient Egypt. Egypt, like France, was also an absorber of immigrants, who rapidly adopted Egyptian culture and rose to positions of prominence in the state by virtue of doing so. The price that has to be paid for these advantages is a certain cultural complacency and even a 'superiority complex', which can hamper original perceptions. Egypt's role wasthat of a perfecter of ideas, rather than an inventor; most of the innovations in the ancient Near East come from outside Egypt, but Egypt, once it adopts a new idea, produces a form of it which is often more effective than it was in its original home. Mesopotamia, on the other hand, does have more in common — to attempt a'generalisation - with the experience of Germany: open frontiers leading to frequent invasion and disruption, a less favourable environment for the growth of political unity, and a restiveness which leads to unity being imposed by a more militaristic culture (Assyria). The results are a creativity, caused in part by competition between its constituent areas, and a restless profundity in intellectual life which contrasts with the general performance in the visual arts, which is not on the whole the equivalent of Egypt's. This is no doubt an oversimplified view of the two civilisations, but it does hold true for quite a few areas of activity, and the emergence of writing is arguably one of them.

It is worth qualifying this picture slightly, by reminding ourselves of the limitations of archaeology, especially in the Nile valley. Here excavation, until quite recently, has concentrated on remains which are well-preserved and likely to produce objects of art or major texts - which in effect meant that the main emphasis in Egyptian archaeology was on tombs and similar monuments. Town sites have been relatively unrewarding and unattractive: close mud-brick work, combined with constant infiltration by sub-soil water, often in the midst of a modern urban area, could hardly compete with leisurely epigraphy amid the sands of the desert, especially if a sensational discovery was likely to be had. Egyptology, therefore, has less chance of producing economic and social information than Mesopotamian archaeology, where clay tablets are easily preserved in large numbers. The situation is now changing, but it will be quite some time, if ever, before we can be sure that our conclusions about Egyptian society, especially early Egyptian society, are true and not merely dictated by what the inhabitants of that society chose to take into the next world with them. This familiar fact still has to be borne in mind. It may also be true that our notions of what ancient Egypt was like are distorted by the accident that most of our evidence comes from the south; an Egyptologist, if he could be transported magically into the eastern Delta at most periods of Pharaonic rule, might well decide that he was in a country quite foreign to the land of his imagination.

Prehistoric Egypt is best seen in the recent study by Hoffman (1980). Whatever the situation may have been in the Palaeolithic, Egypt of the fourth millennium does seem to exhibit many of the characteristics of later Egypt: a strong cultural unity (except that the Delta and Upper Egypt are still markedly different), artistic creations of a high standard, and, at least to judge from tomb structures and furnishing, an increasedly stratified society, with a leisured or wealthy class creating a demand for luxuries which involves a considerable section of the population. The tone, at least in Upper Egypt, seems to be aristocratic and agricultural, rather than mercantile. Towards the end of the period, however, in the phase known as Nagada II or Gerzean, change seems to occur at an accelerated pace. The main feature of this transformation, other than general changes in the styles and ranges of artefacts, is the adoption of foreign motifs, in particular Mesopotamian, or in some cases Proto-Elamite. These motifs - the cylinder-seal, artistic devices comprising animals with intertwined necks, fashions in clothing, and even architectural designs such as the 'palace facade' - are undeniable, even if the explanation is hard to find. Mere trade seems an inadequate reason, and some Egyptologists have fallen back on the concept of a full-scale invasion, either by way of Syria-Palestine, or by sea around the coasts of Arabia. Inadequate pathology was often used to bolster up this theory, and the 'dynastic race' was created as a convenient model. But if we bear in mind the cultural generalisations suggested above, and if we adopt more recent explanations of how primitive societies can 'take off into a more sophisticated level of culture, we can probably see that Egypt, on the eve of its emergence as a historical state, was adopting foreign influences in order to assist its own development. Mesopotamian and Elamite motifs were chosen, not because of political events, but because they were the only models which fitted her stage of development: and these models, once adapted, were almost entirely discarded as soon as Egypt had found its self-confidence and identity. The young civilisation needed a prop with which to learn to walk; then it could throw away the prop.

Writing was the most important of these adoptions, and the only one which was not to be thrown aside. At the moment it does look as if writing, or rather the idea of writing, was extraneous to Egypt. In Mesopotamia, we can see the gradual emergence of picturewriting as a form of accounting or similar record-keeping, at a date earlier by a couple of centuries than its appearance, Athena-like, from the head of the Egyptian hierarchy. This at least is the accepted wisdom, and it is likely to be right, although Arnett (1982) has produced an interesting alternative. Arnett has made a study of the motifs and decorative signs found quite frequently on predynastic pottery and other artefacts from Egypt, and concludes that a rudimentary writing-system was in use several centuries before the unification of Egypt into a historical state. This is certainly an original idea, although Petrie (1912) experimented with a parallel notion when trying to trace the origin of the alphabet to potters' marks found on predynastic vessels; but the weakness of this sort of argument is that it is merely an extrapolation from later usages. The later hieroglyph for 'foreign land', for example, does occur on predynastic pottery, but since it is merely a schematised drawing of desert hills, it is impossible to say that the sign means what it is used to mean later. It may, in its early stage, be merely an element of design, and some of the other 'hieroglyphs' detected by Arnett are very difficult to explain in the light of their historical values. The more likely conclusion seems to be at the moment that, throughout the predynastic period, characteristically Egyptian ways of portraying the natural world were slowly developed, and that it was from this 'reserve', or artistic repertoire, that the first hieroglyphs were chosen. The same would apply to symbols for gods, or shrines, or even spiritual concepts such as the ka, represented by arms stretched upwards, which are likely to have existed in Egyptian thinking long before the need to create a formal system of writing (Arnett, Plate 16). There is no reason to believe that the Egyptians took their individual hieroglyphs from any foreign source.

What then did the Egyptians adapt from Mesopotamia, when it came to creating a writing system? The simplest answer is probably the best: they took the idea of writing. There presumably came a point in the development of the Egyptian state when some agency responsible for economic and political matters decided on the need for recording its activities. This agency, given what we know about dynastic, and what we can reasonably extrapolate about predynastic, Egypt was almost certainly a royal court, or possibly the sole royal court if there was a 'Pharaoh' in Gerzean or late-Gerzean Egypt. The inscriptions surviving from the first dynasty, even when allowance is made for the one-sided archaeological record, are almost exclusively concerned with royal administration: major cult activities in which the king almost inevitably played a major part, events in palace ceremonial or in symbolic public works, such as cutting large canals, which would have been used to enhance the position of the sovereign and his entourage. The milieu, therefore, is reasonably clear, but the date and the mechanism of the creation of hieroglyphs are much harder to determine.

An obvious point for the date would be the beginning of the first dynasty. Here, according to Egyptian tradition, Menes of This in Upper Egypt conquered the Delta, unified the country, founded Memphis as his capital, and introduced many of the traits of classical Pharaonic culture; although, interestingly, he is not credited with the invention of hieroglyphs. A minimalist modern interpretation of what happened at the beginning of Egyptian history would be that there was no Menes, the search for him among the historical records is therefore meaningless, and that there was probably no unification either; all that happened was that the Egyptians invented writing and began to record their history systematically. The date for this can be obtained by a combination of astronomical data and dead reckoning from later king-lists such as the Turin canon: 3089 + x B.C., where x is the length of the obscure 'first intermediate period'. Considerable attempts have been made by historians to reduce this figure, but it is rather supported by some of the most recent Carbon-14 calibrations (see most cautiously Shaw 1984). A date of 3100 would not be far wrong, therefore, in which case there is a suitable time-lag behind the Mesopotamian introduction of writing.

The problem, however, is complicated by the known existence of Egyptian kings before Menes. The Palermo Stone, essentially a fifth-dynasty composition (although almost certainly a much later copy), clearly shows, on a separate fragment, the existence of kings wearing the crown of united Egypt well before 'Menes' and the supposed unification. Names of nine kings of Lower Egypt are also preserved, and outlandish they are, at least by later standards; this may be explicable by their Lower Egyptian origin, or more likely some form of oral tradition has been at work, but the very existence of these names must make us cautious (Sethe 1903). More disturbing are the contemporary monuments of kings, principally from the royal cemetery at Abydos but also from elsewhere, with names such as the increasingly attested Ro or Iry, the obscure Ka or Sekhen, and the better-known Scorpion (reading uncertain), who seems to be almost a prototype of Menes in his achievements (Barta 1982). The embarrassment caused by the existence of these kings is reflected in the term 'Dynasty O' which is frequently applied to them. Names of these kings appear clearly on contemporary monuments such as jars, and even the Scorpion macehead, and this leaves us in no doubt that writing existed in Egypt before the first king of Dynasty I. Our date of 3100 must therefore be raised to 3150 or even slightly earlier, and it is always possible that archaeological discovery will upset this picture even more. 'Menes', therefore, was not the inventor of hieroglyphs.

Can we talk about an invention of writing in Egypt at all? Since, as argued above, the only element necessary to set off a chain reaction within protodynastic Egypt was the knowledge that ways to do the things the Egyptians wished to do existed elsewhere, the realisation that in Sumer pictures of material objects were being used in a punning way to express ideas, or other objects which were impossible to draw explicitly, was the only catalyst required; and this was in fact the only element which was borrowed. Kaplony (1966b, 1972a) speaks blithely of an 'inventor' of Egyptian hieroglyphs who did precisely this, and while this is probably an over-simplification, there are certainly indications within the hieroglyphic system that conscious planning has been applied to the script from the very beginning of its employment. It is distinctly possible, therefore, that one mind may have formulated the basic principles. The Egyptians themselves both confirm this, and beg the question, when they ascribe the creation of writing to the god Thoth (compare the anecdote in Plato, Phaedrus, 274c-275b, where the king of Egypt is presented with the new-fangled system by the god but accepts reluctantly, fearing that his subjects would cease to rely on their memories).

SOCRATES: But there is something yet to be said of propriety and impropriety of writing.

PHAEDRUS: Yes.

SOCRATES: Do you know how you can speak or act about rhetoric in a manner which will be acceptable to God?

PHAEDRUS: No, indeed. Do you?

SOCRATES: I have heard a tradition of the ancients, whether true or not they only know; although if we had found the truth ourselves, do you think that we should care much about the opinions of men?

PHAEDRUS: Your question needs no answer; but I wish that you would tell me what you say that you have heard.

SOCRATES: At the Egyptian city of Naucratis, there was a famous old god, whose name was Theuth; the bird which is called the Ibis is sacred to him, and he was the inventor of many arts, such as arithmetic and calculation and geometry and astronomy and draughts and dice, but his great discovery was the use of letters. Now in those days the god Thamus was the king of the whole country of Egypt; and he dwelt in that great city of Upper Egypt which the Hellenes call Egyptian Thebes, and the god himself is called by them Ammon. To him came Theuth and showed his inventions, desiring that the other Egyptians might be allowed to have the benefit of them; he enumerated them, and Thamus enquired about their several uses, and praised some of them and censured others, as he approved or disapproved of them. It would take a long time to repeat all that Thamus said to Theuth in praise or blame of the various arts. But when they came to letters, This, said Theuth, will make the Egyptians wiser and give them better memories; it is a specific both for the memory and for the wit. Thamus replied: O most ingenious Theuth, the parent or inventor of an art is not always the best judge of the utility or inutility of his own inventions to the users of them. And in this instance, you who are the father of letters, from a paternal love of your own children have been led to attribute to them a quality which they cannot have; for this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.

PHAEDRUS: Yes, Socrates, you can easily invent tales of Egypt, or of any other country.

SOCRATES: There was a tradition in the temple of Dodona that oaks first gave prophetic utterances. The men of old, unlike in their simplicity to young philosophy, deemed that if they heard the truth even from 'oak or rock,' it was enough for them; whereas you seem to consider not whether a thing is or is not true, but who the speaker is and from what country the tale comes.

PHAEDRUS: I acknowledge the justice of your rebuke; and I think that the Theban is right in his view about letters.

SOCRATES: He would be a very simple person, and quite a stranger to the oracles of Thamus or Ammon, who should leave in writing or receive in writing any art under the idea that the written word would be intelligible or certain; or who deemed that writing was at all better than knowledge and recollection of the same matters?

PHAEDRUS: That is most true.

SOCRATES: I cannot help feeling, Phaedrus, that writing is unfortunately like painting; for the creations of the painter have the attitude of life, and yet if you ask them a question they preserve a solemn silence. And the same may be said of speeches. You would imagine that they had intelligence, but if you want to know anything and put a question to one of them, the speaker always gives one unvarying answer. And when they have been once written down they are tumbled about anywhere among those who may or may not understand them, and know not to whom they should reply, to whom not: and, if they are maltreated or abused, they have no parent to protect them; and they cannot protect or defend themselves.

PHAEDRUS: That again is most true.

SOCRATES: Is there not another kind of word or speech far better than this, and having far greater power—a son of the same family, but lawfully begotten?

PHAEDRUS: Whom do you mean, and what is his origin?

SOCRATES: I mean an intelligent word graven in the soul of the learner, which can defend itself, and knows when to speak and when to be silent.

PHAEDRUS: You mean the living word of knowledge which has a soul, and of which the written word is properly no more than an image?

SOCRATES: Yes, of course that is what I mean. And now may I be allowed to ask you a question: Would a husbandman, who is a man of sense, take the seeds, which he values and which he wishes to bear fruit, and in sober seriousness plant them during the heat of summer, in some garden of Adonis, that he may rejoice when he sees them in eight days appearing in beauty? at least he would do so, if at all, only for the sake of amusement and pastime. But when he is in earnest he sows in fitting soil, and practises husbandry, and is satisfied if in eight months the seeds which he has sown arrive at perfection?

PHAEDRUS: Yes, Socrates, that will be his way when he is in earnest; he will do the other, as you say, only in play.

SOCRATES: And can we suppose that he who knows the just and good and honourable has less understanding, than the husbandman, about his own seeds?

PHAEDRUS: Certainly not.

SOCRATES: Then he will not seriously incline to 'write' his thoughts 'in water' with pen and ink, sowing words which can neither speak for themselves nor teach the truth adequately to others?

PHAEDRUS: No, that is not likely.

SOCRATES: No, that is not likely—in the garden of letters he will sow and plant, but only for the sake of recreation and amusement; he will write them down as memorials to be treasured against the forgetfulness of old age, by himself, or by any other old man who is treading the same path. He will rejoice in beholding their tender growth; and while others are refreshing their souls with banqueting and the like, this will be the pastime in which his days are spent.

PHAEDRUS: A pastime, Socrates, as noble as the other is ignoble, the pastime of a man who can be amused by serious talk, and can discourse merrily about justice and the like.

SOCRATES: True, Phaedrus. But nobler far is the serious pursuit of the dialectician, who, finding a congenial soul, by the help of science sows and plants therein words which are able to help themselves and him who planted them, and are not unfruitful, but have in them a seed which others brought up in different soils render immortal, making the possessors of it happy to the utmost extent of human happiness.

PHAEDRUS: Far nobler, certainly.

SOCRATES: And now, Phaedrus, having agreed upon the premises we may decide about the conclusion.

PHAEDRUS: About what conclusion?

SOCRATES: About Lysias, whom we censured, and his art of writing, and his discourses, and the rhetorical skill or want of skill which was shown in them—these are the questions which we sought to determine, and they brought us to this point. And I think that we are now pretty well informed about the nature of art and its opposite.

PHAEDRUS: Yes, I think with you; but I wish that you would repeat what was said.

SOCRATES: Until a man knows the truth of the several particulars of which he is writing or speaking, and is able to define them as they are, and having defined them again to divide them until they can be no longer divided, and until in like manner he is able to discern the nature of the soul, and discover the different modes of discourse which are adapted to different natures, and to arrange and dispose them in such a way that the simple form of speech may be addressed to the simpler nature, and the complex and composite to the more complex nature—until he has accomplished all this, he will be unable to handle arguments according to rules of art, as far as their nature allows them to be subjected to art, either for the purpose of teaching or persuading;—such is the view which is implied in the whole preceding argument.

PHAEDRUS: Yes, that was our view, certainly.

SOCRATES: Secondly, as to the censure which was passed on the speaking or writing of discourses, and how they might be rightly or wrongly censured—did not our previous argument show—?

PHAEDRUS: Show what?

SOCRATES: That whether Lysias or any other writer that ever was or will be, whether private man or statesman, proposes laws and so becomes the author of a political treatise, fancying that there is any great certainty and clearness in his performance, the fact of his so writing is only a disgrace to him, whatever men may say. For not to know the nature of justice and injustice, and good and evil, and not to be able to distinguish the dream from the reality, cannot in truth be otherwise than disgraceful to him, even though he have the applause of the whole world.

PHAEDRUS: Certainly.

SOCRATES: But he who thinks that in the written word there is necessarily much which is not serious, and that neither poetry nor prose, spoken or written, is of any great value, if, like the compositions of the rhapsodes, they are only recited in order to be believed, and not with any view to criticism or instruction; and who thinks that even the best of writings are but a reminiscence of what we know, and that only in principles of justice and goodness and nobility taught and communicated orally for the sake of instruction and graven in the soul, which is the true way of writing, is there clearness and perfection and seriousness, and that such principles are a man's own and his legitimate offspring;—being, in the first place, the word which he finds in his own bosom; secondly, the brethren and descendants and relations of his idea which have been duly implanted by him in the souls of others;—and who cares for them and no others—this is the right sort of man; and you and I, Phaedrus, would pray that we may become like him.

PHAEDRUS: That is most assuredly my desire and prayer.

SOCRATES: And now the play is played out; and of rhetoric enough. Go and tell Lysias that to the fountain and school of the Nymphs we went down, and were bidden by them to convey a message to him and to other composers of speeches—to Homer and other writers of poems, whether set to music or not; and to Solon and others who have composed writings in the form of political discourses which they would term laws—to all of them we are to say that if their compositions are based on knowledge of the truth, and they can defend or prove them, when they are put to the test, by spoken arguments, which leave their writings poor in comparison of them, then they are to be called, not only poets, orators, legislators, but are worthy of a higher name, befitting the serious pursuit of their life.

-- Phaedrus, by Plato, translated by Benjamin Jowett

When considering the question of invention, it is also worth looking at one of the distinctions frequently made between the Mesopotamian writing-system and the Egyptian. It is sometimes argued that, because of the largely mercantile character of Sumerian civilisation and the fact that writing in southern Mesopotamia seems to be linked to accounting techniques and economic purposes, writing in Sumer was primarily a form of 'book-keeping', a convenient tool. On the other hand, runs the argument, Egyptian writing was essentially a royal accomplishment, used to commemorate the achievements of the palace and the status of courtiers and the king's relatives; as such it was ceremonial, designed only to record features which were already well-enough known to the ruling elite. Hieroglyphs, on this view of things, would merely be boasting made permanent. There is really no reason, apart from a spurious neatness, for such a clear-cut distinction. Writing is writing, and once the basic principles are established -- which could take little more than a few months -- the uses to which it may be put are already complex, while the flexibility of the Egyptian writing system, and the way that it fits the language for which it was intended, is such that it could be applied immediately to any useful purpose; the difference, after all, between writing 'the royal tutor Mehy' and 'the royal tutor, two sacks of corn' is not very daunting. A similar point has also been made by Kaplony (1966b, 67 n. 36).

A compromise might be suggested here. Since the Egyptians ascribed the invention of their writing system, not to a king, but to a god, and since they consistently maintained this view later, it may be that Egyptian writing was essentially a temple creation, perhaps even, to pursue the idea, an invention by the priests of Thoth at Ashmunein (Hermopolis in middle Egypt), or one of his other cult-centres. This is tempting, since priests are likely to have had both the leisure and the training for abstract speculation, but it leads us into a difficulty. Temples, at most periods of Egyptian history, were essentially government departments, and the 'Church and State' theory of Egyptian society receives very little support from the surviving documents. Temple officials in the archaic period, and therefore probably in the century or so preceding, seem to have been essentially royal appointees, even princes or royal relatives, and the involvement of the royal court is once again seen to be almost inevitable.

Leaving aside this rather inconclusive line, it is also possible, and more promising, to see the influence of an inventor, or group of inventors, in the way in which the Egyptian writing system is applied so successfully to the Egyptian language. This language, at least in its latest phase, that of Coptic, is comparatively well known, and our knowledge of Coptic, combined with intuitive argument and comparisons with related languages, is the basis for our understanding of the earlier phases, especially Late Egyptian, the vernacular from at least 1500 B.C. and a written form of the language from slightly later. Middle Egyptian, the 'classical' form of the language, has many of the characteristics of an artificial, or at least highly literary idiom, and may never have been spoken in the form in which we have it. Our grasp of this phase is correspondingly less, but even this is markedly greater than our knowledge of archaic Egyptian, such as appears in the Pyramid Texts, the earliest connected body of writing in Egyptian, even though surviving only in copies from the fifth and sixth dynasties (see now Allen 1984). But even in this rather unsatisfactory state of affairs, we do know enough to be able to characterise the Egyptian language and try to place it in its context (see in general Kees 1973, Sethe 1935).

Ancient Egyptian is one of the language-family, widespread in North Africa and the Near East, which is traditionally known as Hamito-Semitic, but now increasingly referred to as Afro-asiatic (Hodge 1971). Within this rather diffuse collection, the best known, and the easiest to define, are the Semitic languages. These are a coherent group which range over the Near East and Ethiopia, and include modern Hebrew and Arabic as well as ancient Babylonian (Akkadian) and the almost extinct Aramaic. The relations between these languages are close, as close, mutatis mutandis, as those between the various Romance languages of Europe, and they are characterised by roots, normally composed of three radical consonants, in which the changes of meaning corresponding to our verbs, nouns or participles are normally expressed by varying the vowels according to fixed rules (there are hardly any 'irregularities' in the sense that most European languages exhibit). There are some prefixes, and a series of terminations corresponding to number, gender, and case endings (frequently obsolescent). The existence of some features common to both the Semitic and the Indo-European families of languages is worth some thought: case-endings, the existence of a dual number alongside singular and plural, certain resemblances in numerals and prepositions, aspects in the verb, and above all grammatical gender, which is absent from the remainder of the world's languages. However, if these two groups are related, it must be at a stage so far distant in time that it is now impossible to chart. The other languages of the Afro-asiatic family are confined to Africa, and are sometimes termed 'Hamitic1, although the differences between these are so much greater than is the case with the Semitic languages that the whole group is really questionable. Egyptian, however, does have some links with several Berber languages, but these are distinctly elusive. The links with the Semitic languages, on the other hand, are clear enough, and have even led some authorities to believe that Egyptian is a Semitic language, with some unusual sound-changes. This is rather far-fetched as it stands. Egyptian has a unique series of palatalised consonants on the one hand, and while it does have one tense, the Stative or misleadingly named 'Old Perfective', its verbal system is largely based on nominal roots, which Callender (1975) has interestingly seen as the various case-endings of a verbal noun with appropriate suffixes. It is a pity that no trace of case-endings survives in Egyptian from any period, since Callender's theory is extremely tempting, and rather informative. But the exact status of Egyptian within the Afro-asiatic family is almost impossible to define. An earlier theory, that Egyptian was a mixed language, rather like modern English, with the Semitic-speaking 'dynastic race' filling the role of the Normans, is grammatically extremely unlikely and historically unnecessary. It may be that Egyptian was merely one of a whole series of languages, or dialects, spoken in the areas of the Sahara and 'Arabian' deserts, which disappeared, or coalesced, with the increasing desiccation of these regions after the last pluvial phase. These may have survived as Beduin languages or dialects well into the historical period, but nothing at all is known of them. Nevertheless, their disappearance was responsible for the apparent isolation of Egyptian which is otherwise so puzzling. (Among the unidentified scripts which have been found in Egypt, one from 'Ain Amur between Kharga and Dakhla is certainly interesting (Fakhry 1940, 764 and PI. 96b. It resembles Egyptian demotic, but is not readable as such. A similar oddity appears on the Colossus of Memnon (Bernand 1960, 213 and PI. 54), but these scripts are too late to be of much help for the present purpose.)

Whatever the exact position of Egyptian as a language, the writing system which came into being with such relative speed was ideally suited to it. The characteristics of the hieroglyphic system have been well described by Sethe (1935) and, more recently, Fischer. In Sumerian, pictures were applied to other concepts, less easy to portray literally, which sounded identical, or perhaps similar (the language as preserved to us shows a remarkable number of homophones). Sumerian is not a Semitic language, and indeed has no known cognates, but Egyptian shared the triconsonantal root system of the Afro-asiatic family. One such root, for example, whose consonants are h-t-r, has been well studied by Ste Fare Garnot. Words involving these three consonants are known from later Egyptian, with meanings such as 'twin', 'tax, imposition', 'necessity' and 'horse'; this is puzzling, and the words may be put down as mere coincidences, until the underlying meaning ('yoke') is realised. Similarly another root, n-f-r, means both 'good' and 'final', which are extended meanings from the same idea, much as 'perfect' comes from Latin perfectus 'finished'. In general, there is a clear tendency for all words from a single root to be written with one pictorial sign, or ideogram, apparently chosen from the range of words available from this root. The vowels are apparently ignored for this purpose. Whether the roots were systematically recognised by the Egyptians or not is debatable, but a tendency to group such words together in the mind must have been almost inevitable. This classification in terms of roots, conscious or unconscious, is probably the real meaning of the so-called 'vowellessness' of the Egyptian script. This is completely different from the Sumerian pattern, where true puns are the basis of the signs chosen, and it seems to involve a much greater abstraction, surprising perhaps at such an early date. The absence of vowels is more striking when applied to a language where changes of vowels indicate major shifts in meaning. It is true that the later Semitic alphabets, such as Hebrew and Arabic, also omit vowels, but these alphabets are probably essentially derived - via the so-called proto-Sinaitic script - from the Egyptian writing system anyway, and the principle may have been kept because it made for a convenient semi-shorthand. One explanation sometimes put forward for the Egyptians' ignoring of vowels is particularly unconvincing: dialects may have existed which used differing vowel patterns, as in later Coptic, but it is difficult to imagine that the vowels were ignored in order to avoid confusion or embarrassment. It is simpler to believe that the very structure of the root-system in Egyptian imposed vowellessness when a picture-system was evolved; in most cases there might be only one possible object portrayable for the whole 'family' of words. Vowels were simply irrelevant, rather than ignored. It is probable that cuneiform would also have been vowelless if Semitic-speaking Mesopotamians had invented it.

In addition to triradical ideograms, there are also a fair number of biradical signs, which appear alongside the triradicals. Some so-called biliterals are probably triliterals in disguise; for example, the words, hmt 'wife' and hmt 'maidservant', which look identical in our transliteration, are written with different ideograms. The reason for this is probably not desire for clarity, as Fischer (1977, 1190) supposes, but the fact that Coptic shows that the word for 'wife', hiome, was formed from a triradical root, hym. (For the reconstruction of such forms see among others Fecht, 1960.)

This system is obviously a clear step towards writing, but it still lacks precision; how is a picture being used in any particular context? The definition is supplied by the other feature of the Egyptian script, the existence of uniconsonantal signs. This is something not found in Mesopotamian writing, and again has the hallmark of being a deliberate invention. A naive view might be to decide that uniconsonantal signs are a later stage of the script's development, derived either from worn-down biliterals or from increasing abstraction and sophistication. But uniconsonantals are present from the beginning, and are used either to 'anchor' the ideograms to specific values and meanings, or to add grammatical or other elements which by definition cannot be present in the ideograms themselves. The origin of these uniconsonantals, or 'alphabetic' signs, is far from clear. The obvious explanation is acrophony - the 'A is for apple' principle, a system which seems to lie behind the proto-Sinaitic script. This is far from convincing, however. More likely is Kaplony's explanation (1966, 1973a) that uniconsonantal signs were derived from, and on occasions could even stand for, words in which the key consonant was the most characteristic, and where the other consonants were weak (semi-vowels or the feminine ending -t, which was regarded as extraneous and which may have ceased to be pronounced at an extremely early date). Thus the hieroglyph 'high ground' (kyt, pronounced something like *kdyat) became k, that for 'cobra' (possibly \v3dyt or *wadjdyai) became dj, and so on. Unfortunately not all uniconsonantal signs can be pinned down in this way, but the idea is certainly suggestive.

The uniconsonantal signs are not merely a remarkable abstraction, but they are also convenient in the extreme. With them the complexity of a pictographic script is cut down to manageable proportions (while 2500 signs exist in the corpus, the beginner can make considerable progress if he knows 250). Since the signs are pictorial, they are much easier to memorise than Mesopotamian signs, which rapidly developed into abstract patterns. The reason why hieroglyphs did not become the standard script of the Near East, rather than the more difficult cuneiform, must be cultural rather than a question of convenience. The 'alphabetic' signs are genuinely such; the attempt by Gelb (1963) to see in them a sort of 'vowelless syllabary' runs contrary to most of what we know about their use.

Archaic hieroglyphs -- for we are now in the first two dynasties -- show almost all the characteristics of the later system (see the convenient tabulation by de Cenival 1982, 61-2); the test of this is that they can, after a certain culture-shock, be read by a student of classical Egyptian. As the system develops, determinatives (signs which are not read, but indicate the class of object to which the word belongs) are introduced more frequently, although they too are present in the system from its inception. This is equally a feature of Mesopotamian writing (although some cuneiform determinatives begin the word, all Egyptian ones end it, and act as a rudimentary form of word-divider). The system of ideograms, displaced ideograms (determinatives), and phonetic signs may sound cumbersome, but it can be mastered fairly quickly and successfully. Certainly when Egyptian is found written in an alphabetic script, as in Hellenistic and Roman texts where the Greek alphabet is applied to the language, the result, perversely enough, is extremely difficult to follow, and the advantages of the native script become clear. This in itself, rather than cliches about Oriental conservatism, helps to explain why the Egyptians never took their alphabetic scheme to what to us would seem to be the obvious conclusion - writing with an alphabet.(The difficulties which even an alphabetic script can entail are shown well by Levine (1964), who republishes an Aramaic ostracon in which every important word has been re-translated; the text then becomes an account of "a dream instead of a discussion about vegetables. This could not happen in hieroglyphs.)

The corpus of archaic inscriptions from Egypt, on cylinder seals, jar-labels, funerary monuments and sherds, has been published by Kaplony (1963 and 1966a). Cursive tendencies are already apparent in ink inscriptions on stone vases, even from the so-called 'Dynasty O'. In the tomb of Hemaka, a high functionary of the reign of king Den (c. 3000 B.C.) there was found a flattened roll of papyrus (Emery 1938, 41; Cerny 1952, 11). Unfortunately it was blank; but papyrus did not remain unused for long, and the civilisation of ancient Egypt was already set on its rare and beautiful course.

16.vii. 1985

University of Cambridge

_______________

References

Allen, J. P. 1984. The inflection of the verb in the Pyramid Texts. Malibu.
Arnett, W. S. 1982. The predynastic origin of Egyptian hieroglyphs. Washington (University Press of America).
Barta, W. 1982. Zur Namenform und zeitlichen Anordnung des Königs "Ro". Göttinger Miszellen 53: 11-13.
Bernand, A. and E. 1960. Les incriptions grecques et latines du colosse de Memnon. Cairo. Callender, J. B. 1975. Middle Egyptian. Malibu.
Cerny, J. 1952. Paper and books in Ancient Egypt. London: University College.
de Cenival, J.-L. 1982. La naissance de l'écriture. In Naissance de l'écriture, Catalogue, Galeries nationales du Grand Palais 7 mai - 9 août 1982, pp. 61-2. Paris.
Emery, W. B. 1938. The Tomb of Hemaka. Cairo.
Fakhry, A. 1940. A Roman temple between Kharga and Dakhla. Annales du Service 40: 763-8.
Fecht, G. 1960. Wortakzent und Silbenstruktur. Glückstadt, Hamburg and New York.
Fischer, H. G. 1977. Hieroglyphen. In Lexikon der Ägyptologie II, pp. 1189-99. Wiesbaden.
Frankfort, H. et al. 1946. The intellectual adventure of Ancient Man. Chicago.
Gelb, I. J. 1963. A study of writing. Revised edn. Chicago.
Hodge, C. T. 1971. Afroasiatic: a survey. The Hague and Paris.
Hoffman, M. A. 1980. Egypt before the Pharaohs. London (Routledge & Kegan Paul).
Kaplony, P. 1963. Die Inschriften der ägyptischen Frühzeit. 3 vols. Wiesbaden.
Kaplony, P. 1966a. Kleine Beiträge zu den Inschriften der ägyptischen Frühzeit. Wiesbaden.
Kaplony, P. 1966b. Strukturprobleme der Hieroglyphenschrift. Chronique d'Egypte 41: 60-99.
Kaplony, P. 1972a. Die Prinzipen der Hieroglyphenschrift. In Textes et langages de l'Egypte pharaonique I, pp. 3-4. Cairo.
Kaplony, P. 1972b. Die ältesten Texte. In op. cit. II, pp. 3-13.
Kees, H. et al. 1973. Ägyptische Schrift und Sprache. Leiden.
Levine, B. A. 1964. Notes on an Aramaic dream text from Egypt. Journal of the American Oriental Society 64: 18-22.
Petrie, W. M. F. 1912. The formation of the alphabet. London (Quaritch).
Ste Fare Garnot, J. 1959. Sur le rôle du vocalisme en ancien égyptien et en copte. Bull, de l'Institut français d'archéologie orientate du Caire 58: 39-47.
Sethe; K. 1903. Beiträge zur ältesten Geschichte Ägyptens. Leipzig.
Sethe, K. 1935. Das hieroglyphische Schriftsystem. Glückstadt and Hamburg.
Shaw, I. M. E. 1984. The Egyptian archaic period: a reappraisal of the C-14 dates (1). Göttinger Miszellen 78: 79-85.
 

[admin]

Aliah University [Mohammedan College of Calcutta] [Calcutta Mohammedan College] [Aliah Madrasha] [Calcutta Madrasha/Calcutta Madrassa] [Islamic College of Calcutta] [Madrasah-e-Aliah.]
by Wikipedia

Fort William College, Calcutta (variant College of Fort William) (1800 - 1854) was an academy of Oriental studies and a centre of learning. Founded on 10 July 1800, within the Fort William complex in Calcutta by Lord Wellesley, then Governor-General of British India. The statute of foundation was passed on 4 May 1800, to commemorate the first anniversary of the victory over Tipu Sultan at Seringapatam. Thousands of books were translated from Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, Bengali, Hindi, and Urdu into English at this institution. This college also promoted the printing and publishing of Urdu books.

Fort William College aimed at training British officials in Indian languages and, in the process, fostered the development of languages such as Bengali and Urdu. The period is of historical importance. In 1815, Ram Mohan Roy settled in Calcutta. It is considered by many historians to be the starting point of the Bengali Renaissance. Establishment of The Calcutta Madrassa in 1781, the Asiatic Society in 1784 and the Fort William College in 1800, completed the first phase of Kolkata’s emergence as an intellectual centre.

Teaching of Asian languages dominated: Arabic, Urdu, Persian, Sanskrit, Bengali. Later, Marathi and even Chinese were added. Each department of the college was staffed by notable scholars. The Persian department was headed by Neil B. Edmonstone, Persian translator to the East India Company's government since 1794. His assistant teacher was John H. Harington, a judge of Sadar Diwani Adalat and Francis Gladwin, a soldier diplomat. For Arabic studies, there was Lt. John Baillie, a noted Arabist. The Urdu department was entrusted to John Borthwick Gilchrist, an Indologist of great repute. Henry Thomas Colebrooke, the famous orientalist, was head of the Sanskrit department. William Carey, a non-civilian missionary and a specialist in many Indian languages, was selected to head the department of vernacular languages. While notable scholars were identified and appointed for different languages, there was no suitable person in Calcutta who could be appointed to teach Bengali. In those days, the Brahmin scholars learnt only Sanskrit, considered to be the language of the gods, and they did not study Bengali. The authorities decided to appoint Carey, who was with the Baptist Mission in Serampore. He, in turn, appointed Mrityunjoy Vidyalankar as head pandit, Ramnath Bachaspati as second pandit and Ramram Basu as one of the assistant pandits.

Along with teaching, translations were organized. The college employed more than one hundred local linguists. There were no textbooks available in Bengali. On 23 April 1789, the Calcutta Gazette published the humble request of several natives of Bengal for a Bengali grammar and dictionary.

-- Fort William College [East India College Calcutta], by Wikipedia

The Making of an Ur-Text

One can imagine how delighted Holwell must have been to find such stunning similarities between the description of India's ancient religious texts and Ilive's vision. But the doctrines that had been translated or summarized from old texts by the likes of Roger, Baldaeus, and the Catholic missionaries showed little similarity with this. All of it seemed "very defective, fallacious, and unsatisfactory" to Holwell, in fact, no more than "unconnected scraps and bits, picked up here and there by hearsay" from ignorant Hindoos rather than solid "literal translations" (Holwell1765:I.5-6). Hence the need to "rescue" this distant nation "from the gross conceptions entertained of them by the multitude" (p. 9) and "to vindicate them" by "a simple display of their primitive theology" (Holwell 1767: Dedication). Disgusted by all these misunderstandings and misrepresentations (1767.2:4), converted by Ilive's theory of delinquent angels, and possibly already fascinated by Ramsay's vision of Ur-tradition, Holwell collected materials about the Gentoo religion and "on his departure from Bengal in the year 1750 imagined himself well informed in the Gentoo religion" about which he had learned through "conversations with the Bramins of those Bhades who were near" (pp. 63-64). He had already thought of writing a book about this but did not find the time (p. 64). Given the fact that he already had such a plan, it is likely that during his stays in Europe he also collected relevant Western literature about India and its religions. If he was not already acquainted with Ramsay and Couto before, he must have studied them after his return to India in 1751 and as a result gained a rather precise idea of what he was looking for. If Holwell was trying to find the Vedas, he was not alone; but Couto's description of the first Veda, which seemed so similar to Ilive's ideas, certainly brought more motivation and focus to his search. He knew that he was looking for an extremely ancient scripture treating of God, the creation Story, angels and their fall, the immortality of souls, the purification of delinquent angels in human bodies, transmigration, the punishment of evil and reward of good, and remission and salvation.

What could happen when a wealthy foreigner was trying to locate such information in old Indian texts is exemplified by the case of Francis WILFORD (1761?-1822), a respected member of the Asiatic Society of Bengal who lived in India four decades after the sack of Calcutta rang in the British Empire. Unlike Holwell, Wilford had studied Sanskrit. He was intent on proving on the basis of Indian texts that India and Egypt had from ancient times been in close contact and that their religions came from a common source. Since that source was, of course, ultimately Noah's ark, Wilford had Indian assistants look for a precise set of topics: the deluge, the name of Noah and his sons, and so forth. Like Holwell some decades before him, Wilford had to tell a learned Indian what he was looking for "as a clue to guide him," and for several years he faithfully translated what this Indian guru gave him. But suddenly he detected that he had fallen victim to fraud:

In order to avoid the trouble of consulting books, he conceived the idea of framing legends from what he recollected from the Puranas, and from what he had picked up in conversation with me. As he was exceedingly well read in the Puranas, and other similar books ... it was an easy task for him; and he studied to introduce as much truth as he could, to obviate the danger of immediate detection .... His forgeries were of three kinds; in the first there was only a word or two altered; in the second were such legends as had undergone a more material alteration; and in the third all those which he had written from memory. (Wilford 1805:251)

The output of this Indian expert was quite astonishing, and the most famous example shows what good remuneration, a sense of what the customer is looking for, and skill in composition can achieve. The learned Indian composed a story "which in nine Sanskrit verses ... reprises the story of Noah, his three sons, and the curse of Ham" and convinced no less a man than William Jones that Noah and his three sons figured in genuine Indian Puranas (Trautmann 1997:90-91). Wilford described how his Indian teacher proceeded in this case:

It is a legend of the greatest importance, and said to be extracted from the Padma. It contains the history of NOAH and his three sons, and is written in a masterly style. But unfortunately there is not a word of it to be found in that Purana. It is, however, mentioned, though in less explicit terms, in many Puranas, and the pandit took particular care in pointing out to the several passages which confirmed, more or less, this interesting legend. Of these I took little notice, as his extract appeared more explicit and satisfactory. (Wilford 1805:254)

Since Wilford had told his pandit exactly what he was looking for, the forger produced an ingenious narrative that presented elements of the story of Noah and his sons in an Indian dress and included some surprising details such as "the legend about the intoxication of NOAH" which, as Wilford now realized, "is from what my pandit picked up in conversation with me" (p. 254). In all, this man "composed no less than 12,000 brand new Puranic slokas -- about half the length of the Ramayana! -- and inserted them into manuscripts of the Skanda and Brahmanda Purana" (Trautmann 1997:92). This was a fraud committed on a man who was far more learned than Holwell; the texts were in Sanskrit, not Hindi; and the source texts could be verified.

In Holwell's case, there is always the possibility that his description of Veda content led some knowledgeable Indian to the very texts that Azevedo had used for the description that Couto plagiarized and Roger and others then used. Caland (1918:49-50) concluded on the basis of the book titles mentioned by Couto that these texts were Saivite Agamas; but an able Indologist would need to substantiate this not just by titles but by contents. While it is possible that similar texts in Hindi were sold to Holwell, I think that the likelihood of a fraud is greater. If Holwell, ready as he was to spend almost any amount of money on this text after the 1756 loss, could not manage to recuperate more than a few fragments -- or, more likely, nothing at all -- one would think that the people who sold it to him in the first place had produced only two slightly different manuscripts and, having sold them to Holwell, were in no position to repeat that feat. If Holwell's text had been available to various people, then someone would probably have sold it to him, especially given the fact that for a while he was governor of Bengal and certainly did not lack the means to get what he wanted.

But who could have forged such a text? Since Holwell remarked that members of the tribe of writers "are often better versed in the doctrines of their Shastah than the common run of the Bramin themselves" (Holwell 1767:2.21) and that "a few others of the tribe of the Batteezaaz Bramins ... can read and expound from the Chatah Bhade [Text II], which still preserved the text of the original [Text I)" (p. 15), the culprit(s) might have come from either or both of these groups.

-- The Birth of Orientalism, by Urs App

Aliah University
Motto: Advancement of Education and culture
Type: Public
Established: 1780; 243 years ago as Calcutta Mohammedan College/Aliah Madrasha/Calcutta Madrasha/Calcutta Madrassa
2007; 16 years ago as Aliah University
Academic affiliation: UGC[1]AICTE[2]INCNCTE
Budget: ₹162.6506 crore (US$20 million) (2021–22 est.)[3]
Chancellor: Governor of West Bengal
Vice-Chancellor: Abu Taher Kamruddin[4]
Academic staff: 211 (2022)[5]
Students: 6,366 (2022)[5]
Undergraduates: 3,548 (2022)[5]
Postgraduates: 2,426 (2022)[5]
Doctoral students: 392 (2022)[5]
Address: Action Area ll-A, 27, New Town, West Bengal, 700160, India
22°35′22″N 88°29′07″ECoordinates: 22°35′22″N 88°29′07″E
Campus: Urban
Website: aliah.ac.in

Aliah University (AU; Urdu: جامعہ عالیہ) is a state government controlled autonomous university in New Town, West Bengal, India. Previously known as Mohammedan College of Calcutta,[circular reference][6] it was elevated to university in 2008.[7] It offers undergraduate and postgraduate programs in different Engineering, Arts, Science, Management and Nursing subjects.

History

The Aliah University (AU) is one of the oldest modern-style educational institutes in Asia, and first in India. It was set up in October 1780 by Warren Hastings, the British Governor general of East India Company near Sealdah in Calcutta.[8] A number of titles were used for it, such as Islamic College of Calcutta, Calcutta Madrasah, Calcutta Mohammedan College and Madrasah-e-Aliah. Of these, Calcutta Mohammedan College was that used by Warren Hastings.[8]

The original building was completed in 1782 at Bow Bazaar (near Sealdah). The college moved to its campus on Wellesley Square in the 1820s. Initially it taught natural philosophy, Arabic, Persian, theology and Islamic Law, astronomy, Grammar, logic, arithmetic, geometry, rhetoric and oratory.[9] The Calcutta Madrasa [Calcutta Madrassa] followed different models for different subjects, like Dars-i Nizami of Firingi Mahal for Persian and Arabic, and the old Peripatetic School Model for the Logic and Philosophy.[10]

The first head preceptor of the college was Mulla Majduddin, a well-known personality and erudite in the Islamic learning of that time in Bengal.

Majd ad-Dīn al-Madanī (Arabic: مجد الدین المدنی; d. 1813), also known as Madan Shāhjahānpūrī (Arabic: مدن شاہجہانپوری), was an 18th-century Indian Muslim theologian. He served as the first principal of the Calcutta Madrasa, the first Alia Madrasa of Bengal.

Early life and education

Majduddin was born in the 18th-century to Tahir al-Husayni in Shahjahanpur, greater Bareilly, North India. He studied under Shaykh Wahhaj ad-Din in Gopamau, Hardoi, who was also the teacher of Muhammad Salih Bengali. It is also said that Majduddin was a student of Qazi Mubarak, as well as being a senior student of Shah Waliullah Dehlawi, the erstwhile Imam al-Hind. In addition to Islamic jurisprudence, Majduddin was trained in rhetoric and logic.

Career

In the last quarter of the 18th century, British administrators realised that it was essential to learn the various religious, social, and legal customs and precedents of the subcontinent in order to better manage its administration. As part of this initiative, Warren Hastings, the inaugural Governor-General of the Presidency of Fort William, founded the Calcutta Mohammedan College in October 1780. Mullah Majduddin visited Calcutta in September, where he had a large following. On 21 September, several Muslims requested Hastings to use his influence to employ Majduddin as a teacher at the madrasa. Thus, Majduddin became the madrasa's first Head Preceptor, serving that role for roughly a decade. He is often credited for introducing the Dars-i Nizami, a popular Islamic curriculum of North India, to Bengal and neighbouring lands, although students of Nizamuddin Sihalivi had reached Bengal, such as Abdul Ali Bahrul Ulum (teacher of Ghulam Mustafa Burdwani). He formulated the syllabus of the madrasa. Alongside fundamental Islamic teachings and jurisprudence, he also included the teaching of mathematics, logic and philosophy. The activities of the Madrasa-i-Alia were undertaken in his own home for the first seven months. During this time, he received a monthly wage of 300 takas as the madrasa's principal.

In 1791, Majduddin was removed following an investigation conspired by the British Collector of 24 Parganas accusing him of alleged mismanagement. Following his dismissal from Calcutta, Majduddin found employment as the Qadi of Lucknow, under the Nawab of Awadh Saadat Ali Khan II. However, under political circumstances, he left this career and returned to Bareilly, where he began teaching Islamic jurisprudence at the Dargah of Hafizul Mulk. One of his notable students of Bareilly was Salamat Ullah Kashfi. Majduddin died in 1813.

-- Majduddin [Majd ad-Dīn al-Madanī] [Madan Shāhjahānpūrī], by Wikipedia

In 1791, he was replaced by Muhammad Ismail because of allegations of mismanagement. Captain Ayron, a British army officer, was appointed in 1819 as the first secretary by the East India Company, to take control of the administration of the Madrasa, and he was in that position until 1842. Ayron made several reforms: the first annual examination of the madrasah was held on 15 August 1827, and the first medical class of India was instituted in 1826 under Peter Breton, the professor of medicine. After 10 years of medical classes, the administration of the Madrasa decided to establish the separate Calcutta Medical College in 1836. The Madrasah students could still study medical subjects at the Calcutta Medical College. Introduction of elementary English courses was also started in college in 1826 under his administration but this English course was not to get huge success. Nawab Abdul Latif and Waheedunnabi were the first English scholars from this college. Dr. Aloys Sprenger was appointed as a Principal for the first time in 1850 to resist the college from a current of continuing deterioration. In 1854, another reform attempt consisting of opening the Anglo-Persian department to make English as an official language under the direct control of Calcutta Madrasah College. The college failed to create enthusiasm. FA level college classes added to the Calcutta Madrasa in 1863, this reform also failed. After the Dr. Aloys Sprenger, few other European Principals was appointed and AH Harley [1910-11] was the last European Principals of this Madrasa. One by one failure of the reforms of Madras and after 1857, the year of the Sepoy Mutiny, the British Government started to see the Muslim community of the Bengal as constant suspicion. Lord Macaulay was a British Whig politician and historian, who advised the British Government to introduce English education to produce to Anglicized Indians. The main aim of this was to extend the British influence into vast areas of India. Then British Government was decided to establish the Calcutta University in 1857.[8] After the establishment of the Calcutta University created a precarious position for the Calcutta Madrasah. There were a number of proposals for closure to Calcutta university to British Authority in India, but the Authority allowed it to continue to function with only a traditional Madrasah teaching Arabic and Sharia Laws. Thus from the year 1857, the Calcutta Madrasa grew up as a separate stream in the education system of the Indian subcontinent. Shamsul Ulema Kamaluddin Ahmed was appointed as the first Indian principal of the Calcutta Madrasah College in 1927. In this same year, the first madrasah education board was established (called Board of Central Madrasah Examinations) for the conducting various examinations the Alim, Fazil, Kamil and Mumtazul Muhaddesin. The year of 1947 in which portion of India took place was very painful in the history of the Calcutta Madras in Bengal. All moveable properties like large numbers manuscripts and books were transferred to East Bengal (Now Bangladesh) at Dhaka madrasah and other things became topsy-turvy. Later in 1949 with help of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the Calcutta Madrasah was reopened. Now the Calcutta Madrasah was elevated to the university as the Aliah University under West Bengal state government controlled minority autonomous university in 2008. The newly set up buildings of Aliah University are located in Taltala, Park Circus and New Town in Kolkata. The New Town campus is used for Science, technology students and the main office while the Park circus campus and Taltala campus Nursing and Arts students, and the Islamic Theology students. Now this university offers undergraduate, postgraduate and Doctorates programs in different Arts, Science, Management, Engineering, Nursing and Islamic theology subjects.

Campus

Aliah University has three campuses for different types of curriculum located at New Town,[11] Park Circus and Taltala.

Chief minister Mamata Banerjee of West Bengal laid the foundation stone of 'Aliah University Campus' at New Town on 15 December 2011.[12] Later on 11 November 2014 Mamata Banerjee inaugurated the finished campus. New Town campus contains 156 class rooms with a capacity of 12,000 students and houses Science and Technology students only. The campus also has separate boy's and girl's hostel. New Town campus also has three annexure buildings dedicated to various laboratories and a central library.

The Park circus campus is used to house Arts & Nursing students, while the Taltala campus houses the Islamic Theology students and the main office.

Academics

Admission

Admission to most undergraduate and postgraduate courses in Aliah University is granted through written entrance examinations and for B.Tech. programs through WBJEE. Admission to M.S. and PhD programmes is based on a written test and a personal interview.

Admission to undergraduate programmes is based on merit rank of the "Aliah University Admission Test" (AUAT), which consists of a written examination of "Multiple Choice Type Questions" (MCQ), clearing of which leads to an interview and final selection of the candidate. Candidates who qualify for admission through AUAT can apply for admission to LLM. ( Masters of Law ), B.Tech. (Bachelor of Technology), Integrated MBA (Master of Business Administration), MCA (Master of Computer Applications), M.Sc. (Master of Science) and M.A (Master of Arts) courses in different Engineering, Business, Science and Arts subjects.[13] Aliah University has also M.Tech. (Master of Technology) program.

Accreditation

The University Grants Commission (U.G.C.) accorded recognition to the university in terms of Section 12B of the U.G.C. Act, in 2019.[14]

University library

Aliah University has three libraries in its three different campuses. All of them, the library of New Town Campus has a central library including 1.33 lac books.

Aliah University has a library rich in collection of literature in Islamic Theology, Islamic Jurisprudence & Law, and Arabic.

The library is now diversifying in the areas of Science, Engineering, Management Science, Humanities and Social Sciences.

Controversy and criticism

In 2016, a series of protests by the students of the university took place on the main campus (New Town) against the disordering principle of the then vice chancellor, Prof. Dr. Abu Taleb Khan; because students were experiencing lack of books in library, lack of faculty, bad condition of lab etc. from the beginning of the university. The protest began on 8 November 2016. On 18 November 2016, students insulted their VC Prof. Abu Taleb Khan giving a black rose to him. They blockaded the main gates of the university and the students made a loud slogan. With the help of police and security guards of the university, the VC entered in his office.[15][16]

Students were requested by the EC members, Fact Finding Committee and also the Minority and Madrasah Education Minister Giasuddin Molla to stop the protest and class boycotts. But students said they will continue to boycott classes until the vice chancellor resigns.[17]

Notable people

Alumni

• Ismail Alam, teacher, poet and activist of the Khilafat Movement
• Syed Ameer Ali, jurist
• Shamsul Haque Faridpuri, educationist, and social reformer
• Syed Ahmad Hashmi, General Secretary of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind
• Mohammad Akram Khan, Bengali journalist
• Nawab Abdul Latif, educator and social worker in Bengal
• Sayeed Mohammed, Freedom Fighters and philanthropist
• Bhudev Mukhopadhyay, writer and intellectual in 19th century Bengal
• Shawkat Osman, novelist and short story writer
• Muhammad Qudrat-i-Khuda, organic chemist, educationist and writer
• Azangachhi Shaheb, Indian Sufi Saint
• Nawsad Siddique, member of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly
• Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, Prime Minister of Bengal and a lawyer
• Ibrahim Suhrawardy, Indian educationist, author and linguist
• Ubaidullah Al Ubaidi Suhrawardy, educationist and writer

Faculty

• Abu Nasr Waheed, Islamic scholar[18]

See also

• List of oldest universities in continuous operation
• University of Calcutta
• Colleges and institutes in India
• List of universities in India
• University Grants Commission (India)
• Education in India
• Ministry of Human Resource Development (India)

References

1. "UGC Section 22 of UGC Act" (PDF). University Grants Commission (India). 23 October 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2021.
2. "AICTE Extension of Approval for the Academic Year 2020-21" (PDF). AICTE. 9 June 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2021.
3. "Detailed Demands For Grants For 2021-22" (PDF). 5 February 2021. Retrieved 6 February 2021.
4. "Aliah University". UGC Official Website. Retrieved 12 January 2013.
5. "NIRF 2022" (PDF). Aliah University.
6. "Puronokolkata". 7 January 2014.
7. "University Grants Commination".
8. "The Madrasah University".
9. "A historic institution falls on bad days".
10. Khan, B.R. (2012). "Calcutta Madrasa, The". In Islam, Sirajul; Miah, Sajahan; Khanam, Mahfuza; Ahmed, Sabbir (eds.). Banglapedia: the National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh (Online ed.). Dhaka, Bangladesh: Banglapedia Trust, Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. ISBN 984-32-0576-6. OCLC 52727562. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
11. "Grand Inauguration of Aliah University". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 25 December 2018. Retrieved 11 November 2014.
12. "CM lays foundation of Aliah varsity campus at Rajarhat". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 17 June 2013. Retrieved 14 January 2013.
13. "Aliah University, India". Study Abroad Universities. Retrieved 12 January 2013.
14. "Proposal for 12-B Status" (PDF). University Grants Commission (India). 19 February 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 September 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2021.
15. "একাধিক দাবিতে 'কালা দিবস' পালন আলিয়া বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ে". TDN Bangla. Retrieved 18 November 2016.
16. "এবার দাবি আদায়ে 'নফল রোজা' করতে চলেছে আলিয়া বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের ছাত্রছাত্রীরা". TDN Bangla. Retrieved 21 November 2016.
17. "উপাচার্যের পদত্যাগের দাবিতে বিক্ষোভে বেসামাল আলিয়া". ইনকিলাব. Archived from the original on 16 November 2016. Retrieved 13 November 2016.
18. "Shamsul 'Ulema, Abu Nasar Waheed". Banglapedia.

External links

• Official website

[admin]

Rajabali (1808)
Excerpt from "The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories"
by Partha Chatterjee
Edited by Sherry B. Ortner, Nicholas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

A PURANIC HISTORY

The first three books of narrative prose in Bengali commissioned by the Fort William College in Calcutta for use by young Company officials learning the local vernacular were books of history. Of these, Rajabali (1808) by Mrityunjay Vidyalankar was a history of India—the first history of India in the Bengali language that we have in print.7 Mrityunjay (ca. 1762-1819) taught Sanskrit at Fort William College and was the author of some of the first printed books in Bengali. When he decided to set down in writing the story of "the Rajas and Badshahs and Nawabs who have occupied the throne in Delhi and Bengal," he did not need to undertake any fresh "research" into the subject; he was only writing down an account that was in circulation at the time among the Brahman literati and their landowning patrons.8 His book was; we might say, a good example of the historical memory of elite Bengali society as exemplified in contemporary scholarship.

The book starts with a precise reckoning of the time at which it is being written.

In course of the circular motion of time, like the hands of a clock, passing through the thirty kalpa such as Pitrkalpa etc., we are now situated in the Svetavaraha kalpa. Each kalpa consists of fourteen manu; accordingly, we are now in the seventh manu of Svetavaraha kalpa called Valvasvata. Each manu consists of 284 yuga; we are now passing through the one hundred and twelfth yuga of Vaivasvata manu called Kaliyuga. This yuga consists of 432,000 years. Of these, up to the present year 1726 of the Saka era, 4,905 years have passed; 427,095 years are left. (R, pp. 3-4)

The calendrical system is also precisely noted. For the first 3,044 years of Kaliyuga, the prevailing era (saka) was that of King Yudhisthira. The next 135 years comprised the era of King Vikramaditya. These two eras are now past.

Now we are passing through the era of the King called Salivahana who lived on the southern banks of the river Narmada. This saka will last for 18,000 years after the end of the Vikramaditya era. After this there will be a king called Vijayabhinandana who will rule in the region of the Citrakuta mountains. His saka will last for 10,000 years after the end of the Salivahana era.

After this there will be a king called Parinagarjuna whose era will last until 821 years are left in the Kaliyuga, at which time will be born in the family of Gautabrahmana in the Sambhala country an avatara of Kalkideva. Accordingly, of the six eras named after six kings, two are past, one is present and three are in the future. (R, p. 8)

Whatever one might say of this system of chronology, lack of certitude is not one of its faults.

Mrityunjay is equally certain about identifying the geographical space where the historical events in his narrative take place.

Of the five elements—space [akasa], air, fire, water and earth—the earth occupies eight ana [half] while the other four occupy two ana [one-eighth] each.... Half of the earth is taken up by the seas, north of which is Jambudvipa.... There are seven islands on earth of which ours is called Jambudvipa. Jambudvipa is divided into nine varsa of which Bharatavarsa is one. Bharatavarsa in turn is divided into nine parts [khaifda] which are called Aindra, Kaseru, Tamraparna, Gavastimata, Naga, Saumya, Varuna, Gandharva and Kumarika. Of these, the part in which the varnasrama [caste] system exists is the Kumarikakhanda. The other parts [of Bharatavarsa] are inhabited by the antyaja people [those outside caste]. (R, pp. 4-6)

Thus Rajabali is the history of those who ruled over the earth, in which there are seven islands, of which the one called Jambudvipa has nine parts, of which Bharatavarsa is one, and so forth, and so on.

Where does this history begin?

In the Satyayuga, the Supreme Lord [paramesvara] had planted in the form of an Asvathva tree a king called Iksaku to rule over the earth. The two main branches of this tree became the Surya and the Candra vanisa. The kings born in these two lineages have ruled the earth in the four yuga. Of these, some were able to acquire the greatest powers of dharma and thus ruled over the entire earth consisting of the seven islands. Others had lesser powers and thus ruled over only Jambudvipa or only Bharatavarsa or, in some cases, only the Kumarikakhanda. If a king from one lineage became the emperor [samrata], then the king of the other lineage would become the lord of a mandala. The accounts of these kings are recorded in the branches of knowledge [sastra] called the Purana and the Itihasa. (R, pp. 6-7)

A few things may be clarified at this point. In Mrityunjay's scheme of history, the rulers on earth are, as it were, appointed by divine will. They enjoy that position to the extent, and as long as, they acquire and retain the powers of dharma. By attaining the highest levels of dharma, one could even become the ruler of the entire earth. In order to distinguish this variety of history writing from that we are more familiar with today, Mrityunjay's narrative can be called a Puranic history. Mrityunjay would not have quarreled with this description, not because he was aware of the distinction, but because puranatihasa was for him the valid form of retelling the political history of Bharatavarsa.

The discipline of Puranic history cannot be accused of being sloppy in its counting of dynasties and kings. "In the 4,267 years since the beginning of the Kaliyuga, there have been 119 Hindus of different jati who have become samrat on the throne of Delhi" (R, p. 10). The count begins with King Yudhisthira of the Mababharata, who heads a list of twenty-eight Ksatriya kings who ruled for a total of 1,812 years. "After this the actual reign of the Ksatriya jati ended." Then came fourteen kings of the Nanda dynasty, starting with "one called Mahananda born of a Ksatriya father and a Sudra mother," who ruled for a total of 500 years. "The Rajput jati started with this Nanda."

After this came the Buddhist kings: "Fifteen kings of the Nastika faith, from Viravahu to Aditya, all of the Gautama lineage, ruled for four hundred years. At this time the Nastika views enjoyed such currency that the Vaidika religion was almost eradicated."

We then have a curious list of dynasties—nine rulers of the Maytira dynasty, sixteen of the Yogi dynasty, four of the Bairagi dynasty, and so on. Of course, there are "the Vikramadityas, father and son, who ruled for ninety-three years." We are also told of "thirteen kings, from Dhi Sena to Damodara Sena, of the Vaidya jati of Bengal who ruled for 137 years and one month"—from, let us remember, "the throne in Delhi"! The rule of the "Chohan Rajput jati" ends with

Prthoray who ruled for fourteen years and seven months. . . . This is as far as the empire [samrajya] of the Hindu kings lasted.

After this began the samrajya of the Musalman. From the beginning of the empire of the Yavanas to the present year 1726 of the Saka era, fifty-one kings have ruled for 651 years three months and twenty-eight days. (R, pp. 12-13)

What is interesting about this chronology is the way in which its dynastic sequence passes ever so smoothly from the kings of the Mahabharata to the kings of Magadha and ends with the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II, "of the lineage of Amir Taimur," occupying the throne in Delhi at the time of Mrityunjay's writing. Myth, history, and the contemporary—all become part of the same chronological sequence; one is not distinguished from another; the passage from one to another, consequently, is entirely unproblematical.9 There is not even an inkling in Mrityunjay's prose of any of the knotty questions about the value of Puranic accounts in constructing a "proper" historical chronology of Indian dynasties, which would so exercise Indian historians a few decades later. Although Mrityunjay wrote at the behest of his colonial masters, his historiographic allegiances are entirely precolonial.

It would therefore be of some interest to us to discover how a Brahman scholar such as Mrityunjay describes the end of "the Hindu dynasties" and the accession to the throne at Delhi of "the Yavana emperors." Curiously, the story of the defeat of Prithviraj Chauhan at the hands of Shihabuddin Muhammad Ghuri takes the form of a Puranic tale.

Prithviraj's father had two wives, one of whom was a demoness (raksasi) who ate human flesh. She had also introduced her husband into this evil practice. One day the raksasi ate the son of the other queen who, taken by fright, ran away to her brother. There she gave birth to a son who was called Prthu. On growing up, Prthu met his father. At his request, Prthu cut off his father's head and fed the flesh to twenty-one women belonging to his jati. Later, when Prthu became king, the sons of those twenty-one women became his feudatories (samanta). "Because Prthu had killed his father, the story of his infamy spread far and wide. Kings who paid tribute to him stopped doing so." In other words, Prithviraj was not a ruler who enjoyed much respect among his subjects.

It was at this time that Shihabuddin Ghuri threatened to attack Prithviraj.

When the King heard of the threatening moves of the Yavanas, he called a number of scholars learned in the Vedas and said, "Oh learned men! Arrange a sacrifice which will dissipate the prowess and the threats of the Yavanas." The learned men said, "Oh King! There is such a sacrifice and we can perform it. And if the sacrificial block [yupa] can be laid at the prescribed moment, then the Yavanas can never enter this land." The King was greatly reassured by these words and arranged for the sacrifice to be performed with much pomp. When the learned men declared that the time had come to lay the block, much efforts were made but no one could move the sacrificial block to its assigned place. Then the learned men said, "Oh King!- What Isvara desires, happens. Men cannot override his wishes, but can only act in accordance with them. So, desist in your efforts. It seems this throne will be attacked by the Yavanas."

Hearing these words, Prithviraj was greatly disheartened and "slackened his efforts at war." His armies were defeated by Shihabuddin, who arrived triumphantly at Delhi. Then Prithviraj

emerged from his quarters and engaged Sahabuddin in a ferocious battle. But by the grace of Isvara, the Yavana Sahabuddin made a prisoner of Prthuraja. On being reminded that Prthuraja was son-in-law of King Jayacandra [Jaichand, ruler of a neighboring kingdom, had already collaborated with Muhammad Ghuri], he did not execute him but sent him as a prisoner to his own country of Ghaznin. (R, pp. 109-10)

Let us remember that in Mrityunjay's scheme of history, dynasties are founded by the grace of the divine power, and kingdoms are retained only as long as the ruler is true to dharma. The Chauhan dynasty was guilty of such heinous offenses as cannibalism and patricide. That Prithviraj had lost divine favor was already revealed at the sacrificial ceremony. His defeat and the establishment of "Yavana rule" by Muhammad Ghuri were, therefore, acts of divine will.

Half a century later, when Puranic history would be abandoned in favor of rational historiography, this account of the battle of Thanesar would undergo a complete transformation. English-educated Brahman scholars would not accept with such equanimity the dictates of a divine will.

Mrityunjay has a few more things to say about the reasons for the downfall of the Chauhan dynasty. These remarks are prefaced by the following statement: "I will now write what the Yavanas say about the capture of the throne of Delhi by the Yavana Sahabuddin" (R, pp. 112-13). Mrityunjay then goes back to the earlier raids into various Indian kingdoms by Nasruddin Sabuktagin, father of Mahmud Ghaznavi.

When Nasruddin came to Hindustan, there was no harmony among the kings of Hindustan. Each thought of himself as the emperor [badsah]; none owed fealty to anyone else and none was strong enough to subjugate the others. On discovering this, the Yavanas entered Hindustan. The main reason for the fall of kingdoms and the success of the enemy is mutual disunity and the tendency of each to regard itself as supreme. When Sekandar Shah [Alexander] had become emperor in the land of the Yavanas, he had once come to Hindustan, but seeing the religiosity and learning of the Brahmans, he had declared that a land whose kings had such advisers [hakim] could never be conquered by others. Saying this, he had returned to his country and had never come back to Hindustan. Now there were no more such Brahmans and, bereft of their advice, the kings of this country lost divine grace and were all defeated by the Yavanas. (R, pp. 121-22)

Mrityunjay's accounts of the Sultanate and the Mughal periods were very likely based on the Persian histories in circulation among the literati in late eighteenth-century Bengal. It is possible that some of these texts contained comments on the disunity among Indian kings and perhaps even the statement attributed to Alexander. But the argument that it was because of the failings of the Brahmans that the kings strayed from the path of dharma and thus lost the blessings of god was undoubtedly one formulated by Mrityunjay the Brahman scholar. It was the duty of the Brahmans to guide the king along the path of dharma. They had failed in that duty and had brought about the divine wrath which ended the rule of the Hindu kings and established the rule of the Yavanas. Later, as the role of divine intervention in history becomes less credible, this story of the fall acquires in the modern writings the form of a general decay of society and polity.

But this is anticipating. Note, for purposes of comparison, Mrityunjay's account of the destruction by Mahmud Ghaznavi of the temple at Somnath. The main details of the story are the same as those which would appear in later histories, for they all come from Persian sources such as the Tarikh-i-Firishta. But Mrityunjay mentions one "fact" about the idol at Somnath that is never to be mentioned again. "There was a very large sacred idol called Somnath which was once in Mecca. Four thousand years after the time when the Yavanas say the human race was born, this idol was brought by a king of Hindustan from Mecca to its present place" (R, p. 129). Mrityunjay's source for this information is uncertain, but it is never to be mentioned again by any Bengali historian.

Two Mughal emperors are subjects of much controversy in nationalist historiography, and Mrityunjay has written about them both. On Akbar, Mrityunjay is effusive. "Since Sri Vikramaditya, there has never been in Hindustan an emperor with merits equal to those of Akbar Shah" (R, p. 195). Apart from having a deep sense of righteousness and performing all his duties in protecting his subjects, Akbar also had, according to Mrityunjay, an additional merit:

Because of his knowledge of many sastra, his spiritual views were skeptical of the doctrines of Muhammad and were closer to those of the Hindus. The kings of Iran and Turan often complained about this. ... He did not eat beef and forbid the slaughter of cows within his fort. To this day, cow-slaughter is prohibited in his fort. (R, pp. 191, 194)

On Aurangzeb, on the other hand, Mrityunjay has this to say:

He became very active in spreading the Muhammad faith. And he destroyed many great temples. Many ceremonies of the Hindus such as the worship of the sun and of Ganesa had been performed in the fort of the Badshah since the time of Akbar; [Aurangzeb] discontinued these practices and issued new rules invented by himself.

He then adds:

Although he destroyed many great temples, he was favored by the divine powers at Jvalamukhi and Lachmanbala and made sizable grants of land for the maintenance of those temples. He later lived at Aurangabad for twelve years and, on being cursed by a Brahman, died uttering horrible cries of pain. (R, p. 221)

Where kings acquire kingdoms and hold power by divine grace, the business of arriving at a verdict on the character of rulers has to be negotiated between kings and gods. The only role that the ordinary praja (subject) has in all this is in bearing the consequences of the actions of these superior entities. Of course, the praja knows the difference between a good king and a bad one, which is why he praises a ruler such as Akbar. And when Aurangzeb dies "uttering horrible cries of pain," perhaps the praja shudders a little at the ferocity of divine retribution, but is reassured in the end by the victory of dharma. In all this, however, the praja never implicates himself in the business of ruling; he never puts himself in the place of the ruler. In recalling the history of kingdoms, he does not look for a history of himself.

If it was ever suggested to Mrityunjay that in the story of the deeds and fortunes of the kings of Delhi might lie the history of a nation, it is doubtful that he would have understood. His own position in relation to his narrative is fixed—it is the position of the praja, the ordinary subject, who is most often only the sufferer and sometimes the beneficiary of acts of government. It is from that position that he tells the story of Prithviraj's misdeeds or of Akbar's righteousness. But the thought would never have occurred to him that because of the associations of "nationality," he, Mrityunjay Vidyalankar, a Brahman scholar in the employment of the East India Company in Calcutta in the early nineteenth century, might in some way become responsible for the acts of Prithviraj or Akbar. Rajabali is not a national history because its protagonists are gods and kings, not peoples. The bonds of "nation-ness" have not yet been imagined that would justify the identification of the historian with the consciousness of a solidarity that is supposed to act itself out in history.

THE PRESENT AS PURANIC HISTORY

It is in his telling of the recent history of Bengal that Mrityunjay's position becomes the clearest. Mrityunjay was born only a few years after the battle of Plassey. The history of those times must have been fresh in popular memory in the years of his boyhood and youth. His condemnation of the misrule of Siraj-ud-daulah is severe: "The violations of dharma multiplied when [the Nawab] abducted the wives, daughters-in-law and daughters of prominent people, or amused himself by cutting open the stomachs of pregnant women or by overturning boats full of passengers" (R, pp. 268-69).

When Siraj "attempted to destroy the clan" of Raja Rajballabh, the Raja sought the protection of the English in Calcutta. The English refused to hand him over to the nawab.

"Then Nawab Siraj-ud-daulah sowed the seeds of his own destruction by plundering the kuthi of the Company Bahadur and the town of Calcutta" {R, p. 270). The English were forced temporarily to leave Calcutta. After some time,

[the sahibs] returned to Calcutta and, accepting without a question the estimates of damages suffered in the raid by traders, shopkeepers and residents, compensated all of them. Then, after consulting through Khwaja Petrus the Armenian with leading men such as Maharaj Durlabhram, Bakshi Jafarali Khan, Jagat Seth Mahatabray and his brother Maharaj Swarupchandra, and collecting money and some soldiers, [the English], intending to defend their protege and holding aloft the flag of dharma, marched to battle at Palasi. (R, p. 271)

What happened in the battle is common knowledge. Siraj tried to flee, but was captured.

Then Miran Sahib, son of Jafarali Khan, without informing Maharaj Durlabhram or anyone else and ignoring the pleas of mercy from a terrified Siraj-ud-daulah, carved up the body of the Nawab with his own hands, and putting the dismembered body on top of an elephant, displayed it around the town. Thus, by the will of god, was demonstrated the consequences of such misdeeds as . . . the treacherous murder of Nawab Sarfraz Khan and the secret executions of Alibhaskar and other Maharashtrian sardars and the raping of women by Siraj-ud-daulah. (R, p. 276)

Thus, Miran acted in accordance with the divine will and Siraj faced the consequences of his misdeeds. But what happened to Miran in the end? "Thereafter, Nawab Miran was once coming from Azimabad to Murshi-dabad when at Rajmahal, as a consequence of his having betrayed Nawab Siraj-ud-daulah, he was struck by lightning. Even after his death, lightning struck twice on Nawab Miran's grave." And Mir Jafar? "Nawab Jafarali Khan, on resuming his subahdari for two years, died of leprosy after much suffering" (R, pp. 281, 289).

It is the force of divine will that acts in history, and in the end it is dharma that is vindicated. This belief frames Mrityunjay's description of the most recent events in the history of Bengal. At the conclusion of his story, he locates himself unhesitatingly as someone seeking the protection of the Company—the same Company that, flying the flag of dharma, had gone to battle with the promise to defend those under its protection.

When, because of the evil deeds of certain emperors and kings and nawabs, from Visarad of the Nanda dynasty to Shah Alam and from Nawab Munaim Khan to Nawab Kasemali Khan, this land of Hindustan was facing utter destruction, the Supreme Lord willed that the rule of the Company Bahadur be established. Thus ends this book called Rajataranga composed in the Gaudiya language by Sri Mrtyunjay Sarma, pandit in the school established by the bada saheb [governor-general] who is like the flower and the fruit of the tree which is the Company Bahadur. (R, pp. 294-95)

Let us remember, the Company rules by divine will in order to protect its subjects. It remains a constant implication that if that object is not fulfilled and if the subjects are oppressed, then, by divine intervention, the kingdom would pass to someone else and the truth of dharma would be vindicated once again.

MORE MYTHIC HISTORY

This was the form of historical memory before the modern European modes were implanted in the mind of the educated Bengali. In Mrityunjay, the specific form of this memory was one that was prevalent among the Brahman literati in eighteenth-century Bengal. What, then, was the form followed by Bengali Muslim writers? The court chronicles of the Afghan or the Mughal nobility are not of concern here because these were never written in Bengali. The examples of dynastic history written by Bengali Muslim writers show that notions of divine intervention, punishment for misdeeds, and the victory of righteousness are as prominent in them as they were in Mrityunjay. The following text is from 1875, a much later date than those of the Fort William College histories. But it is so prominently marked by the features of the puthi literature of the village poets of eastern Bengal and so completely devoid of the influence of modern historical education that we should have no difficulty in assuming that this poet from Barisal was in fact following a form that had been conventional for some time.10 The dynastic history begins thus:

How the name of Delhi became Hindustan
Can be learnt from its kings, from beginning to end.

However, Hindu writers cannot tell the full story.

The Hindus believe in the four yuga;
They cannot grasp the full significance.
Satya, Treta, Dvapar and Kali: these are the four yuga
In which the Hindus ruled with pleasure.

That, presumably, is the story that Hindu writers are best qualified to tell. This poet then gives his list of fifty-nine Muslim kings of Delhi ending with "Shah Alam Bahadur," the last Mughal emperor. It is only a list, composed in verse, with no descriptions of events and no comments on the rulers. Then comes a miraculous event.

Suddenly by a miracle [daiva], the English came to this land
And defeated the Nawab in battle.
The English occupied most of the kingdom:
Since then there is the rule of Maharani Victoria.
Putting to death Kumar Singh, the Company
Abolished all ijara and made the land khas of the Maharani.

It is curious that the only event of the Revolt of 1857 that is mentioned is the suppression of Kunwar Singh's rebellion. Then there is a panegyric to Queen Victoria and a list of the marvels of modern technology.

The people are governed with full justice.
In her reign, the praja have no complaints.
Cowries have been abolished; now
People buy what they need with coins.
People exchange news through the mail.
The towns are now lit with gaslights.
The steamer has vanquished the pinnace and the sailboat.
The railway has reduced a week's journey to hours.
In Calcutta they can find out what's happening in England
In a matter of moments—with the help of the wire.
If in court an injustice is done,
Then it is corrected in another court.

But even such a well-ruled kingdom as the Maharani's cannot last forever.

The praja is fortunate that the Maharani rules now.
What happens after this, I do not know.

In particular, if the British occupy Turkey, then all hell will break loose.

If the Queen comes to rule over Rum [Turkey],
Then only Mecca and Medina will be left.
There will be despair and anarchy in the land,
And all will lose jdt and become one jat.

And then, after a series of cataclysmic events, the day of judgment will arrive.

The Prophet Isa [Jesus] will come down from the sky,
And again the Musalmani faith will appear.
From the east to the west, and from north to south,
The world will be shattered by a terrible storm.
This is how it has been written in the Ayat Kudria
And explained clearly in the Hadis.
When the sun rises in the west,
All the doors of tauba will be closed thereafter.
The sun will rise only a few cubits
And will set soon after, and the night will be long.
Each night will stretch for six or seven nights,
And the people will rise only to sleep again. . . .
From the year 1300 Hijri,
And before 1400 is past, let it be known,
Those who are still alive
Will see many unnatural things in this world.

We might compare this with Mrityunjay's prediction: "After this there will be a king called Parinagarjuna whose era will last until 821 years are left in the Kaliyuga, at which time there will be born in the family of Gautabrahmana in the Sambhala country an avatara of Kalkideva" [R, p. 8). There does not seem to be much difference in the mode of historical thinking.

HISTORY AS THE PLAY OF POWER

This framework changed radically as the Bengali literati was schooled in the new colonial education. Now Indians were taught the principles of European history, statecraft, and social philosophy. They were also taught the history of India as it came to be written from the standpoint of modern European scholarship. The Orientalists had, from the last years of the eighteenth century, begun to "recover" and reconstruct for modern historical consciousness the materials for an understanding of Indian history and society. The English-educated class in Bengal, from its birth in the early decades of the nineteenth century, became deeply interested in this new discipline of Indology.

But, curiously enough, the new Indian literati, while it enthusiastically embraced the modern rational principles of European historiography, did not accept the history of India as it was written by British historians. The political loyalty of the early generation of English-educated Bengalis toward the East India Company was unquestioned, and in 1857, when most of northern India was in revolt, they were especially demonstrative in their protestations of loyalty. And yet, by the next decade, they were engaged in open contestation with the colonialist interpretation of Indian history. By the 1870s, the principal elements were already in place for the writing of a nationalist history of India. It is interesting to trace the genealogy of this new history of "the nation."

In 1857-58, with the inauguration of the University of Calcutta, a set of translations was produced in Bengali, for use in schools, of histories of India and of Bengal written by British historians. By then, fifty years had passed after the publication of Rajabali, written in Bengali for the instruction of English officers in the history of India. The new translations were meant for the instruction of Bengali students in the history of their country as written by the colonizer.

One volume of J. C. Marshman's History of Bengal was translated by Iswarchandra Vidyasagar (1820-91)." The other volume was translated at Vidyasagar's request by Ramgati Nyayaratna (1831-94).11 The latter contains sentences like "Sultan Suja arrived as the gabbarnar of Bengal" or "Murshid sent his son-in-law to Orissa as his deputi" betraying in its use of administrative terminology its source in an English history of Bengal. And at the point where the book ends with the Maratha raids on Bengal in the period of Alivardi Khan, Ramgati feels it necessary to indicate the miraculous transformation that was about to take place.

At that time the influence of the Marathas was so strong that everyone thought they would become the rulers of the country. But how ineffable is the greatness of the divine will! Those who had come to this country only as ordinary traders, those who were often on the verge of leaving this country for ever, those who had never even dreamed of becoming rulers of this country—they, the English, ousted Siraj-ud-daulah from the throne of Alivardi and have now become the virtual sovereign of all of India.13

Only ten years later, however, in 1869, a book of questions and answers based on the same English textbooks had the following entry:

Q: How did Clive win?

A: If the treacherous Mir Jafar had not tricked the Nawab [Siraj-ud-daulah], Clive could not have won so easily.

Or, the following question about the ethics of English officials:

Q: Was Nandakumar's execution carried out in accordance with justice?

A: His offenses did not in any way deserve the death sentence. It was at the request of the unscrupulous Hastings that Chief Justice Elijah Impey conducted this gross misdeed.14

A Bengali textbook of 1872 tells the story of the betrayal of Nawab Siraj-ud-daulah in much greater detail. Siraj, says Kshetranath Ban-dyopadhyay, was a tyrant, but, contrary to the canard spread by the English, he was not responsible for the "black hole of Calcutta." Yet it was against him that the English conspired. Siraj was suspicious of the loyalties of his genera] Mir Jafar and made him swear on the Koran. But Mir Jafar betrayed him at Plassey, although his other generals fought valiantly. "If this battle had continued for some time, then Clive would surely have lost. But fortune favored the English, and weakened by the betrayal of Mir Jafar, the Nawab was defeated and Clive was victorious." Kshetranath's hatred is directed particularly against Mir Jafar and Miran. "Mir Jafar was cruel, stupid, greedy and indolent. On becoming the Nawab, he sought to plunder the wealth of prominent Hindus." "Miran was stupid and cruel, a beast among men. He was such an evil character that his oppressions made people forget all the misdeeds of Siraj."15

Nawab Mir Kasim too was a victim of betrayal:

[Mir Kasim] scrapped the duties on all goods. Thus all traders, English or Bengali, were treated on an equal footing, and unlike before, when all except the English were discriminated against, now others began to prosper. This angered the English. They began to prepare for war. .. . Mir Kasim's army was undoubtedly the best in Bengal, and yet it never won a single battle. There was a hidden reason for this, which was the treachery of Gargin [Mir Kasim's Armenian general].16

Kshetranath also describes the condition of the emperor in Delhi:

The emperor at this time was in a pitiable condition. Even his capital was under the control of others. He had no throne to sit on. The table at which the English dined became his throne, from which the emperor of all of India offered to the English the diwani of three provinces and thirty million subjects. The Emperor of Delhi, whose pomp was once without limit and at whose power the whole of India trembled, was now reduced to a condition^ that was truly sad.17

Not only in gaining an empire, but even in administering one, the English resorted to conspiracy and force. In the period before and after Clive, says Kshetranath, "the English committed such atrocities on the people of this country that all Bengalis hated the name of the English." Because of his intrigues, Hastings "is despised by all and is condemned in history." In 1857, just as the soldiers committed atrocities, so did the English: "At the time of the suppression of the revolt, the English who are so proud of their Christian religion wreaked vengeance upon their enemies by cutting out the livers from the bodies of hanged rebels and throwing them into the fire." Even the end of the mutiny did not bring peace.

In no age do the poor and the weak have anyone to protect them. When the disorder died down at other places, a huge commotion began in Bengal. In the areas of Bengal where indigo is grown, the English planters became truculent. The cruelties they perpetrated on the poor tenants will prevent them for all time from being counted among human beings.18

It was in fact in the course of writing the history of British rule in India that English-educated Bengalis abandoned the criteria of divine intervention, religious value, and the norms of right conduct in judging the rise and fall of kingdoms. The recent history of Bengal demonstrated that kingdoms could be won and, what was more, held by resorting to the grossest acts of immorality. The modern historiography seemed to validate a view of political history as simply the amoral pursuit of raison d'etat.

The popular textbook of Krishnachandra Ray portrayed the political success of the British in India as the result of a cynical pursuit of power devoid of all moral principles. On Clive's intrigues, he said, "Most people criticize Clive for these heinous acts, but according to him there is nothing wrong in committing villainy when dealing with villains." The new revenue arrangements of 1772 are described as follows:

"The land belongs to him who has force on his side." It is from this time that the Company stopped being a revenue collector and really became the ruler. If the Emperor [in Delhi] had been strong, there would have been a huge incident over this. But there was nothing left [to the Empire]. Whatever Hastings decided, happened.

The deep hatred we saw in Mrityunjay of Siraj's misrule has disappeared completely in Krishnachandra. In its place, there is a political explanation of his actions. For instance, when the English strengthened their fortifications in Calcutta, Siraj ordered the new constructions demolished. "Which ruler can allow foreigners to build forts within his territory? . . . [Siraj] could not accept any longer that this bunch of traders should suddenly arrive in his kingdom and defy his commands. Humiliated, his anger was now boiling over." Or his role in the so-called black hole incident is explained as follows:

It must have been an inauspicious moment when Siraj-ud-daulah entered Calcutta. He knew nothing of the black hole deaths and did not order the imprisonment of the English captives. Yet, that became the source of his downfall. Intoxicated by power, he had stepped on a tiger thinking it was only a cat. In the end, it was this error of judgment which led to the loss of his kingdom, his death and the endless misery of his family. Indeed, it was the black hole deaths which created the opportunity for the rise of the English power in India.

The downfall of Siraj is not seen any more as the consequence of immoral acts. It is now the result of an error of judgment: mistaking a tiger for a cat.19

History was no longer the play of divine will or the fight of right against wrong; it had become merely the struggle for power. The advent of British rule was no longer a blessing of Providence. English-educated Bengalis were now speculating on the political conditions that might have made the British success impossible.

If this country had been under the dominion of one powerful ruler, or if the different rulers had been united and friendly towards one another, then the English would never have become so powerful here and this country would have remained under the Musalman kings. Perhaps no one in this country would have ever heard of the English.

The book ends with a list of the benefits of British rule. And yet it is clearly implied that this does not establish its claims to legitimacy: "In any case, whatever be the means by which the English have come to acquire this sprawling kingdom, it must be admitted that infinite benefits have been effected by them to this country."20 We have almost reached the threshold of nationalist history.

Kshirodchandra Raychaudhuri's book, published in 1876, had this announcement by its author in the preface: "I have written this book for those who have been misled by translations of histories written in English." The extent to which European historiography had made inroads into the consciousness of the Bengali literati can be judged from the following comment on relations between the European colonial powers:

The English and the French have always been hostile towards each other. Just as the conflict between the Mughals and the Pathans is proverbial in India, so is the hostility between the English and the French in Europe. Thus it was beyond belief that in India they would not attack each other and instead drink from the same water.

The book ends with the following sentences:

Having come to India as a mere trader, the East India Company became through the tide of events the overlord of two hundred million subjects, and the shareholders of the Company, having become millionaires and billionaires, began to institute the laws and customs of foreign peoples. In no other country of the world has such an unnatural event taken place.21

ELEMENTS OF A NATIONALIST HISTORY

Earlier I spoke of Mrityunjay's position with respect to the political events he was describing as that of an ordinary subject. The same could be said of the authors of the textbooks I have just mentioned. But these "subjects" were very different entities. In the seventy years that had passed, the creature known as the educated Bengali had been transmuted. Now he had grown used to referring to himself, like the educated European, as a member of "the middle class." Not only was he in the middle in terms of income, but he had also assumed, in the sphere of social authority, the role of a mediator. On the one hand, he was claiming that those who had wealth and property were unfit to wield the power they had traditionally enjoyed. On the other hand, he was taking upon himself the responsibility of speaking on behalf of those who were poor and oppressed. To be in the middle now meant to oppose the rulers and to lead the subjects. Our textbook historians, while they may have thought of themselves as ordinary subjects, had acquired a consciousness in which they were already exercising the arts of politics and statecraft.

Simultaneously, the modern European principles of social and political organization were now deeply implanted in their minds. The English-educated middle class of Bengal was by the 1870s unanimous in its belief that the old institutions and practices of society needed to be fundamentally changed. It is useful to remind ourselves of this fact, because we often tend to forget that those who are called "conservative" or "traditionalist" and who are associated with the movements of Hindu revivalism were also vigorous advocates of the reform and modernization of Hindu society. Whatever the differences between "progressives" and "conservatives" among the new intellectuals in the nineteenth century, they were all convinced that the old society had to be reformed in order to make it adequate for coping with the modern world.

This becomes clear from reading the most commonplace writings of minor writers in the second half of the nineteenth century. A completely new criterion of political judgment employed in these writings is, for instance, the notion of "impartiality." An 1866 text by an author who is undoubtedly a "traditionalist Hindu" recommends in a chapter titled "The Treatment of Young Women" that "whether indoors or out, no young woman should at any time be left alone and unwatched." Yet, he is opposed to polygamy and the practice of dowry. In another chapter, "The Subject of Political Loyalty," this traditionalist, Tarakrishna Haldar, writes:

In the days when this country was under the rule of the Hindu jati, the arbitrariness of kings led to the complete domination by a particular jati over all the others. That jati wielded the power to send others to heaven or hell. . . . When the kingdom was in the hands of the Yavanas, they treated all Hindus as infidels. In all respects they favored subjects belonging to their own jati and oppressed those who were Hindu. . . . The principles of government followed by the British jati do not have any of these defects. When administering justice, they treat a priest of their own jati as equal to someone of the lowest occupation in this country, such as a sweeper. . . . No praise is too great for the quality of impartiality of this jati.22

One step further and we get the next argument in nationalist history: the reason Hindu society was corrupt and decadent was the long period of Muslim rule. The following is an extract from a lecture by a certain Bholanath Chakravarti at an Adi Brahmo Samaj meeting in 1876:

The misfortunes and decline of this country began on the day the Yavana flag entered the territory of Bengal. The cruelty of Yavana rule turned this land to waste. Just as a storm wreaks destruction and disorder to a garden, so did the unscrupulous and tyrannical Yavana jati destroy the happiness and good fortune of Bengal, this land of our birth. Ravaged by endless waves of oppression, the people of Bengal became disabled and timid. Their religion took distorted forms. The education of women was completely stopped. In order to protect women from the attacks of Yavanas, they were locked up inside their homes. The country was reduced to such a state that the wealth of the prosperous, the honor of the genteel and the chastity of the virtuous were in grave peril.23

Half of nationalist history has been already thought out here. In the beginning, the history of the nation was glorious; in wealth, power, learning, and religion, it had reached the pinnacle of civilization. This nation was sometimes called Bengali, sometimes Hindu, sometimes Arya, sometimes Indian, but the form of the history remained the same. After this came the age of decline. The cause of the decline was Muslim rule, that is to say, the subjection of the nation. We do not get the rest of nationalist history in this lecture I have just cited, because although Bholanach Chakravarti talks about the need for the regeneration of national society, he also thinks that its possibility lies entirely in the existence of British rule.

There are limits to everything. When the oppressions of the Musalman became intolerable, the Lord of the Universe provided a means of escape. . .. The resumption of good fortune was initiated on the day the British flag was first planted on this land. Tell me, if Yavana rule had continued, what would the condition of this country have been today? It must be loudly declared that it is to bless us that Isvara has brought the English to this country. British rule has ended the atrocities of the Yavanas.... There can be no comparison between Yavana rule and British rule: the difference seems greater than that between darkness and light or between misery and bliss.24

[/quote]

However, even if Bholanath Chakravarti did not subscribe to it, the remainder of the argument of nationalist history was already fairly current. Take, for example, the eighteenth edition, published in 1878, of "The History of India," by Tarinicharan Chattopadhyay.25 Tarinicharan (1833-97) was a product of colonial education, a professor at Sanskrit College, and a social reformer. His textbooks on history and geography were extremely popular and were the basis for many other lesser-known textbooks. His History of India was probably the most influential textbook read in Bengali schools in the second half of the nineteenth century.

In the next chapter, I will recount some of the stories from Tarinicharan's history in order to point out how the materials of Hindu-extremist political rhetoric current in postcolonial India were fashioned from the very birth of nationalist historiography.  

[admin]

xxx