academics-from-hungary

745 Zitate
0 Likes
0Verified
26Authors

Timeline

First Quote Added

April 10, 2026

Latest Quote Added

April 10, 2026

All Quotes

"An intriguing point emerges from the find of the term Pippali in the list of agricultural terms in the Saunakiya Atharvaveda by the famous Hungarian Sanskritist Gyula Wojtilla. Considering the importance of such an intense study relating to the agriculture of the later Vedic period, it may be useful to draw attention to the broad conclusions of WojtillaĂ­s study (www.sanskrit.nic.in/SVmarsha/V6/ c3.Pdf) ĂŤagricultural knowledge as it is reflected in the Saunakiya AtharvavedaĂła reappraisalĂ­.preponderance of rice cultivation indicated by the terms dhanya, vrihi and sasya and the strong position of barley (yava) production. The unambiguous term for wheat (godhuma) is missing here, but it can be attested in the Paippalada Atharvaveda (IX, 11, 12). ĂŹVerse 5 of hymn II, 4 makes a clear distinction between the forest products and that of ploughing. Special hymns have been recited in order to make agriculture successful (III, 17), to promote the abundance of grain (III, 24), to increase barley (VI, 142). The king of gods, Indra, holds down the furrow and Pcan defends it (III, 17, 4). Indra has a hundred abilities (Aatakritu), is called siripati the master of the plough (VI, 30, 1). VisnuĂ­s stride is ĂŤstirred up by ploughingĂ­(X, 5, 34). Hymn XII, 1 extols the earth. Verse 3 and 4 say that the earth is ĂŤon whom food, plowing, came into beingĂ­. According to verse 17 she is ĂŤthe all-producing mother of herbs ....The number of attestations is edifying: dhanya is attested nine times, phala seven times, krisi and tandula six times, ksetra, yava, vrihi and surpa five times, urvara, baja and sira three times, kinasa, khanitrima, khalva, tila, tusa, pippali, bija two times, while the remaining twenty-nine only once. It indicates the established position of agriculture among other economic activities, the preponderance of rice cultivation indicated by the terms dhanya, vrihi and sasya and the strong position of barley (yava) production. The unambiguous term for wheat (godhuma) is missing here, but it can be attested in the Paippalada Atharvaveda (IX, 11, 12) ....the text bears the testimony ofsignificant contemporary changes in agricultural production. The main points of these changes are as follows. New tools such as spade, (abhri), or probably varieties of tools or new names for already known tools appear: sickle (parsu), sieve (pavana, surpa). There are formerly unknown plant names: some of them arenot satisfactorily explained such as abayu, pippali and baja, while other are of great economical importance such as sugar-cane (iksu), cucumber (urvaru), black chick-pea (khalva), sesame (tila) and hemp (sana). There is a full-fledged inventory of the place, implements, products and by-products of rice processing: threshing-floor (khala), sieve (pavana, surpa), grain after threshing and winnowing (tanula) and chaff (tusa)."

- Wojtilla Gyula

• 0 likes• academics-from-hungary• orientalists•
"The evidence concerning horses remains nonetheless the weakest point in the case for an Indian Urheimat. While the evidence is arguably not such that it proves the Harappan culture’s unfamiliarity with horses, it cannot be claimed to prove the identity of Vedic and Harappan culture either, the way the abundance of horse remains in Ukraine is used to prove the IE character of the settlements there. At this point, the centre-piece of the anti-AIT plea is an explainable paucity of the evidence material, so that everything remains possible.... The non-invasionists should recognize the merits in the invasionist skepticism of the horse evidence found in the Harappan cities. It is one thing for Prof. B.B. Lal (one of those healthy doubters who only came to dismiss the “myth of the Aryan invasion” gradually) to cite recent finds of horse bones as proving that “the horse was duly known to the Harappans” and to quote archaeozoologist Prof. Sandor Bokonyi as confirming that the horses found in Surkotada were indeed horses (which some had refused to believe due to their AIT bias), and that “the domestic nature of the Surkotada horses is undoubtful”. It is another to deduce that the horse was simply part of Harappan life rather than an exotic curiosity; AIT defenders have a point when they maintain that the horse was not part of the Harappan lifestyle the way it was in the Kurgan culture. More work is to be done, both in digging and incorrectly interpreting the data."

- SĂĄndor BĂśkĂśnyi

• 0 likes• academics-from-hungary• archaeologists-from-hungary•