to be descended from the seven sages, though, in Indian
astronomy, the “seven sages” are typical y represented
by the Pleiades. So Seth himself may be the same as the
Egyptian deity Seth (Ganesha), who is the son of Horus
the Elder/Brahman. Manu/Noah, however, is the first man
rather than an antediluvian sage or patriarch.
118 This work incorporates information culled from the
anonymous History of the Blessed Men who Lived in the Days of Jeremiah the Prophet.
119 See E.A.W. Budge, The Alexander Book in Ethiopia, London: OUP, 1933, pp.74ff.
120 See A. Annus, Standard Babylonian Epic of Anzu, Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2001, p.xxix.
121 See Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, I:70-1.
56
alexander jacob
***
In the Vedic Shatapatha Brāhmana. Manu, the son of
Vivasvant ( SB I,viii,1),122 is described as offering a sacrifice after the flood, and from this sacrifice arises, first, a
“daughter” Idā [a variant of Ilā],123 from whom is derived
the human race. In the SP, Idā is called the “potency of Shankara [Shiva]”,124 that is, a reincarnation of his consort
Pārvathi herself, and is identified with Narmada “who
destroys sin and delivers (mankind) from transmigration”.
Narmada is, as we have seen, the power of the Flood itself
which has borne aloft the incipient sun and the life of the
newly formed universe.125 Since Idā is the “potency” of
Shiva, we have here a reminder that Manu must be a form
of Shiva himself.
Manu’s daughter Idā represents an original lunar
dynasty while her brother Ikshvāku begins the solar
dynasty.126 These two primal dynasties of the Indian king-
lists may be representative of the Elamite and the Kish/
Akshak cultures of Mesopotamia, which began the great
civilisations that marked the beginning of our Kali Yuga,
122 In
KYV VI,5,6, Vivasvant is called an Āditya (sun) whose offspring are men and the one born after the first four Ādityas. In the SB III,1,3,3
Vivasvant is identified with Mārtānda, the eighth Āditya, who is at first unformed but later moulded into a man who generates the creatures of Earth.
123 Ilā and Idā are interchangeable in the BP (Ilā: IX,16,22) and other Purānas (Idā: BrdP III,60,11, VP 85,7) In SP (Vaishnava Khanda), it is a name of Narmada, the mighty river (and consort) of Shiva (see S.
Shastri, op.cit, p.72).
124 See S. Shastri, op.cit., p.72.
125 See above; cf. S. Shastri , op.cit., p.81.
126 It may be noted, in passing, that the Edda (‘The Deluding of Gylfi’) too records the first human beings as a girl called Embla and a boy called Ask.
57
indo-european mythology and religion
which is dated traditional y around 3100 B.C.127 The
Sumerian, as well as the Egyptian, culture is attributed
in Genesis 10:6 to the Hamitic branch of the Noachidian
family, as Cush and Mizraim respectively. Ikshvāku has
four sons, Nimi, Nābānadishtha, Sharyāti, and Nabhāga,
who constitute solar dynasties.128 The son of Ilā is called
Purūravas and it is he who is supposed to have learned
the secrets of fire-worship from the Gandharvas, or
Gandhāras.129
If we consider Josephus’ description of the lands
associated with Noah, who is said to have preserved the
wisdom of Seth, we find that the land of Seth is said to be
located around “Seiris”. In the Christian Opus Imperfectum
in Matthaeum of Pseudo-Chrysostom, the books of Seth
were supposed to have been hidden by Noah in the land
of Šir, and the so-called “cave of treasures” in which they
were hidden is identifiable with Mt. Ararat.130 In Genesis
14:6, the Horites, or Hurrians, are particularly identified
with Mt. Seir. But, since Manu is the same as Noah, who is
the last of ‘the sons of Seth’ and, according to BP VIII,24, Manu is King of Drāvida, the brāhmans who are
considered to be the “sons of Seth” may have original y
proto-Dravidian population.131 F.E. Pargiter maintained
127 This is the calculation of the 5th c. astronomical treatise, Sūrya Siddhānta.
128 See F.E. Pargiter, op.cit. , p.84f.
129 See above p.16.
130 See G.G. Stroumsa,
Another Seed: Studies in Gnostic
Mythology, Leiden:E.J. Bril , 1984, p.117.
131 The term “Hurrian” (derived from Suwalliyat/Suwariyat/Sūrya; see above) however may not be equated with “Āryan” since both Iranian and Indian have distinct terms for the sun (sūrya, hvare) and for the community of Āryans (ārya, eira), respectively. Hurrian certainly includes a strong Dravidic element in it (see G.W. Brown, “The
possibility of a connection”, pp.273-305).
58
alexander jacob
that Brāhmanism itself was not original y Āryan but
adopted into Indo-Āryan religion from Dravidian.132
However, Pargiter did not consider the possibility that
both Āryan and later Dravidian may have been derived
from a proto-Dravidian/Hurrian spiritual culture.
One of the earliest regions to be settled by the
Noachidian peoples from neighbouring Armenia must
have been Anatolia.133 This is suggested by the great
antiquity of the Neolithic archaeological finds at Çatal
Hüyük in (ca. 7th millennium B.C.). The civilisation
of Syro-Palestine may be even as old as that of Anatolia
since settlements in Jordan are traceable from the late
7th millennium B.C. and in Byblos from the 6th.134
As regards the identity of the Noachidian family,
which may be considered
proto-Dravidian/Hurrian,
we may remember Lahovary’s pioneering research into
the Mediterranean people, which he equated with the
Dravidian, as being the original inhabitants of the ancient
Near East ‘in its largest meaning, that is including
Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Caucasia, Persia,
Mesopotamia with its extensions towards India, as
well as Arabia and the African regions facing Arabia,
132 See F.E. Pargiter, op.cit., Ch.26.
133 Though the urban Neolithic achievements at Çatal Hüyük
seem to be older than those in Armenia, there is evidence of similar development at the border of ancient Armenia in Jarmo (see D.
Lang, Armenia: Cradle of Civilization, London: George Allen and Unwin, 1980., p.61).
134 See G.W. Ahlstrom, The History of Ancient Palestine, Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993; J. Cauvin, Religions néolithiques de Syro-Palestine, Paris: J. Maisonneuve, 1972; S.A. Cook, The Religion of ancient Palestine in the Light of Archaeology, London: Oxford University Press, 1930 ; for Jericho, see K.M. Kenyon, Digging up Jericho, London: E.
Benn, 1957.
59
indo-european mythology and religion
i.e. from the Nile valley to the high tablelands of East
Africa.135
Lahovary goes on to remark that
It was from this world of Anterior Asia, where the
foundations of civilization had been already laid,
that the bearers of the neolithic and chalcolithic
civilizations of the Near East spread, by successive
migrations, in general of relatively small grou
ps over
a period of more than three thousand years, first
towards North-East Africa, and later, during the
fourth, third and second millennium, towards Europe.
The proto-Dravidians are most probably identifiable
with the proto-Hurrians. The geographical region in
which the earliest Hurrians are found corresponds to
the earliest Anatolian-Halafian settlements associated
with the Subarians/Suwarians/Hurrians from the
seventh millennium B.C. These earliest Hurrians spoke
a language that possessed Dravidian characteristics and
F. Bork136 and G.W. Brown137 have revealed the intimate
linguistic relationship between Hurrian (along with
its Mitanni dialect),138 Elamite, and Dravidian. Thus
Elamite, which is today general y considered a Dravidian
135 See N. Lahovary, tr. K.A. Nilakantan, Dravidian Origins and the West: Newly Discovered Ties with the Ancient Culture and Languages, including Basque, of the pre-Indo-European Mediterranean world, Bombay: Orient Longmans, 1963, p.2.
136 See F. Bork, “Die Mitanni Sprache”, MVAG, I and II, 1909.
137 See G.W. Brown, “The Possibility of a Connection between Mitanni and the Dravidian languages”, JAOS, 50 (1930), pp.273-305 .
138 For the dialectal relationship between the language of Tushratta’s letter to Amenophis III and Hurrian, see Knudtzon, Die el-Amarna Tafeln, 2 vols., Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1915, no.24; cf. S. Smith, Early History of Assyria, London: Chatto and Windus, 1928, p.71.
60
alexander jacob
language,139 is also related to the Hurrian. However,
Elamite and Dravidian are possibly later dialects than
the northern Hurrian, since they lack the initial ‘s’ of
Hurrian personal pronominal forms.140 The Dravidian of
the Brahui-speakers in northwestern India itself retains
archaic elements resembling Hurrian which are lost in the
southern Dravidian languages.141 This confirms the route
taken by the Dravidians from northern Syria and Elam to
South India.
Although the Hurrians are attested in historical records
only from the Old Akkadian period and more particularly
in the following Ur III period,142 the fact that the Hurrians,
as Wilhelm has shown,143 are in all probability identical to
the Subarians may advance their presence in Mesopotamia
139 See D. McAlpin, “Linguistic Prehistory: The Dravidian Situation”, in M.M. Deshpande and P.E. Hook (ed.) Aryan and Non-Aryan in
India, Ann Arbor, MI: Center for South and Souteast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan, 1979, pp.175-190.
140 See G.W. Brown, op.cit. , p.290f. For further discussions of the connection between Dravidian and Āryan, see F.C. Southworth,
in Aryan and Non-Aryan in India, 191-234; cf. also J. Harmatta, “Proto-Iranians and Proto-Indians in Central Asia in the 2nd Millennium B.C.
(Linguistic Evidence)”, F.R. Allchin, “Archaeological and Language-historical Evidence for the Movement of Indo-Aryan speaking Peoples into South Asia”, in Ethnic Problems of the History of Central Asia in the EarlyPeriod (second mil ennium B.C.), Moscow, 1981, and A.
Parpola, “On the Protohistory of the Indian Languages in the Light of archaeological Evidence: An Attempt at Integration”, in South Asian Archaeology, Leiden, 1974, pp.90-100.
141 See G.W. Brown, op.cit. , p.297.
142 The calcite tablet of Tisadal, king of Urkis, composed entirely in Hurrian dates from this period (see E.A. Speiser, “The Hurrian participation in the civilizations of Mesopotamia, Syria and
Palestine”, Cahiers d’Histoire Mondiale, I,2 (1953), p.313).
143 See G. Wilhelm, The Hurrians, tr. J. Barnes, Warminster: Aris and Phillips Ltd., 1989, p.1.
61
indo-european mythology and religion
to a much earlier date.144 Subartu itself may have referred
later to the north-eastern lands bordering on the Tigris,
and particularly Assyria,145 but it is likely that the Elamites
too formed a southern branch of the same people.146 The
gentilic “subari” is, according to Speiser, in its original
form, “suwari”, which suggests that it may be derived
from the name of the sun-god “suvalliyat/suvariya” (Skt.
sūrya/Av. hvare). It is also related to the later ethnic term
“hurri”, which would be the Iranian pronunciation of the
same name, as the Iranian name of the sun-god, “Hvare”,
suggests. And the entire Hurrian ethnos may have been
characterised by sun-worship.
The Hurrians, who are found widespread throughout
the ancient Near East, are closely associated in the
seventeenth century B.C. with the Indo-Āryan Mitanni147
(who spoke a Hurrian dialect as well as a sacred Sanskritic
144 In the Hebrew Bible, the Hurrians are referred to variously as Horites, Hivites or Jebusites (see Interpreter’s Bible, p.665) and are not listed separately in the ‘Table of Nations’.
145 See S. Smith, Early History of Assyria, London: Chatto and Windus, 1928, p.70.
146 See G.Wilhelm, ibid.; cf. A. Ungnad, Subartu: Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte und Völkerkunde Vorderasiens, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1936, p.113f.
147 The Mitanni themselves may be identifiable with the Medes, for, as Herodotus (VII,69) reveals, the Medes were once universal y called Arians, as well as perhaps with the proto-Iranians, since several Median words are traceable in Old Persian (see P.O. Skjaervo, in G.Erdosy, (ed.) The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1995, p.159). That the name “Mede” may be related to the term Mitanni was suggested by J. Charpentier, “The Date of Zoroaster”, BSOS 3
(1923-25), 747-55; B. Landsberger and T. Bauer, “Zu neueroeffentlichen Geschichtsquellen”, ZA 37 (1927), 61-98; E. Forrer, “Stratification des lanuges et des peoples dans le Proche-Orient préhistorique”, JA 217
(1930), pp.227-52; and F. Cornelius, “Erin-Manda”, Iraq 25 (1963), pp.167-70.
62
alexander jacob
language) as well as with the Hittites.148 The Mitanni
themselves may be identifiable with the Medes, who, as
Herodotus (VII,69) reveals, were once universal y called
Arians,149 as well as perhaps with the proto-Iranians,
since several Median words are traceable in Old Persian.150
However, the Mitanni represent an Indo-Āryan religious
tradition rather than an Avestan or Zoroastrian since the
list of Indic gods in the treaty of the Mitanni-Hurrian king
Šattiwaza and the Hittite king Šuppililiumas I dating from
the sixteenth century B.C.151 includes the names Mitra-
Varuna, Indra, and Nāsatyas – and Indra and Naonhaithya
were considered to be demons by the Zoroastrians.
***
Epilogue
In the Indic cosmogonical accounts, our manvantara,
that of Manu, of the Sun, will be followed by seven other
manvantaras ruled by other Manus, called Savarni,
Dakshasavarni, Brahmasavarni, Dharmasavarni,
Rudrasavarni, Devasavarni, and Indrasavarni respectively
148 Although the so-called Hittites were Āryans, the Hittite kingdom also gives evidence of a strong neo-Hurrian cultural influence from the fifteenth century B.C. and many of the Hittite queens bear Hurrian names, just as in the case of the Mitanni. The Āryan language of the Hittites and Mitannis may have been limited to the male members of an Āryan aristocracy.
149 That the name “Mede” may be related to the term Mitanni was
suggested by J. Charpentier, “The Date of Zoroaster”; B. Land
sberger and T. Bauer, “Zu neueröffentlichen Geschichtsquellen”; E. Forrer,
“Stratification des langues”; and F. Cornelius, “Erin-Manda”.
150 See P.O. Skjaervo, in G.Erdosy, op.cit., p.159.
151 See D. Yoshida, Untersuchungen zu den Sonnengottheiten bei den Hethitern, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter, 1996, p.12; cf. V.
Haas, Geschichte der hethitischen Religion, Leiden: E.J. Bril , 1994., p.543.
63
indo-european mythology and religion
( BP VIII,13). At the end of our kalpa there will be another Naimittika Pralaya.
In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Ch.175, too, Atum
declares:
in the end I will destroy everything that I have created,
the earth will become again part of the Primeval
Ocean,
like the Abyss of waters in their original state.
Then I will be what will remain, just I and Osiris,
when I will have changed myself back into the Old
Serpent
who knew no man and saw no god.152
The deluge that Atum threatens to overwhelm the
universe with will mark the dissolution of the material
universe into its original state in the Abyss Nun and the
flood Hehu.153
However, the seeds of the universe are contained in the
phallic Tree of Life and will renew themselves after every
cosmic cataclysm. Thus the ‘fig tree’ which symbolizes
the entire emergent universe at the centre of the cosmic
streams is described in the Skanda Purāna as being
unshaken by the “doomsday hurricane”.154 In the Nordic
Edda, too, the cosmos will be renewed after Ragnarök:
Now do I see the earth anew
Rise all green from the waves again155
152 See R.T. Rundle Clark, Myth and Symbol in Ancient Egypt, London: Thames and Hudson, 1959, p.140f.
153 See K. Sethe, Amun und die acht Urgötter von Hermopolis
(Abhandlungen der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1929, Nr.4), p.64.
154 See S. Shastri, op.cit., p.65.
155 “Voluspa”; cf. The Prose Edda, Ch.XVII. Also, R. Cook, The Tree of 64
alexander jacob
***
At the end of the lifetime of Brahma, however, there
will be a different sort of flood called a Prākrita
Pralaya ( BP XII;4,5-6) which will dissolve not just the
gross form of the universe but even the subtle elements of