A discussion on elongated vowels in the Taittriya Shaka (Guest post by R.Ramanathan)

Mr R.Ramanathan, the Vedic scholar had been from time and again enlightening us with rare gems from Vedas and this time he has written for us a short article on some of the elongated vowels with particular reference to Pluta (प्लुत), which means protracted. The article introduces us to newer horizons in understanding the oral tradition that highlights how accents are related to the emotions and the contexts. For first time readers, I suggest a reading of two previous articles by Mr Ramanathan to get a better grasp of this article.  The links are

How Vedas are preserved through Oral Tradition.

Ancient sound propagation theories and their Vedic applications.  

Now on to his article on Pluta….

Objective and audience

This small write up attempts to explain in some detail the semantics of various elongated vowels and its usage patterns in the various portions of the Taittriya Shaka, with special reference to the Atreya-Oukhya Shaka that is currently in vogue in most of south India. Many concepts can be the same across various shakas of the Krishna Yajur Veda or even other Vedic shakas. Differences and nuances of pronunciation are to be learnt from the Praatishakya literature of that Vedic shaka under the guidance of a competent Guru.

The intended audience are those who are currently doing proper adhyayanam of the above mentioned Shaka or any other shaka under competent gurus with the proper anushtanas from the Adhyayana parampara only and not for people who have learnt from youtube, CDs or smart phone apps, or “Self-taught”. Also, some familiarity of the Panini sutras and the Maaheshvara sutras along with the basic four Vedic Swaras the Udatta, Anudatta, swarita prachaya with the rules of interactions amongst themselves are assumed.

The reason I point out people who learn through other un authorized means is not due to any personal hatred for them. But many of these people who learn from these other sources are found wanting in actual practice of anushtanams and do not take the acharams seriously and are not actually seriously bothered about right intonation.

Now for the subject matter.

What are elongated vowels?

As per the Maheshvara sutras of panini the entire set of vowels can be
abbreviated by the pratyahara अच्. This encompasses all the 16 Sanskrit vowels from now on called as swaraaksharas. Each vowel has 3 forms 1. Hrasva(Short) 2. Dheerga(Long) and 3. Pluta (Protracted). The first 2 are known commonly in all Indian languages and so the discussion will be centered around Pluta and its varieties.

In Devanagari, the representation for the above 3 is as below the same is applicable for other varnas too,

अ -Hrasva
आ-Deerga
अ(3)-Pluta

Thus in theory there are 16 possible plutas for each swara akshara. But note that in a given shaka not all vowels have pluta forms.

Types of elongated vowels in the Taittriya shaka

The Taittriya has the following types of elongated swaraaksharas.

1.     Ranga Dheerga: This is a form of a Dheerga which is pronounced longer than a proper two maatra Dheerga but is stopped before a pluta. It is indicated by आ(2) and not अ(2).  Examples for these are found in the taittriya Aranyaka first prashna. The important point is that it occurs in words with anusvaaras(म्)

नि॒ध॒न्वेव॒ ता (2) म् इ॑मिà(Aranyaka 1^st prashna 12^th anuvaka)
दे॒वा(2)म् उप॑प्रैथ्स॒प्तभिः॑->(Aranyaka 1^st  prashna 13^th  Anuvaka)

2.      Pluta and Ranga pluta: Pluta is pronounced for 3 maatras and the Ranga Pluta till the breath is exhausted though denoted by 4 in brackets. Classic example of an anuvaka that has both the types is found in the Rajasuya prashna which is the1st kanda 8th prashna 16th anuvaka. This is the chant of the Ritwik called the Brahma who does abhisheka of the new Saamrat.

Pluta: धृ॒तव्र॑तो॒ वरु॑णः प॒स्त्यास्वा साम्राज्याय सु॒क्रतु॒र्ब्रह्मा(३) न् त्व रा॑जन् ब्र॒ह्माऽसि॑ सवि॒ताऽसि॑ स॒त्यस॑वो॒ ब्रह्मा(३) न् त्व रा॑जन् ब्र॒ह्माऽसीन्द्रो॑ऽसि
The dheerga आ the end of ब्रह्मा(3) is elongated to 3 maatras

         

Ranga pluta: In the same Anuvaka, in panchashat 32 we see a ranga pluta with a (4) in brackets. Though it is 4 it means that you have to elongate the vowel till the breath is exhausted. Note the anusvara/anunaasikya part on it like in point 1.
सुश्लो॒काँ (4) सुम॑ङ्ग॒लाँ (4) सत्य॑रा॒जा ३ न्
Another example is from 7^th kanda 4^th prashna 20^th Anuvaka
लाजी (३) ञ्छाची (३) न््यशो॑ म॒मा (4)म्
Again note the anuswaara on the Ranga. So the gist is Ranga(2) or Ranga(4) occurs only for words with Anunaasika/Anuswaara sounds.

Conditions under which Plutas can occur

Since the pluta and Ranga versions are just vowel elongations, they do not fall into the category of a proper swara like say Udatta or swarita. Thus, they do not have hard rules for occurrence nor can be derived from Paninis rules as for the 4 basic swaras. But we can qualitatively ascertain the situations they can occur.

1.     Discussions of various options possible in either a ritual act or otherwise.

For example in the Agnishtoma soma sacrifice, in the 6^th Kanda, 1^st prashna, Anuvaka 9, a doubt occurs as to whether the soma creeper bought has to be purified.

ब्र॒ह्म॒वा॒दिनो॑ वदन्ति वि॒चित्यः॒ सोमा (३) न वि॒चित्या (३) इति॑

It means “Brahmavaadis say, Should the soma be purified or not”

Purified -> वि॒चित्यः॒ सोमा (३)

Not purified:  न वि॒चित्या (३)  

Thus this shows the act of “Thinking out aloud”. This is a very common usage of the pluta. But remember that not all cases of Brahma Vaada or debate need to have a pluta in it. For indication of ascent or satisfaction.

2.     In the 7^th kanda 1^st prashna 5^th Anuvaka, in a discussion between the deities Soma, Indra and Yama in the allocation of cows, Soma first finds the cows, Indra comes following him Yama comes later and asks that may he have a share in it too. The other too say “So be it”. This ascent is indicated by a pluta.
सोमो॒ वै स॒हस्र॑मविन्द॒त्तमिन्द्रोऽन्व॑विन्द॒त्तौ य॒मो न्याग॑च्छ॒त्ताव॑ब्रवी॒दस्तु॒ मेऽत्रापीत्यस्तु॒ ही(३) इत्य॑ब्रूता॒॒ स:
The ही(३) indicates ascent by Indra and soma

3.     Indication of emotions or surprise:

The most famous example being found in the Taittriya Upanisad. A rishi singing in absolute bliss. The pluta here indicates the joy here.

एतथ्साम गा॑यन्ना॒स्ते । हा (३) वु॒ हा (३) वु॒ हा (३) वु॑ । अ॒हमन्नम॒हमन्नम॒हमन्नम् । अ॒हमन्ना॒दोऽ 

हमन्ना॒दोऽ हमन्ना॒दः । अ॒ह श्लोक॒कृद॒ह श्लोक॒कृद॒ह श्लोक॒कृत् । अहमस्मि प्रथमजा ऋता (३) स्य॒ । 

पूर्वन्देवेभ्यो अमृतस्य ना (३) भा॒इ॒ । यो मा ददाति स इदेवमा (३) वाः॒ । अ॒हमन्न॒मन्न॑म॒दन्त॒मा (३) द्मि॒

4.     Indicating deep philosophical thinking

This is related to point 1. But does not involve various options but involves only the curiosity of the thinker.

उ॒ता वि॒द्वान॒मुल्लोँ॒कं प्रेत्य॑ । कश्च॒न ग॑च्छ॒ती (३) । आहो॑ वि॒द्वान॒मुल्लोँ॒कं प्रेत्य॑ । कश्चि॒थ्सम॑श्ञु॒ता (३) उ॒
Basically the question is “Where would a dying person go? Where would he stay after exiting here?” The pluta here in the boldened texts indicate the curiosity of the questioner.

5.     Indication of sounds like say that of a flying object. 

In the Pravargya prashna Aranyaka 8^th prashna(Of Dravida paata 6^th of Andhra paata)1^st anuvaaka, while explaining the reason why the pravargya is performed, The devas won the war against asuras with Vishnus help with the agreement that the credits for the victory would be divided equally. But it seems Vishnu ran away from the Devas and sat with his chin on his bow gloating over this greatness. The Devas sent some termites to bite of the bow string. As the string was taut the tip of the bow on which Vishnu rested his head coiled up like a spring and cut his head off. The head flew through the air. The sound made by the head is indicated by a Ranga pluta here.

तत्प्र॑व॒र्ग्य॑स्य प्रवर्ग्य॒त्वम् । यद्घ्राँ (4) इत्यप॑तत् ।

The boldened text indicates the “Ghang” sound made by Vishnu’s head when flying through the air.

These are the typical cases when plutas and it varieties can occur.

Grammatical and shaka specific characters of plutas

1. It is not necessary that pluta for all the 16 vowels need to occur in a shaka. In the Taittriya for example pluta forms exists for all fundamental swaraaksharas

अ आ इ ई उ ऊ

The ऋ ॠ लृ varnas do not have pluta forms in the Taittriya Shaka with only the dheerga forms being found(ॠ)

2. Among the derived vowels ए ऐ ओ औ, pluta forms exists for only ए. But it does not exist directly but is split into its constituent vowels. For example

ए = अ(or)आ + इ
To give an example for this, in the 1^st kanda 4^th prashna is called Graha prashna. The mantras are used to fill up the soma grahas in the Soma sacrifice. The mantra is as follows (27^th anuvaka)

बृह॒स्पति॑सुतस्य त इन्द्रो इन्द्रि॒याव॑तः॒ पत्नी॑वन्तं॒ ग्रहं॑ गृह्णा॒म्यग्ना(३) इ पत्नी॒वा(३) स्स॒जूर्दे॒वेन॒ त्वष्ट्रा॒ सोमं॑ पिब॒ स्वाहा

Actually the word अग्ने is split into

अग्ने = अग्ना(3) + इ (ग्ने = ग्ना + इ)

The pluta is applied to ग्ना and them after a gap (Virama of ½ matra) the इ is chanted. This is as per Panini sutra

“Pluta pragrihyam achi nityam”          

If there is an अच्(Vowel) after a pluta(An elongated vowel) there should be no sandhi or coalesce of these two vowels and in the chant this absence of sandhi is shown by a small gap of ½ matra.

Chariot burial in Sinauli (2000 -1800 BCE) – any connection with Harappan or Mahabharata?

For the first time in India buried chariots along with wooden coffins dated at 2000-1800 BCE have been excavated. The eight burial sites found in Sinauli village in Bhagpat which is 60 KM from Delhi have raised speculation on whether these findings are related to Mahabharata and would re-define the date of Mahabharata. The link with Indus-Saraswathi civilization is also being discussed by some.

Looking into these questions, certain observations pertaining to the period and nature of civilization of that period is being discussed here to decide whether these findings belong to these periods. Further discussion is on what is being known from the burials.

First of all we must accept the traditional date of Mahabharata in as much we accept the fact of archaeological discovery of Indus- Saraswathi civilization. The overlap in terms of time period and also the geographic expanse of both – Mahabharata and Indus-Saraswathi civilization is something that cannot be brushed aside.

While scientific dating methods define the date of Indus- Saraswathi civilization, the robustness of the date of Mahabharata is also scientifically strong. Let us see how.

Uncompromising nature of Kali Yuga date.

According to tradition and literary sources, Kali Yuga started 36 years after the end of Mahabharata war when Krishna left his mortal coils. The date of Kali Yuga is crucial as that forms the basis for all the ‘saGkalpa’( religious vows) of every kind done by millions of Hindus everyday till today. Unless the date is well laid out right from the beginning, it could not have happened.

Another feature pertains to the very fact of the existence of our calendar (time computation) of day –star –tithi – yoga – karana, popularly known as Panchanga. This (Panchanga) is part of  the ‘Ashtanga’ system that has 3 other higher units of time, namely month (solar), year (Saka year) and Yuga (Kali). All these are intertwined with each other such that if one is wrong others cannot fall in line (can’t be the same). For example, the lowest unit Karana is related to tithi. Tithi and yoga are two different yardsticks of the space-time gap between the two time keepers, namely Sun and the Moon. The alignment of these three (Karana, tithi and yoga) with a star cannot happen on any day, for the day has a certain progression linked with the solar year. For example, if a solar year (marked by the entry of sun into Mesha rasi) starts on a Saturday (as in 2018), it will start on the next day, i.e., Friday in the next year (in 2019) and it continues so forever.

Thus the week day that is in vogue today is very well fixated in the solar month. In which year, a month is fixated comes under the remaining 3 features of the Ashtanga system. The month along with the five (Panchanga) features is fixated in Saka year. The Saka year is related to the first year of Kali Yuga. There are formulae in Tamil to arrive at the month and day of any random date just by knowing the Saka year. There is also a formula to arrive at the number of days elapsed right from the beginning of Kali Yuga till the required date. The date of Parthivadekarapura inscription by Kokkaru Nanthadakkan given in number of days elapsed from the first day of Kali Yuga is on the basis of this formula only. Most inscriptions of Tamil Nadu contain a reference to Saka year of Kaliyuga. 

Therefore the date of first year of Kali Yuga is not a concocted one. Our present day-month system would collapse if the Kali Yuga date is changed. In other words, you change the Kali yuga start date, then your current day in the current month will be different. The current day and month cannot be different as the month is computed from the sun’s location in the zodiac (rasi) – which is unalterable.

Therefore it is sheer ignorance if one says that the start of Kali Yuga can be on any date other than the ‘traditional’ date (3102 BCE). From this date the Mahabharata war year is deduced, as it happened 36 years prior to that.

Chariot burials

With the idea of the firmness of the Kali Yuga date, we are looking at the date given for the Sinauli-discovery. It is dated at 2000-1800 BCE which is almost a millennium posterior to Mahabharata date. So it could not have been part of the Mahabharata war.

It could not have been part of Indus-Saraswathi civilization (which is in fact post Mahabharata civilization, due to concurrence with date and the presence of numerous seals bearing the image of Varaha, which was the state emblem of Jayadratha, the ruler of Indus region), going by the fact that the until now excavated burial pits of the Indus-Saraswathi civilization have no parallel to the Sinauli burial.

The negligible number of burials excavated so far in the Indus or any region is India can be attributed to the simple fact that burial is not common in Vedic society. None of the Mahabharata warriors were buried, but were only cremated. The number of burials in the Indus- Saraswathi sites is also very negligible compared to the size of the sites.

There are references to burials in Tamil Sangam texts but they are death-specific. For example, the excavated burial pots were popularly known as ‘Mudhu makkal Thaazhi’ – referring to the burial of very old people. Those with birth defects and who died soon after birth were buried – an information from Sangam texts. Burial and cremation had existed side by side, but certain clauses determined the decision to bury or dead - which is not very clear from the Sangam texts.

But the underlying feature for cremation can be known from the way Narada described in Mahabharata the death of Dritharashtra, Gandhari and Kunti in a forest fire. Those who lived by the sacrificial fire would die by sacrificial fire. In the Vedic society, everyone was engaged in growing the sacrificial fire, whatever their Varna may be. This concept follows in death also. It is only from the sacrificial fire (in death ceremony) the dead person is cremated.

This logic conveys that if a burial is found, then a major cause can be that the dead person was not connected with Vedic sacrificial fire (we should not forget the exceptional cases as known from Sangam texts).

We can test this hypothesis on the numerous burials in Farmana of the Indus –Saraswathi period. The dental examination of the Farmana corpses showed that they were all outsiders having come from faraway places, presumably for work in the Indus sites. While the Indus people had cremated their dead, they could not afford to do the same for the ‘foreigners’ who had come to their cities and died. In the absence of the nearest kith and kin of the dead, the local people had to dispose the dead. The best way is to bury them as no one had the ‘right’ to do Vedic rites for the dead, unless initiated by someone close to the dead.

Based on the rationale so far discussed, the dead in the Sinauli burials could have been non-Vedic or outsiders.

The way they have been buried in perfectly made coffins shows that though they were outsiders to Vedic life, they were not outsiders. They must have had some roots in the place. The elaborate coffin design presupposes the presence of someone related to dead, to be connected with the place.  

The burial of chariots is another odd feature as there is no reference in any literature, in Ithihasa or Sangam texts, of burying the vehicles used by the dead. This also secludes them from Vedic life.

Probing the nature of these people, there is a parallel to this kind of burial in Hubei in China discovered in 2015. Elaborate tombs were found out surrounded by separate burial pits for chariots and horses were found. In all 28 chariots and 98 horses were found and dated at sometime in 770-476 BCE. The nature of dead horses showed that they were killed and buried. It appears that they dead were massacred in an enmity.

One of the buried chariots in China

In Sinauli burials, no animals were seen. Only chariots were buried. The absence of animals showed that the animals that pulled the chariots were not killed – as was the case in the burial in China. This contrasting feature shows that those buried in China were enemies of the people who made the burial, whereas those buried in Sinauli were buried by their own people. The dead were buried along with their carriers. This is probable in a situation where death happened in action in a battle.

Buried chariot in Sinauli 

So this boils down to a situation where a community, which was necessarily not Vedic had lived in the location 1000 years after Mahabharata war. In a local enmity or military raids, people had laid down their lives. The community had given them a burial fitting to their status.

Many tribes or communities of non-vedic nature had lived in Mahaharata times. One such community had lived in Sinauli is what is deduced from these burials. Newer information from this site could exactly determine who they were.

Neolithic bottleneck of Y-chromosome had its epicentre in India since Yayati’s times.

A recently published paper by Zeng et al of the Stanford University proposes socio-cultural causes for the sudden and simultaneous appearance of a ‘bottleneck’ in Y-chromosome diversity across the Old world (Asia, Europe and Africa) around 5000 -7000 BP. The two limits of this date correspond to eventful India of those times with the lower date coinciding with the traditional date of Mahabharata and the upper with Ramayana period extending upto Yayati’s times whose descendants spread out to Europe. The authors’ postulation of socio-cultural causes for this bottleneck further reiterates the suitability of the events in India of those times in giving rise to a bottleneck in male lineage across the world and more intensely in Eurasia.

The paper by Zeng et al is an improvisation or development over a previous paper published in 2015 by Karmin et al of Arizona University. The extent of the bottleneck proposed by Karmin et al was 4000 -8000 BP which is also very much within the span of momentous events in India. A sudden drop in genetic diversity of male centric Y-chromosome had happened in this period while the female centric mtDNA had continued to thrive without any reduction. The authors did not see the reduction in Y chromosome diversity as a case of biological survival of the fittest, but of a “reproductive success of a “limited number of ‘socially fit’ males and their sons” caused by “the accumulation of wealth and power”

Using the same data, Zeng et al hypothesized the effect of repeated wars over generations in wiping out many male lineages while losing considerably the males of their own clan thereby leading to a drop in male genetic diversity. The tricky part is that there was a sudden and sharp drop in genetic diversity of male chromosome but not in the overall size of the male population. There is no such change in female diversity and population-size. These made them fine tune their hypothesis by comparing the patrilineal and non-patrilineal groups. Their models showed acute loss of diversity in patrilineal groups - in the lineages from a common ancestor - to the extent that there was just one male for 17 women.

According to them a common cultural ethos promoted high levels of Y-chromosomal homogeneity from a common descent and also ‘high levels of between-group variation’. The presence of many groups of common patrilineal descent also resulted in inter-group competition, leading to clashes that wiped out lineages, which is genetically perceived as a drop in genetic diversity. Their computer simulations of patrilineal societies showed early extinction of many haplogroups in the beginning with one or many other haplogroups quickly becoming dominant in frequency. The same is not found in non-patrilineal societies where very less number of haplogroups became extinct and overall representation continued till the end of simulation. 

The inference from a layman point of view is that different groups that sprang from a common ancestor did undergo a politico-military survival of the fittest for a couple of millennia between 5000 -7000 BP (or 4000 -8000 BP as per Karmin et al) and ended up with specific groups among them becoming dominant and continuing the progeny. The surprising element is the simultaneity of this phenomenon across the Old World.

The Old World covered by Karmin et al was Africa, the Andes, South Asia, near East and Central Asia, Europe and Oceania. The DNA samples were taken from 456 males from these regions for the study. Following illustration shows the sampling locations.

Source: https://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/03/bottleneck-in-human-y-chromosomes-in.html

The dominant feature of this map is non-representation of China in the study. It is difficult not to think that the sampling pattern of Eurasia follows the popular conception of western academia of PIE or IE or Aryan migration from central Europe to India (South Asia), leaving out China. The socio-cultural hypothesis of this study is presumed to be largely influenced by the western perception of PIE.  

Another feature that catches up attention is why neither of the teams left untouched the most striking feature, namely the surprising simultaneity of the bottleneck in all these regions across the globe. Though the bottleneck lifts are connected with the rise of regional polities and statehood in the respective regions, what caused the bottleneck around the same time in all the seven regions of the five continents leaves very less to speculate.  Was there a singular force having a global reach?   

To answer this, let us take a look at the bottleneck curves for all these regions.  They tell a story of their own which Zend et al did not probe.  

Source: https://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/03/bottleneck-in-human-y-chromosomes-in.html

In the above map the red curve represents mtDNa and yellow curve, Y-chromosome. The sudden dip in the yellow curve (Y-chromosome) in all the regions in the period 5000-7000 BP (or 4000 -8000 BP), except Siberia and Andes is striking. The bottleneck is less extreme in South East and East Asia whereas it is more in Near East and Europe. But Zeng et al clubs together West Asia, Europe and South Asia in their paper as having similar trend which is not true as per this figure.

South Asia (India) presents a unique shape of a winnowing basket or a flat bottomed bowl and not a sharp curve as with Europe and Near East. This covers a longer time period than it is for other regions. The figure shows that the drop in male genetic diversity had started soon after 10,000 BP.

One can see the yellow curve gradually dropping down even since 10,000 BP and flattening a couple of millennia later. The lift comes approximately another 4000 years later. That is, for a period of roughly 6000 years since the beginning of 10,000 BP the male genetic diversity had been much less. Applying the rationale of Zeng et al, this period had seen a severe and continuing power struggle within the same patrilineal clan.

Such prolonged dip is found only in India and not in any other regions under study. In other regions the bottleneck is found simultaneously in the period 5000 -7000 BP which falls well within the flat bottom period of India between 4000-10,000 BP.

Only other exception is Central Asia which however has been explained by Zeng et al.

They say,

“Central Asian pastoralists, who are organized into patriclans, have high levels of intergroup competition and demonstrate ethnolinguistic and population-genetic turnover down into the historical period. They also have a markedly lower diversity in Y-chromosomal lineages than nearby agriculturalists. In fact, Central Asians are the only population whose male effective population size has not recovered from the post-Neolithic bottleneck; it remains disproportionately reduced, compared to female estimates using mtDNA. Central Asians are also the only population to have star-shaped expansions of Y-chromosomes within the historical period, which may be due to competitive processes that led to the disproportionate political success of certain patrilineal clans.”

The above figure is self-descriptive of a power struggle or unrest in Central Asia with a continuing lower diversity of male lineages for thousands of years. However the sudden dip has happened in 5000-7000 BP in tune with other regions.

A glaring feature in this scenario is that South Asia is in the centre of the all the regions that experienced the bottleneck simultaneously. And South Asia experiencing the bottleneck for a much extended period within which the bottlenecks occurred in the surrounding regions makes it plausible that South Asia was the epicentre of the struggle that resulted in dispersal to the neighbouring regions. The power struggle among the dispersed clan in the newly settled regions had caused the sudden dip in the male diversity between 5000 -7000 BP.  

Even though Southeast and East Asia enjoyed a steady and higher coalescence between female and male lineages, the bottleneck did appear in the same period as in Europe but less intensely. For Europe, Central Asia and South Asia, the authors echo the same sentiment as PIE proponents of a distribution of pastoral culture. But the large flat bottom of South Asia does not correspond to the pastorals coming from Europe and causing bottleneck in India in the power struggle. Contrary to that the figure suggests a long history of sibling rivalry in India ever since 10,000 BP and a spill over to Europe and central Asia. The history of Bharat known from Itihasas and Puranas also establish this spill over due to power struggle among same patrilineal clans.

The most well known spill over was that of Yayati clan. Even Ramayana accounts for the spread of the kins to distant lands to establish independent suzerainty. By Mahabharata times struggle for power has become a regular norm with numerous clans of west Asia and Europe siding with the two sides that belonged to the same Kuru clan. One can say that Mahabharata war was a high point of a clash of patrilineal clans that caused a severe bottleneck in the male progeny. Needless to say that the revival from bottleneck coincided with post Mahabharata period, in 4000- 5000 BP.

Historical evidence from India on patrilineal group struggle.

Sibling rivalry is inherent in human nature. Having understood the extent of damage it could do to a family, the early ancestors of Bharat had favoured migration to distant lands and setting up polity by conquering those regions. For a long time since Manu, transfer of power was to the eldest son only. The Ikśvāku-s followed that tradition (VR 2-110-35). The younger siblings had to see newer pastures.

Rama himself says this in justifying his acceptance of Vibhishana. Kin of the same family do not see eye to eye. (VR 6.18.10 and 14)

“It is told that persons of the same family and rulers belonging to adjoining territories become enemies and strike in times of adversities. For this reason, he (Vibhishana) came here.”

 “Kinsfolk do not live together in a fearless mode and in a delightful manner. Hence, they get a split among themselves.”

Rama envisions a personal enmity between the brothers, Vibhishana and Ravana and justifies that it is common to see this – a perfect example of the patrilineal enmity that Zeng et al proposes to explain the genetic bottleneck.

The enmity and rivalry forced the siblings to go to distant places to set up their own kingdoms and start dynasties in their name.  The Chola dynasty was one such off-shoot of the Solar dynasty that traced its beginnings to Ikśvāku.  The presence of many branches of lineages and the mix-up of names of ancestors in the chronology given by Puranas can be attributed to this.

The first ever migration of siblings was that of Amāvasu, whom the western Indologists see as a migrant Aryan. Amāvasu was one among six children born to Pururavas and Ila, the daughter of Manu. The eldest was Āyus who became the inheritor of the throne (VR 4.7, MB 1.75). The kingdom was his and there was no need for him to look for newer pastures. This is also ascertained from the name Āyu – that has many meanings, among which ‘descendant’ or ‘offspring’ are suitable for him as the eldest son. On the other hand, Amā in Amāvasu means ‘in the house of’ or ‘non-authority’, indicating a co-existence with his eldest brother.  

A verse in Baudhāyana Śrautasūtra  suggests that Amāvasu went to the West in the regions of Gāndhāra, Parśu and Arāṭṭa. Further movement to West Asia and Europe was well within reach of those who left home. Sage Vishwamitra was the 11^th descendant of Amāvasu and he preferred to stay in Bharat.

Yayati clan.

Another important patrilineal clan that dispersed out of India comes from the house of Yayati. This family has all features of a mix of European and Indian races. One of the wives of Yayati was of Danu’s lineage. Of the three sons born to her two went out of India due to sibling fights while one stayed back in India and continued the progeny that can be detected as a strong European mtDNA mix-up in Indian population.

Of the two who went out of present-day boundaries of India, Anu went to the West and Druhyu to North and North West (central Europe). They would not have gone alone but accompanied with their well wishing kin. Conquests of new regions could have happened in the following period causing considerable extinction of native lineages.

While on the West this march was going on, an expedition was launched on East Asia too. Puru, the other sibling of Anu and Druhyu who stayed back in India had a son named Janamejaya. The son born to Janamejaya went to the countries to the east of India till the region where the sun rises – a reference to Udayagiri in Fiji Islands. Ramayana also describes the route till Udaya Parvata (VR 4.40. 54, 55) indicating the familiarity with the regions of the east and frequent travels to them.

The son of Janamejaya and grandson of Puru was perhaps inspired by the western occupation of Puru’s siblings and tried his hand in conquering eastern part of the globe. It is for the reason that he brought eastern countries under his power, he was called as “Prachinvat” (MB 1-95).

Thus we have two records in ancient history of Bharat of the same paltrolineal clans making inroads in West and East of India. Those who went to West ended up in power struggle later that finally reflected in genetic bottleneck. Such violent reflections were less in the eastern sector. But the simultaneity of the bottleneck in the west and east of India has the backing of history of India in Anu and Druhyu in the west and Prachinvat in the east.

Rama was born 20 generations after Anu as per the genealogy given in Vishnu Purana 4-18. Rama was not genetically connected with Anu but his father’ friend Romapada was the 20^th descendant of Anu. Assuming 3 generations for a century, Rama can be presumed to have been born 700 years after Yayati.

The flat bottom of the bottleneck coincides with Rama’s period (7000 BP as per Pushkar Bhatnagar’s decipherment of Ramayana and the corresponding date of sage Agastya, a contemporary of Rama, which is known from the sighting of star Agastya to the north of Vindhyas for the first time ). Though Rama was wary of sibling rivalry of other dynasties, he didn’t experience the same in his family. But all his brothers and brothers’ sons set up kingdoms in far off regions with Bharat’s sons reaching to North West India.  

Rama’s reign was felt far and wide – in west Asia too, known from the fact that many cities of West Asia and Middle East had their name connected to Rama. The relative calm in rivalry for the next millennium perhaps ensured a horizontal progression of the genetic curve. This ended by Mahabharata times, which saw extermination of own lineages and other lineages as well. By the end of Mahabharata war the territorial rights were more or less established and this is made out from lifts from bottlenecks.

An expansion of each of the above mentioned historic events will stretch further this monograph. But what is to be made out is that India had a prolonged history of struggle for power among the clans of a common ancestor. The loss of males in wars and occasional loss of complete lineages is more palpable in the research study matching with history. This is bound to have a profound impact on dismantling the Aryan Invasion ideas.