TRACING VEDIC DIALECTS - People.fas.harvard.edu

(MS,KS,TS) it immediately appears that these texts know only the area
from E.Panjab to Allahabad / Benares. 347 A look at the material culture
of the texts is facilitated by W. Rau's investigations: They provide
evidence for: ayas ("Nutzmetall", copper (bronze which is unusual in
India; not, as usually translated:"iron"), but also iron (śyāma- ayas-),
wattle (and daub) huts, which were easily removable; cultivation of rice,
barley, etc., cattle (horse, etc.), in short, a generally still very simple
material culture.
Pottery, as described in the texts, unfortunately does not provide a good
possibility for comparison: Vedic pots, as used in ritual and described in
the texts, were handmade or even built up of several lumps (the
Pravargya mahāvīra vessel); they could not be made by potters as these
did not belong to the three higher castes; they had, instead, to be made by
the Brahmins, typical non-specialists of pottery thus. Both the wellknown
archaism of ritual implements as well as the caste system conspire
to deprive us of one of the most important and useful parts of
archeological comparison. 348
However, apart from the general agreement of the testimony of the texts
on material culture and archeological finds, there is one more surprising
correspondence. The area of the YV Saṃhitās and of Paippalāda-AV is:
E. Panjab, Kurukṣetra, Haryana, W. Uttar Pradesh up to
Allahabad/Benares (Kāśī). This is precisely the area that is covered by
PGW culture... 349 To my mind, the coincidence is too great to be
accidental. If future research will provide more material to support the
identification of the PGW civilisation with that of the post-Mantra and
pre-Late Br. period of texts and of the Kuru-Pañcāla tribes, this will be
of major importance both for dating the texts (see below) and for a
general correlation of Vedic studies with archeology, as well as for the
further interpretation by archeologists of this culture.
347 See Fel.Vol. Eggermont; the only exception is ŚS, with Aṅga which replaces Kāśī of PS.
348 W.Rau is a little more optimistic: he thinks it is possible to compare sacral pottery with
everyday pottery objects which were already thrown on a wheel but regarded as demonic
(asura-like); see also W.Rau, Altertumskunde, p.41 sq.
349 I should like to underline, that I began this whole investigation with no thoughts spent on
centres of innovation, or on political centres, not to speak of archeological regions. Yet the
outcome indicates several centres of innovation which happen coincide with those of the
political centres/tribal kingdoms, -- and with those of archeologically attested cultures, at
least as far as we know them at this moment.- Cf. also W. Rau who, on other grounds, came
to a similar conclusion: Altertumskunde, p.48: "The so-called.../OCP/...agrees best,
according to the area of spread, technical condition, and approximate age, with the pottery
described in the Vedic texts." (my transl.)
137