Quantcast
Channel: Bharatkalyan97
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 11040

Assur, Daiva, Samudra Manthan. Meluhha hieroglyphs resolve the dialectic: Tin Road.

$
0
0
A depiction of Samudra Manthan at the Suwannaphum airport, Bangkok, Thailand. Suvarnabhumi Airport (Thaiท่าอากาศยานสุวรรณภูมิSuwannaphum; pronounced [sù.wān.nā.pʰūːm] from Sanskrit,सुवर्णभूमि, "Golden Land")


Altar for fire-god karaṇḍi (of Tukulti-Ninurta I, Assur). karaḍa 'hard alloy' (hieroglyph: karaḍi) had been deified.





Dholavira Sign Board.

 

The link between Tukulti Ninurta's altar showing a spoked-wheel banner and the Dholavira Signboard showing the spoked-wheel hieroglyph 4 times in a 10-glyph narrative is definitive, with the rebus reading eraka 'copper' arā 'brass'.
Tukulti Ninurta's altar also shows the safflower hieroglyph: 
करडी [ karaḍī ] f (See करडई) Safflower: also its seed. Rebus: karaḍa 'hard alloy' of arka 'copper'. Rebus: fire-god: @B27990.  #16671. Remo <karandi>E155  {N} ``^fire-^god''.(Munda)

Frieze of a sculpture in Kanchi Kailasanatha temple. Dhanvantari carrying the pot from the churned ocean. 


The dialectic

"...there were two categories of divinity in Indo-Iranian religion, the *asuras and the *daivas. The Indians demonized the first and the Iranians the second; Zoroaster’s role was at most simply to accelerate the latter process."

Tin Road narrative


Meluhha hieroglyphs resolves the dialectic arguments. They are evidence of the deployment of Meluhhan language to describe the accomplishment of the mission of Samudra Manthan. Seafaring merchants, Meluhha Assur had contributed to the tin-bronzes and the active Tin Road which revolutionized the Bronze Age for millenia starting from ca. mid-3rd millenium BCE.

The first ruler of Assur Puzur Aššur I ca 2025 BCE founded a dynasty of Assur. The 20000 tablets of Kultepe (Kanesh/Nesh) attest to the Tin Road between Assur and Kultepe rivaling the Silk Road in importance for the contributions made to the evolution of the true bronze-age with tin-bronzes and other alloys including zinc (hieroglyph: svastika).

Ocean churned, mission accomplished

This accomplishment of the mission to gather the resources across the oceans is exemplified by the sculpture of Dhanvantari. 


Daiva and Asura are narratives of ancient traditions of Ancient Near East. One exemplary narrative relates to Samudra Manthan, a cooperative effort of Deva and Asura to churn the oceans and share the resources. This is exemplified by the Tin Road narrative. 

Links:

          http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/12/tin-road-between-ashur-kultepe-and.html 

          http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/12/meluhha-hieroglyphs-of-assur-assur.html 

P.L. Bhargava says, "The word, Asura, including its variants, asurya and asura, occurs 88 times in the Rigveda, 71 times in the singular number, four times in the dual, 10 times in the plural, and three times as the first member of a compound. In this, the feminine form, asuryaa, is included twice. The word, asurya, has been used 19 times as an abstract noun, while the abstract form asuratva occurs 24 times, 22 times in each of the 22 times of one hymn and twice in the other two hymns." (Bhargava, PL, 1994, Vedic Religion and Culture, South Asia Books, Delhi).
Thomas Burrow argued that the *daivas were gods of the Indian tribes who lived in the same territory as the Iranians. In the tradition of the Veda Asura were divinities. "Bhargava believes that, in most of the ancient hymns, the word, asura, is always used as an adjective meaning "powerful" or "mighty". In the Rigveda, two generous kings, as well as some priests, have been described as asuras. One hymn requests a son who is an asura. In nine hymns, Indra is described as asura. Five times, he is said to possess asurya, and once he is said to possess asuratva. Agni has total of 12 asura descriptions, Varuna has 10, Mitra has eight, and Rudra has six. Bhargava gives a count of the word usage for every Vedic deity. Moreover, Bhargava states that the word slowly assumed a negative connotation toward the end of the Rigvedic period. The Avesta, the book of the Zoroastrians, describes their supreme God as Ahura Mazda (compare Vedic Asura Medhira)—Mighty and Wise. For them, the word Deva (daeuua) is negative. Asura is therefore regarded as an epithet. Ravanasura means mighty Ravana. Ravana was a Brahmana—Rakshasa (powerful flesh-eating demon). There was no "Asura Jati" in the way that there were Rakshasas, Daityas, Devas, and Brahmanas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asura

I suggest that this Samudra Manthan (Churning of the ocean) relates to a metaphor of the Bronze Age when Assur spoke and wrote Meluhha (Indian sprachbund) and were seafaring merchants and artisans contributing to the revolution cause by use of tin-bronzes along the Tin Road from Assur to Kanesh/Nesh (Kultepe, Anatolia). These contributions are exemplified in the splendid Samudra Manthan narratives on painting of Ellora and sculptures of Angkor Wat, Angkor Thom and other monuments.

Samudra manthan or 'Churning of Ocean of Milk' Deva and Da_nava churn the ocean, using Va_suki, the serpent as the rope and Mandara, the mountain as the churning rod. Ganesh Lena, Ellora, ca. 11th cent. CE.
Angkor Thom. Part of Samudra Manthan narrative.







Four faces top Mount Meru and adorn the 5 gates of Angkor Thom. In the Samudra Manthan narrative, Meru is the churning stick and Vishnu's avatara is Kurma, tortoise.



The churning stick is flanked by Deva and Asura pulling the 7-headed snake rope Vasuki.

Angkor Wat relief of Samudra Manthan shows Vishnu standing above the tortoise Kurma, the churning stick.

Vishnu as Hayagriva holds the heads of Madhu and Kaitabha (West lintel of the inner entrance pavilion)

Krishna attacks Kamsa, Angkor Wat

Krishna attacks Kamsa, Banteay Srei


Some notes of RN Iyengar: 

Deva is derived from div to shine, these were the celestial luminaries mainly the nakshatras (deva  grihaavai nakshatraaNi  Tai.Br. ). Quite intriguingly in many places  Shining objects are also qualified as Asura. For example in 3.3.4; 4.2.5 Agni is called asura. As is well known VaruNa is also asura. In some places Indra is asura. Hence asura was not a pejorative word till something special happened. The clue is with Maruts who are also asurah. SayaNa in most of the places accepts the derivation of the word from asu kshepaNe = to throw, to put, to keep. The action of the Maruts was to throw stones at earth.  They in fact killed Prajapati’s creation once. In RV the eclipse shadow Svarbhaanu is called Aasura (one belonging to  asura). This is so because the original Visvarupa Tvaashtra could once cover up Sun. To cut a long story short the original asuras were throwers of stones towards earth sometimes falling on the houses/ ashrams/vedis/lakes. Even some devas such as VaruNa (star in Draco or Shishumaara) could do this and hence was an Asura. The word Rahu appears first in the Atharvana veda. My suspicion is this should be word connected with the Rigvedic  maruts who are in one place called Va-raahu (RV1.88.5).  'Svarbhaanu' in RV is perhaps correlated with 'Aasura'.   In RV the word is used to address deities such as agni, indra, varuNa, (not just maruts)considered usually as Deva. Vrtra eventhough an Asura he is qualified as 'Deva'. (as'vyo vaara abhavaatad indra sr.ke yattvaa pratyahn deva ekah.| Rv 1.32.12) The word asuryā has been rendered in several translations as divine, but the connection
with maruts indicates the epithet to be a physical description of the flowing river affected by maruts who were always called asurāh: throwers (of stones). Significantly, in the tenth book (10.17.8-9) goddess Sarasvatī is invoked seated in the same chariot as the ancestor deities. This in vaidika parlance means the river had dried, which, in the language of RV should have been after frequent sightings of maruts in the visible sky above the River Sarasvatī(circa 1900BCE).


आसुरी सरस्वती How to explain this praise in RV? Asura-tva is praiseworthy, it appears.



मुखबाहूरुपज्जानां या लोके जातयो बहि:।
म्लेच्छवाचश्चार्यवाच: सर्वे ते दस्यव: स्मृता:॥ Manu 10.45 १०अध्या.४५ तमश्लो.॥


> > व्याख्यानम् -> > ब्राह्मण-क्षत्रिय-वैश्य-शूद्राणां क्रियालोपदिना या जातयो बह्या: जाता: मेल्च्छभाषायुक्ता: आर्यभाषोपेता वा ते दस्यव: सर्वे स्मृता:। 

कनीयस्विन इव वै तर्हि देवा आसऩ् भूयस्विनोऽसुरा: । ता>१२/१३/३१॥ कानीयसा एव देवा ज्यायसा असुरा: श.१४.४.१.१.॥ (Tandya Brahmana)

Devas or Suras were born from the Mukha or Face of Prajapati and the Asuras were from his Jaghana part (स जघनादसुरानसृजत। स मुख्हाद्देवानसृजत। तै. २.२.९.५-८).

१. तेनासुनासुरानसृजत। तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्। (तै.२।३।२।१॥)

"सोर्देवान् असृजत तत़् सुराणां सुरत्वम्। असोरसुरानसृजत तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्।"(तै.ब्रा.२.३.८.२,४)

Dr. Rani Sadasiva Murthy:

I. The word Asura in the Text of Nirukta
Scholars say that the word Asura was used in Nirukta for Devas. But the following lines are seen the NIrukta in the words of Yaska differentiating them from Devas.
1. तदद्यवाच: परमं मंसीय येअनासुराऩ् अभिभवेम देवा:। असुरा: असुरता:। स्थनेष्वस्ता: स्थानेभ्य इति वा. अपि वासुरिति प्राणनाम। अस्त: शरीरे भवति। तेन तद्वन्त:। (निरुक्ते ३.८)
"सोर्देवान् असृजत तत़् सुराणां सुरत्वम्। असोरसुरानसृजत तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्।"(तै.ब्रा.२.३.८.२,४)
२. "देवाश्च वा असुराश्चास्पर्धन्त नेमे देवा आसन्नेमेऽसुरा:।" (निरुक्ते ३.२०)
II. Now some more Vedic citations which differentiate Asuras from Devas or Suras
१. तेनासुनासुरानसृजत। तदसुराणामसुरत्वम्। (तै.२।३।२।१॥)
२. दिवादेवान्सृजत नक्तमसुराऩ् अद्दिवा देवनसृजत तद्देवानं देवत्वम्; यदसूर्य्यं तद्सुराणामसुरत्वम्॥(षद्विंशब्राह्मणम्४.१.)
३. देवाश्च वाऽअसुराश्च। उभये प्राजापत्या: प्रजपते: पितुर्दायत्वमुपेयुरेतावेवार्धमासौ (शुक्लकृष्णपक्षौ)॥ (श.ब्रा.१.७.२.२२)
३. देवाश्च व असुराश्च प्रजपतेर्द्वया: पुत्रा आसऩ्। (तां.ब्रा.१८.१.२)
४.कानीयसा एव देवा ज्यायसा असुरा:. (श.१४.४.१.१.)
५. अहर्वै देवा आश्रयन्त रात्रीमसुरा: (ऐ.४.५)
६.अर्वाग्वसुर्ह देवानां ब्रह्मा पराग्वसुरसुराणाम्. (गोपथ - उत्तरभागे १.१)
असुराणां देवानां च उत्पत्ति विषये।
स: (प्रजापति:).....अकामयत प्रजायेयेति। स तपोऽतप्यत> सोऽन्तर्वानभूत्। स जघनादसुराऩ् असृजत......स मुखाद्देवानसृजत..तै.२.२.९.५-८)
III Now some Post Vedic Instances:
i. Some Derivative Meanings of the Word Asura:
अ) अस्यति देवाऩ् क्षिपति इति(अस्+उरऩ्) 
आ) न सुर:। (विरोधे नञ् समास:) 
इ) नास्ति सुरा यस्य स:।
ई) "सुराप्रतिग्रहाद्देवा: सुरा इत्यभिविश्रुता:। अप्रतिग्रहणात्तस्या: दैतेयाश्चासुरा: स्मृता:॥" (इति  रामायणे)
एते चत्वा्रोऽर्था: हलायुधकोशात् स्वीकृता:।

DAIVA, Old Iranian noun (Av. daēuua-, OPers. daiva-) corresponding to the titledevá- of the Indian gods and thus reflecting the Indo-European heritage (*deiu̯ó-), though the category of divinities to which it referred seems to have dropped completely out of the Iranian religious tradition and even to have become demonized. It is extremely difficult to determine just when this change took place and to understand its significance within the framework of Mazdean theology. (Daiva, Encyclopaedia Iranica, p. 599).


DAIVA

Old Iranian noun (Av. daēuua-, OPers. daiva-) corresponding to the titledevá- of the Indian gods and thus reflecting the Indo-European heritage (*deiu̯ó-).
*DAIVA, Old Iranian noun (Av. daēuua-, OPers. daiva-) corresponding to the titledevá- of the Indian gods and thus reflecting the Indo-European heritage (*deiu̯ó-), though the category of divinities to which it referred seems to have dropped completely out of the Iranian religious tradition and even to have become demonized. It is extremely difficult to determine just when this change took place and to understand its significance within the framework of Mazdean theology. The impression garnered from various sources is that the process was a gradual one.
In Avestan. In the Gathas the daēuuas had not yet, in fact, become demons. AsÉmile Benveniste (1967) clearly established, they constituted a distinct category of quite genuine gods, who had, however, been rejected. They were still venerated by the leaders of the larger Iranian nation (dax́iiu-Y. 32.3, 46.1) and had formerly been worshiped even by the people who accepted the religion of the Gathas (Y.32.8); they thus formed part of the Mazdean social and religious sys­tem. That they were national gods is confirmed by the fact that they were invoked by means of the Iranian versions of expressions common in Vedic rhetoric, for example, daēuua-/maṧiia-devá-/mártya-vīspa-­daēuua-víśva- devá-, and daēuuo.zušta-:devájuṣṭa-. The poet of the Gathas reproached the daēuuas for being, through blindness, incapable of proper divine discernment (ərəš vī + ci) and of having as a result accepted the bad religion, characterized by aēnah- ­ (approximately equivalent to “error”), along with the good, characterized by auuah-(approximately equiva­lent to “favor”). It appears from the Gathas that the process of rejection, negation, or demonization of these gods was only just beginning, but, as the evidence is full of gaps and ambiguities, this impression may be erroneous. For example, although polemics against the daēuuas and their followers are a major theme of the Gathas, in the other section of the Older Avesta, Yasna Haptaŋhāiti (Y.35-41; Kellens and Pirart, pp. 30-32, 133-40), they are not mentioned at all. This divergence is extremely puzzling, espe­cially as the doctrines expressed in the two sections are otherwise quite similar. Even in the Gathas no proper names are mentioned, so that it is not even clear precisely who the daēuuas were. Nor does the Younger Avesta (Vd. 10.9, 19.43) appear to shed any light on this specific problem.
Furthermore, in the Gathas the scope of the word aēnah-, and thus of the error to which it refers, is not precisely understood, and criticism of the daēuuas seems to differ slightly in different contexts. In the passage in which their relation to fundamentally negative abstractions (druj-aka-manah-pairimaiti-) is defined (Y.32.3), a syntactical construction otherwise unknown in Old Indo-Iranian has been adopted: mas­culine plural subject plus verb “to be” plus attributive adjective in the form of a singular neuter noun in the accusative plus ablative. The meanings are thus fun­damentally incomprehensible. The pejorative terms applied to the daēuuas are duždāh- “miserly” and xrafstra-, referring to noxious creatures, depicted as harmful in the Younger Avesta, though the signifi­cance of the term in the Older Avesta is not certain. On the other hand, the daēuuas were never identified asdrəguuaṇt- “people of the lie,” which would be very significant if it could be demonstrated that it is not a chance of survival.
In the Younger Avesta the daēuuas were represented as small, wicked genies who disturbed the order of the world, human health, and the regularity of religious life, in contrast to the daēuuaiiasna-, literally, “those who sacrifice to the daēuuas,” adherents of other religions. There are, however, exceptions in several passages. For example, the daēuuaiiasnas who of­fered nocturnal libations to Anāhitā (seeanāhīdYt. 5.94) seem from the evidence to have been Mazdeans who were thus designated because of their deviation from accepted ritual; this passage suggests that in the period of the Younger Avesta the objects of all reli­gious disapproval, whatever petty event may have inspired it, were identified as daēuuas. In theVidēvdād (10.9,19.43) Iṇdra (Ved. Índra), Sauruua (Ved. Śarvá), and Nåŋhaiθiia (Ved. Nāˊsatya) are mentioned at the head of a list of daēuuas, immediately after reference to Aŋra Mainiiu (see ahriman); in the Pahlavi books the same three were recognized as the enemies of Aṧa, Xšaθra, and Ārmaiti respectively. There are three possible explanations of why these Iranian equivalents to Vedic gods should be mentioned in the Vidēvdād. First, it is conceivable that they were still worshiped in some Iranian circles, though at the period when the Vidēvdād was compiled that seems very unlikely; furthermore, this explanation does not take into account the probability that there was no word *daiva- “god” in Iranian (see below). If, on the other hand, these gods represented an ancient memory, they would provide clues to the identification of several of the daēuuas in the Older Avesta, but this suggestion raises other difficulties, aside from the apparently miraculous survival of this memory. In particular, it is difficult to explain why only these three gods would have been “demonized,” or perhaps not “undemonized,” while Mithra, Vāiiu, and others were not. Finally, it might be suggested that the three gods were simply avatars of the Indian gods, but it would be surprising to find in the Vidēvdād such close links with the Vedic religion coupled with complete adaptation of the names to Iranian phonology.
In Old Persian. The word daiva- appears three times in the plural in an inscription of Xerxes I (r. 486-65 b.c.e.) at Persepolis (XPh, ll. 36, 38, 39; Kent, Old Persian, pp. 150-52), and daivadāna- occurs once, in the accusative singular, in the same inscrip­tion (l. 37), referring to one of the daivas’ sanctuaries: “And in addition (utā) among these countries there was [a place] where previously the daivas were wor­shipped (yad). Therefore, at the command of Ahura Mazdā, I destroyed this sanctuary of the daivas, and I proclaimed, "The daivas are no longer to be worshiped!" In this place where previously the daivas had been worshiped, there I worshiped Ahura Mazdā with a brazman according to Harmony (artācā brazmaniy).” The possible Avestan parallel to the usage of the word daivas in this text remains entirely unclear. Mary Boyce (Zoroastrianism II, p. 175) has argued that Xerxes, “as a Zoroastrian, was recording the destruc­tion of an Iranian sanctuary devoted to the worship of those warlike beings condemned by the propheṭ . . . ” Muhammad Dandamayev, on the other hand, has sug­gested that thedaivas mentioned by Xerxes were Mithra, Anāhitā, and the other gods condemned by Zoroaster (p. 226). Ugo Bianchi cited the use of the word daiva- “with an absolutely negative sense (that is to say, not depending upon an adjective or on the context)” as evidence that the Achaemenids were in fact Zoroastrians (1977, p. 1). In the view of all three of these scholars, Xerxes thus understood the word in the sense “rejected god,” which is identical with the Gathic meaning.
Other scholars have taken into account the broader context in which the inscription was composed, in­cluding what is known of the political history of the reign of Xerxes. Somewhat earlier in the inscription (ll. 13-28) Xerxes listed the countries that were part of the Achaemenid empire and reported (ll. 28-35) that, at the time of his accession to the throne, one of them was in revolt; he put down the rebels and restored the country to its former condition. If the country “in revolt” could be equated with the country where false daivas had been worshiped, it would follow that Xerxes understood daiva- in the Younger Avestan sense “god of another religion.” Hans Hartmann, Henryk S. Nyberg (pp. 364-66), and apparently Jacques Duchesne­-Guillemin (1962, p. 156) all identified the country in revolt as Babylon, but Gherardo Gnoli (p. 79) has expressed reserve about this identification, particu­larly in view of what is known of the Achaemenids’ religious policy. The question of Xerxes’ specific policy toward the Babylonian temples was reviewed by Amélie Kuhrt and Susan Sherwin-White, who concluded that the daivas mentioned in the inscription cannot be identified with the gods of Babylon.
On the other hand, Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg insists that inscription XPh does not reflect specific historical events but is merely a proclamation of royal religious ideology, announcing in effect “All rebellion will be punished, and the sanctuaries of the gods of the rebels will be destroyed.” If she is correct, the sense of daiva- in the inscription would be similar to that in the Avestan passage in which the daivas are said to have offered nocturnal libations to Anāhitā (Yt. 5.94). It should be added that Xerxes replaced the rebels’ cult with the official Achaemenid cult, represented by his sacrifice to Ahura Mazdā according to a precise ritual (artācā brazmaniy). From this perspective the daivas appear to have been gods, of whatever origin, who might side with rebels, even hypothetical ones, and thus imperil the political and religious order of the empire, which was rooted in the imperial cult. Consid­ering that the Achaemenids did not prevent subject populations from practicing their own religions, as specified in the treaties of political submission and tribute, it must be concluded that the gods whom Xerxes called daivas could be worshiped but that such worship could not be expressed with the verb ya- “to worship.” In Xerxes’ textyad can mean only “to perform the official worship, the worship of the founder.” Although Xerxes’ mention of the daivas is most logically explained in this way, the available documentation does not permit further clarification of the actual historical usage of yad.
Problems of interpretation. It is difficult to reconcile the fragmentary and chronologically discontinuous information on the daivas provided in the sources. There is an essential contradiction between the testi­mony of the Gathas, which suggests that the rejection of the daēuuas constituted a major crisis in Iranian religious thought, and the fact that no known Iranian dialect attests clearly and certainly the survival of a positive sense for *daiva-. Only four possibilities have been identified. First, if a curious amalgam of signs in the last lines of the inscription from Surkh Khotal could be interpreted as ’eiio, then Mithra could be said to have borne the title *daiva- (Humbach), but this reading has not been accepted. Second, proper names in which dēv is the first element are known from Sogdiana (Nöldeke, 1923; Henning), but, as Marijan Molé has pointed out, they are attested only from an area where the population had been converted to Bud­dhism. Third, that the white dīv of Māzandarān, the subject of an episode in the Šāh-nāma, may have been an authentic ancient local divinity (Nöldeke, 1915) is purely conjectural. Fourth, Georges Dumézil’s inter­pretation of Ossetic œvdīv as equivalent to *apa-daiva“godless” (1960) was received with skepticism by Benveniste (1959).
If the pejorative sense of *daiva- was common to all Iranian languages, it could not have resulted from an innovation; it would have had to be an original con­stituent of the Iranian language and religion, but it is impossible to make this fundamental fact of Iranian linguistics accord with the information in the Gathas. Attempts to explain the pejorative connotation of *daiva- thus involve either accepting the linguistic evidence while denying that of the Gathas (the con­stituent hypothesis), accepting the evidence of the Gathas and denying that of the language (the reform hypothesis), or attempting to reconcile the two (the progressive hypothesis).
According to the constituent hypothesis, the *daivas had never been Iranian gods. Martin Haug claimed that a schism had occurred at the time of the Indo­-Iranian migrations, a notion that is now out of date. Thomas Burrow, on the other hand, argued that the *daivas were gods of the Indian tribes who lived in the same territory as the Iranians. The daēuuas named in the Vidēvdād (10.9, 19.43) would thus have repre­sented either a memory of the national past or the specific gods of the ancient enemy. Both of these interpretations are contradicted by the Gathic evi­dence, which cannot simply be passed over in silence.
In the reform hypothesis the rejection of the *daivas is considered to have been the work of Zoroaster (Lommel, pp. 88-92; cf. Gershevitch; Bianchi, 1978, pp. 19-22; Gnoli, pp. 73-83). This interpretation is intimately connected with explanation of Mazdaism by means of the dialectical schema: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The rejection of the daēuuas would thus have been the core of the antithesis and the fundamen­tal act of Mazdean monotheism. There are several insurmountable flaws in this hypothesis, however. First, it does not account for the fact that a personal doctrine, which was disseminated gradually by mis­sionaries, ended by predominating in exactly the geographical area where the Iranian languages were spo­ken. Second, it depends heavily on the meager evidence suggesting that *daiva-was originally equiva­lent to “god.” Finally, it does not account for the fact that one man was able to impose his condemnation of the traditional gods upon his entire people. Herman Lommel (p. 91) and Ilya Gershevitch (pp. 79-80), though aware of the force of this last objection, argued that the total rejection of these gods is evidence of the genius of Zoroaster.
According to the progressive hypothesis, the rejec­tion of the *daivas was a gradual phenomenon, rooted in the Indo-Iranian past but evolving during the course of Iranian history, a result in which Zoroaster played a role of greater or lesser importance. This hypothesis has three variants. In that proposed by James Darmesteter and Molé the “rejection” consisted of nothing more than a striking lexical accident to the Iranian word *daiva-. This interpretation, like the constituent hypothesis, is contradicted by the Gathic evidence and also by the onomastic data of the Vidēvdād (10.9, 19.43), which Darmesteter sought unsuccess­fully to explain away. This variant is the most extreme and the farthest from the dialectical hypothesis, for it postulates that there was no religious divergence be­tween India and Iran at all. According to the variant proposed by Boyce (Zoroastrianism I, pp. 85, 197), which Duchesne-Guillemin came close to adopting in 1962, the Iranians’ distrust of the *daivas was general, but Zoroaster was the actual artisan of their demonization. To the extent that it accords to the prophet the primordial role, this interpretation has the same weaknesses as the reform hypothesis. The third variant was implied in a paragraph by Antoine Meillet (p. 62) and in Benveniste’s explanation of the forma­tion of the cult of Mazdā (1929, pp. 35-42), but it was fully developed by Nyberg (p. 96) and Duchesne-Guillemin (1953, pp. 27-28). It reflects an attempt to reconcile all the known evidence in acceptable fash­ion. According to this argument, there were two categories of divinity in Indo-Iranian religion, the *asuras and the *daivas. The Indians demonized the first and the Iranians the second; Zoroaster’s role was at most simply to accelerate the latter process. This hypothesis raises new difficulties, however. First, the use of ásura- in the Rigveda is so unsystematic and inconsistent that it can hardly be said to confirm the existence of a category of gods opposed to the devás. Burrow has clearly shown, furthermore, that the demonization of the ásuras took place so late that the associated terms cannot be considered a feature of Indo-Iranian religious dialectology. To propose a prehistoric opposition *ásura/daivátherefore would involve interminable and entirely conjectural discus­sions of the status of Mithra, Apąm Napāt, and *Ahura (Boyce, 1969; Bianchi, 1978). There is also the question of interpreting the Gathic passages if reference to the rejection of the daēuuas was not what was intended. Dumézil foresaw the difficulty when he defined Zoroastrianism as a reform of a reform (1945, pp. 63-64). If it is assumed that the debasement of the daēuuas and the elevation of Mazdā constituted the primary reform, then it is not clear in what the second­ary reform consisted. Johanna Narten (passim) has demonstrated that it could not have been the formula­tion of the system of beings, as Dumézil believed; on the contrary it appears that the rejection of the daēuuas was the focus of attention in the Gathas. Another obstacle to acceptance of this hypothesis is the reap­pearance of the banished gods in the Younger Avesta. The dialectical schema does not account for the diver­sity of the evidence. It is not clear, for example, where Mithra belonged or why the Mazdeans rehabilitated Vāiiu but not Rudrá, the Nāˊsatyas, or even Indra. The evidence does not support any closely reasoned argument. For example, in contrast to Duchesne-Guillemin, who believed that Mithra was “the god of cruel offer­ings and drunken ecstasies” (1953, p. 40), Boyce declared that “Mithra’s general character as god of justice and good faith accords admirably with Zoroaster’s tenets” (1969, p. 17).
Bibliography:
E. Benveniste, The Persian Reli­gion According to the Chief Greek Texts, Paris, 1929.
Idem, Études sur la langue ossète, Paris, 1959.
Idem, “Hommes et dieux dans l’Avesta,” Festschrift für Wilhelm Eilers, Wiesbaden, 1967, pp. 144-47.
U. Bianchi, “L’inscription "des daivas" et le Zoroastrisme des Achéménides,” RHR, 1977, pp. 3-30.
Idem, Mithra and the Question of Iranian Monotheism. Études mithraïques, Acta Iranica 17, Tehran and Liège, 1978.
M. Boyce, “On Mithra’s Part in Zoroastrianism,” BSOAS 32, 1969, pp. 10-34.
T. Burrow, “The Proto-Indoaryans,” JRAS, 1973, pp. 123-40.
M. Dandamayev, Persien unter den ersten Achämeniden, Wiesbaden, 1976.
J. Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, Paris, 1877.
J. Duchesne-­Guillemin, Ormazd et Ahriman, Paris, 1953.
Idem, La religion de l’Iran ancien, Paris, 1962.
G. Dumézil, Naissance d’archanges, Paris, 1945.
Idem, “€ propos de quelques répresentations folkloriques des Ossètes,” Festgabe für Herman Lommel, Wiesbaden, 1960, pp. 39-40.
I. Gershevitch, “Die Sonne das Beste,” Mithraic Studies 1, 1975, pp. 79-81.
G. Gnoli, Zoroaster’s Time and Homeland, Naples, 1980.
H. Hartmann, “Zur neuen Inschrift des Xerxes von Persepolis,” OLZ 40, 1937, pp. 158-60.
M. Haug, Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings and Reli­gion of the Parsees, Bombay, 1862.
W. B. Henning, “A Sogdian God,” BSOAS 28, 1965, pp. 253-54.
C. Herrenschmidt, “Notes de vieux-perse III (artācā brazmaniy),” IIJ 36, 1993, pp. 45-50.
H. Humbach, “Der iranische Mithra als Daiva,” Festgabe für Herman Lommel, Wiesbaden, 1960, pp. 75-79.
J. Kellens, “Trois réflexions sur la religion des Achéménides,” Studien für Indologie und Iranistik 2, 1976, pp. 121-26.
Idem and E. Pirart, Les textes vieil-avestiques I, Wiesbaden, 1988.
A. Kuhrt and S. M. Sherwin-White, “Xerxes’ Destruction of Babylonian Temples,” in H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg and A. Kuhrt, eds., Achaemenid History II. The Greek Sources, Leiden, 1987, pp. 69-78.
H. Lommel, Die Religion Zarathustras, Tübingen, 1930.
A. Meillet, Trois conférences sur les Gâtha de l’Avesta, Paris, 1925.
M. Molé, Culte, mythe et cosmologie dans l’Iran ancien, Paris, 1963, pp. 5-7.
J. Narten, Die Aməṧa Spəṇtas im Avesta, Wiesbaden, 1982. T. Nöldeke, “Dīv,” ARW18, 1915, pp. 597-600.
Idem, “Deva,” ZII 2, 1923, p. 318.
H. S. Nyberg, Die Religionen des alten Irans, Leipzig, 1938.
H. Sancisi-­Weerdenburg, Yaunā en Persai. Grieken en Perzen in een ander perspectief, Ph.D. diss., Groningen, 1980.
(Clarisse Herrenschmidt and Jean Kelllens)
Originally Published: December 15, 1993
Last Updated: November 11, 2011
This article is available in print.
Vol. VI, Fasc. 6, pp. 599-602






Hale, Wash Edward (1986). Ásura: In Early Vedic Religion, p.120-133. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Insler, Stanley; Hale, Wash Edward (1993), "Review: ÁSURA in Early Vedic Religion by Wash Edward Hale", Journal of the American Oriental Society 113 (4): 595–596
Hale, Wash Edward (1986), ÁSURA in Early Vedic Religion, Delhi: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

Alain Daniélou The Myths and Gods of India: The Classic Work on Hindu Polytheism from the Princeton Bollingen Series Inner Traditions / Bear & Co01-Dec-1991 - Body, Mind & Spirit - 441 pages


pp.139-146





Survival of Traditional Indian Iron Technology


By Pankaj Goyal

Recently an interesting book, Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making has come out. We give below a summary of some interesting essays dealing with traditional iron technology.

After aluminum, iron is the second most abundant metal in the earth’s crust and is considered as one of the most useful metal as it is utilized in almost all industries. It is believed that iron was accidentally discovered late in the Bronze Age. The early iron encountered by man was meteoritic iron. In India and China iron making may have developed independently and by 600 BC excellent steel was being made in India. India has been known for its ancient heritage of iron and steel production and metal craftsmanship. There are a large number of iron monuments in India that represent the ancient metallurgical expertise, some of the examples are iron pillars at Dhar and Delhi, iron beam at Konark, Orissa etc. 

The beginnings of iron technology in India date back to probably the end of the second millennium B.C. Initially, it was generally believed that iron came to India with the Aryans. Several of such conjectures have been discarded now. Some of these are discussed below.
1.      It was believed that iron was a monopoly of the Hittites and with the disruption of their empire the technical know-how dispersed to different parts of the world around circa 1200 B.C. But now it is known that there are several sites in the world where metallic iron was in use in pre-1200 B.C. period although in small quantity. Metallic as well as smelted iron has been reported in some early contexts.

2. The word “Ayas” that generally stands for iron occurs several times in the Rigveda, the earliest text of the Aryans in India. But a detailed examination of the word Ayas reveals that it was used either to indicate metal or copper bronze. There are certain contexts that can be interpreted both ways but more precisely Ayas meant copper-bronze and if it was true then we can’t say that iron come to India along with the Aryans (the composers of Rigveda).   

3.      Metallurgically, iron smelting and forging processes were considered so complex that independent origin of technology at several places was regarded as improbable. But recent investigations show that iron is a by-product of copper and lead smelting and this makes iron production a viable proposition in any copper – bronze working society. The availability was greater in more elementary and less efficient groups as they were likely to blunder and stumble upon a new product than the expert groups whose skill ruled out mistakes. Hence, under certain conditions iron-rich copper and even metallic iron could get reduced out of copper – lead smelt as a result of use of fluxes.

4.      If we go through chronological evidence, it also shows that iron was indigenous in origin. Recently, from the mid-Ganga plains several sites like Raja Nal-Ka-Tila in Sonabhadra district, Malhar in Mirjapur district and Pandurajar Dhibi, Hathigra, Mangalkot in Bengal etc. have yielded important early evidence of the occurrence of iron. No one can ignore all such evidence that suggests that iron technology developed independently in India. Although, it may be possible that in certain bordering regions iron could have come through interactions with neighboring regions but there is no data to support diffusion of foreign technology into the deeper parts of the subcontinent.

Literary Evidence
The existing literature related to indigenous iron and steel industry is really vast. The accessible literature on India’s indigenous iron industry is largely based on European accounts as most of the ethno-historical data on this subject was collected by the European observers of the early colonial period. However, it seems that most of the European evidence concealed more than they exposed and the actual artisan is missing in this perspective. These European observers chiefly dealt with the broad outer characteristics of craft production (the shape and the size of the furnace, working method, product etc.) with only a passing reference to the smith as a ‘tribal’, a ‘savage’ or simply as ‘an emaciated creature’. One other factor that played a significant role in the restriction of the accessible historiography on Indian iron is its failure to take note, much less highlight, the fact that the colonial observers’ notion of iron metallurgy in India differed widely between the early eighteenth century and the post-Bessemer invention period.

But the available indigenous literature shows a different perspective of the Indian craft tradition, though this indigenous literature has its own limitations. The limitations of the nationalist historiography are widely known at present as one could hardly get into the actual working sphere of the artisans simply by depending on archival and similar other evidences generally used in historical research. Historical evidence cannot give or explain the idea of early technologist’s perception of his work, his position in the particular craft structure, site of his work and the design of his workshop.

Indigenous Iron Industry of Jharkhand
Jharkhand has a long tradition of metallurgy as archaeological evidence of copper, gold and iron smelting has been found in this region. Jharkhand has been an epicenter of the growth and dispersion of a particular tool technique. It is believed that a nomadic group known as Asur had introduced the craft of iron smelting in this region (It is interesting to note that the name Asur  is also associated with traditional iron technological sites of Kumaun in the Central Himalayas). How old is the Asur’s association with Jharkhand is not known. There are two types of small iron smelting workshop that distinguish the iron industry of Jharkhand – the open air furnace of the nomadic blacksmith and the more numerous thatched furnace. Then, there was the larger iron-smelting workshop of the Koth-Saal type, followed by Khammar-Saal or iron refining houses. There were also some groups that did not smelt iron but specialized in forging tools. These different groups show differences in their tool techniques which are reflected in their widely different narratives and legends relating to their craft techniques. Significantly, the dichotomy between the ordinary Saal or the small iron-smelting furnace and the larger workshop of the Koth-Saal type also existed in some other parts of India.

Traditional Iron Workings in India
There are a number of groups in India, whose main occupation is iron smelting or related to iron working, but here only four ethnic groups (Agaria, Asur, Brijias and Lohar) are taken into consideration for highlighting the Indian traditional iron smelting technology. These four groups give a good idea about the traditional iron techniques in India.

(1) Agaria Iron Smelting Techniques
The Agaria is a scheduled tribe living in the districts of Mandala, Dindhori, Bilaspur, Balaghat of Madhya Pradesh. Iron smelting is the chief and traditional profession of Agaria groups. The Agaria community resides in close proximity of ore deposits, perhaps to save time as well as energy. There is no need of deep digging in India as iron deposits are profusely distributed. Iron ores used by them are mainly hematite or magnetite that occur in association with lateritic rocks in the form of heavy reddish brown stones. These stones are then broken into small pieces and cleaned of sticking earth. They mix the ore with charcoal in proportion of 1:3 and put this mixture into the furnace. After filling the mixture up to the top of the furnace they ignite it and plaster the mouth. After a continuous blast of one and half hour, the thick molten liquid starts appearing through the waste flue that indicates that the processes of melting of iron has begun. When the flow of slag stops, the bellows are removed. Finally, the bloom of glowing semi-molten iron balls are lifted out with the help of tongs and carried for hammering. After repeated hammering and heating this iron ball is used for making various implements and household tools.     

(2) Asur Iron Smelting Techniques
We can say that the Asur iron smelting technique is a living tradition of the past. Asur is one of the thirty scheduled tribes in Bihar and are found in the districts of Gumla, Lohardaga and Palaman and the Pat area of Netarhat plateau in Bihar. Three different varieties of iron ore are recognized by them: Magnetite is the first one and termed as POLA by the Asur. The second one is haematite, commonly known as BICHI. The third one is Haematite from laterite and commonly termed as GOTA. Charcoal of green sal trees is used by them as this charcoal is capable of generating sufficient heat for smelting processes as well as the sal tree is a good quality of forest wood.

(3) Birjia – the Iron Smelters
The Birjia is one of the most primitive tribes of Bihar. At present, Birjia people are mostly found in Lohardaga, Bishunpur and Raidih (Gumla) and Guru police stations of Palamu district. Traditionally the chief occupations of theBirjia are iron smelting, benora cultivation and basket making.  They are believed to be the first human race, who discovered the iron ore and prepared different types of iron implements with the help of their indigenous process.  A few among them still follow their traditional occupation, but due to shortage of raw materials they have started to adopt new economic activities.  Kothi (the basic open hearth furnace) is the iron smelting furnace used by them the height of which is about 2-1/2 feet with a single hole. The mixture of iron ore and charcoal was charged from the top and air was blown through a nozzle, by repeated pressing of the cylindrical bellow with the help of the feet. This bellowing with the legs is known as Chaupa.  The air is blasted for about 4-5 hours. The temperature in the furnace is determined by the skilled workers themselves. After the reduction the bellow is removed and the furnace mouth is broken. The bloom in the form of sponge is taken out from the furnace and hammered, first gently and then by hard hammering to shape it into desired forms.  But the unfortunate thing is that the tradition is now almost lost in competition to the modern technology.

(4) The Godulia Lohar and their Iron Making Technique
The Godulia Lohars live in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Western parts of Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. Black smithy  is the chief traditional profession of the Godulia Lohars. As they are nomadic groups, their home is their bullock cart that holds all the possessions and requirements that they need for their living. The same techniques were followed by their forefathers and the tradition is still continuing today by transmitting knowledge from father to son. They specialize in recasting waste scraps of iron. A small pit in the ground is used as a firing place and with the help of a manually operated wheel-fan the blast is produced. The quality of the scrap iron is enhanced by repeated heating and hammering and thus the new desired shaped tools and implements are made.

Traditional Iron Making in Modern Context
The traditional iron working is still alive in certain remote areas of the country, where higher quality of product is made by the workers in small furnaces. But in the present context there appears a need to review the technical availability of traditional iron making due to the changing politico-culture and socio-ecological constraints.  It has been said that the traditional iron making is wasteful both from the point of view of raw material as well as charcoal consumption as it plays an important role in the process of deforestation.  But, if we look at their technology closely we find that these groups are tapping those ores that are neglected or rated as low grade and not considered important for smelting by modern steel mills. The other significance of their work is that they locate and exploit those small pockets of ore deposits that have not been recorded in the geological texts while listing economically viable mining zones.  The delicate way of ore picking by them cannot be neglected. So if we take a holistic look, their technology is based on maximum utilization of the available ore resources. Regarding the second allegation that they are over exploiting forest resources, we find that most of the charcoal is made by them with dead trees lying in the forest. The Agaria families of Chhattishgarh and Chhota Nagpur visit forests for the collection of the sal leaves to use them as the plates for their meals, but the number of leaves per family is fixed and they do take a lot of care while plucking the leaves. So when even leaves are not plucked indiscriminately or carelessly by them, how can we accuse them of wasting trees? They show a great regard and respect towards the trees.  The trees are considered as the abode of deities or ancestor spirits that take care of the welfare of the people. 
  
Role of Traditional Iron Technology on Ecology
 In the present ecological conditions, the traditional technology can play a vital part by saving the environment and making it pollution free. The charcoal used by them as a source of energy is proved to be a far less pollutant in comparison to the fuels used by the modern steel mills. On the one hand, coal or other fossil fuels produce a large number of carcinogenic byproducts, while on the other charcoal is not a pollutant because of its low sulphur content. The furnaces used by these communities are small and so they do not cause damage to the atmosphere. The traditional iron working is in the form of small scale household industries distributed over a large area. Resource exploitation by these communities is therefore shallow, expanding over an extensive area. So, one can say that the ore and fuel used by these communities are not affecting the environment. These data lead us to construe that these the traditional crafts of iron making have an eco-friendly economic viability in the present context.  

Conclusions
Traditional iron technology in India was well developed as shown by the above facts.
The indigenous iron smelting was found among the tribal artisan groups and this tradition is gradually losing due mainly  to the following reasons:
1.      This tradition is losing its grip because of the availability of better tools and implements in the market.
2.      The scarcity of the raw materials forced these tribes to adopt some new ways of economic activities.
3.      The work is very laborious and time consuming.
4.      The other factor that is playing an important part in losing this tradition is the adoption of the western techniques. The Indian tribes have been dispossessed of their habitat and thrown into an alien world without being equipped to face the harsh world. As a result of this, they are losing their traditional techniques and are forced to adopt the new ways to eke out an existence. As we are now realizing the potential of their craft, we need to review our industrial policies after over fifty years of independence.

Indira Gandhi National Museum of Mankind, Bhopal, is trying to revive this dying tradition. This will certainly help to protect these traditional iron smelters from unemployment and thus will be able to save this traditional system of iron technology.

Sources:
Sarkar, Smritikumar. 2002. Studying India’s Indigenous Iron Industry: Looking for an Alternative Approach. InTradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making, Girija Pande and Jan af Geijerstam (Eds). Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 205-224.

Tripathi, Vibha. 2002. Iron Technology in India: Survival of an Ancient Tradition. In Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making, Girija Pande and Jan af Geijerstam (Eds). Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 225-236.

Nayal, Rakesh and Nilanjan Khatua. 2002. Traditional Iron Making Techniques in India. In Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making, Girija Pande and Jan af Geijerstam (Eds.) Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 250-257.


Aryan Gods of Mitanni Treaties (Paul Thieme)
JOAS Vol. 80, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1960), pp. 301-317



Tales of Krishna's childhood - (Nandita Krishna 2012) (Nanditakrishna 2012) ppt
http://www.scribd.com/doc/193918920/Tales-of-Krishna-s-childhood-Nandita-Krishna-2012








An Unique panel - Samudra Manthan from Kanchi kailasantha

The land of the thousand temples is no tall claim by Kanchipuram. At any spot in the city, you will be able to spot atleast 2 -3 temples and this treasure trove holds in its midst on the earliest and grandest structural temples - the spectacular Kailasantha built by King Rajasimha Pallava. This jewel of a temple holds in its midst some of the most fantastic expression of sculptural excellence - be it the composition, complexity, elegance and sheer volume per square inch of workmanship - this temple is second to none. Today, we are going to see a very unique panel that showcases the intellect and liveliness of the Pallava sculptor as well - the Samudra manthan.
Kailasantha+sculpture

Its very unusual to find the churning of Milk ocean to depicted in stone in India. Though a very important act, we find mostly Vishnu shown as his Kurma ( turtle) avatar depicting this significant event. The only freeze that does justice to this event is the one in Angkor and a few smaller panels in the surrounding sites. The Cambodian version have Vishnu shown twice - both as himself and as his kurma avatar ( including the nice one in the Swarnaboom Airport in Bangkok). The legend is ofcourse a simple one. The good Devas loose their powers due to an act of their chief Indra. They need Amrit to restore their immortality and powers. Amrit can be obtained if the Milk ocean is churned - but the task is so huge. They need the Manthara Mountain to churn and look for a rope - the king of serpents Vasuki volunteers his help. Just as they begin, the mountain sinks into the ocean due to its weight. Vishnu takes the form of turtle ( kurma) and bears it weight. The Devas and Asuras take the two side of the snake and churn the ocean. Finally the nectar or amrit is obtained.
The sculpture in Kanchi however is very different, for it does not have the Turtle depicted anywhere ! Lets take another look.


churning+kanchi
The central eight armed figure is Vishnu for sure, you can clearly see the Conch and the Discus.








discus+conch
discus+conch+offset
He is slightly off center and hence our attention goes to the object on which he is leaning or rather holding up. ( kind of reminds you of the blokes in Baywatch leaning on their surf boards!!)
main+act
vishnu
The posture is also important to notice, there seems to be nonchalant ease or rather an accomplished pride in his stance.
notice+4+hands
notice+posture

Now, to the bottom we do see the Vasuki, the king of serpents ( the rope that was used to churn) looking very much relaxed.
vasuki

In side the frame of the Mandara mountain, we see a flying figure carrying something.
dhanvantari+nectar+pot
Lets take a closer look at this flying figure.
closeup+dhanvatari+nectar+pot

Ofcourse, its Dhanvatari carrying the pot of amrit. That means its mission accomplished ! Apart from the pot of Amrit with Dhanvantari many more auspicious beings/objects emerged during the churning chief among which are ofcourse the Kaustubham - the jewel worn by Vishnu, Kamadenu , Kalpavriksha, Airavatam - the white elephant given to Indra, by some version the Conch and Discus of Vishnu, and a seven headed white horse - Ucchaishravas. This is where it gets interesting. In its hay days, the entire sculpture would have had a full coat of lime plaster and beautifully painted - however, time has taken its toll, leaving us very little of the minute details, yet we can spot a horse ( its not a seven headed one) but a horse there is. This horse has an interesting legend associated with its tail and color, but we will see that later on.




So, the pillar which Vishnu is propping up could be taken the Mandra mountain which was used to churn the milk ocean.
mount+madhara

notice+horse+in+corner
ucchaishravas

Looking at all these, it would be a considered guess that this depicts the final act of the Samudra churning, where the triumphant Vishnu stylistically leans on the Mandara, taking in the applause.

picture courtesy: Sri Ashok Krishnaswamy


The Churning of the Ocean of Milk

   The episode of the churning of the Ocean of Milk for getting the Nectar of immortality appears in chapters 5 to 11 of the eighth Skandha of Srimad Bhagavata. The story may first be narrated before going into its inner meaning.

   Sage Durvasa had received a divine garland from a celestial damsel. Knowing that the wearer of this garland would be blessed with all prosperity, Durvasa went to Indra and presented the garland to him. Indra, who was then seated on his elephant, received it without caring to get down and make obeisance to the sage, and nonchalantly placed it on the head of the elephant. The elephant shook its head and, when the garland fell down, trampled on it. Sorely annoyed at this blatant display of disrespect, Durvasa left immediately after pronouncing a curse that Indra, as well as the three worlds ruled by him, would soon lose all their splendour. Taking advantage of the situation the Asuras attacked the Devas and killed many of them. Indra and the other gods rushed to Brahma seeking his help. Brahma told them that none but Lord Vishnu would be able to help them out of their predicament. Lord Vishnu, to whom all of them then went, advised them to make peace with the Asuras and seek their co-operation for churning the Ocean of Milk to get the nectar which would make them immortal.  
  
   As commanded by Lord Vishnu, the gods got the co-operation of the Asuras and set about the task of churning the ocean, using the Mandara mountain as the churning rod and the serpent Vasuki as the churning rope. While the gods and the Asuras were carrying the mountain to the ocean they became exhausted by the great effort and dropped the mountain. The Lord immediately appeared there on his mount Garuda, placed the mountain on Garuda and carried it to the ocean with ease.

   When the churning was to begin, the Lord asked the Asuras to hold the tail-end of Vasuki and the Devas the head. The Asuras objected to this and wanted to be at the head-end. The Lord immediately agreed to this. This was a stratagem adopted by the Lord to make the Asuras suffer when poison would emanate from Vasuki's mouth during the churning. When the churning had gone on for a little while, the mountain sank into the ocean because of its weight. The Lord again came to their rescue by taking the form of a huge tortoise, going deep down into the ocean and lifting up the mountain on His back. The Devas and Asuras then resumed the churning while the Lord Himself kept the mountain in position by pressing it down with one hand so as to prevent it from springing up due to the force of the churning. When Vasuki began to emit poison, the Asuras who were at the head-end were affected most and the Devas at the tail-end to a lesser extent. The Lord then caused cool showers of rain to fall on the Devas, but not on the Asuras.   

   When nothing emerged from the ocean in spite of long churning, the Lord Himself took up the churning, holding both ends of Vasuki in His hands. The first thing to emerge after the Lord took up the churning was the deadly poison known as Haalaahala. As it spread in all directions, the terrified Devas ran to Lord Siva for refuge. Lord Siva took the poison in the hollow of His palm and put it in His mouth, but did not swallow it, lest the living beings inside His stomach be destroyed. He kept it in His throat and thereby protected all the living beings, both within and outside Him. The poison left a black mark around His throat and that became His special adornment.

   Then there emerged from the ocean, one after another, Kamadhenu, whom Lord Vishnu gave to the Rishis, the horse Uchchhaisravas, the elephant Airavata,  the Kalpaka tree which grants all wishes, and divine damsels, all of whom were given to the Devas by the Lord. Then Goddess Lakshmi emerged and she chose the Lord Himself as her consort. The next to come up was the intoxicating liquor Varuni, which the Lord permitted the Asuras to take for themselves. Finally emerged Dhanvantari, another form of the Lord Himself, holding in his hands a vessel of nectar. The Asuras immediately snatched the nectar, while the Devas looked on helplessly. The Lord again came to the rescue of the Devas, taking the form of a beautiful young damsel, Mohini. The Asuras, who were intoxicated with the liquor Varuni, became infatuated with Mohini and requested her to distribute the nectar. Mohini asked the Devas and the Asuras to sit in separate rows and distributed all the nectar to the Devas, while the Asuras, who had succumbed to her charms, merely looked on. One Asura, Rahu, had disguised himself as a Deva and sat between the Sun and the Moon and he was also served nectar, but, on being pointed out by a gesture by the Sun and the Moon, the Lord cut him into two with his Discus. His trunk, which had not been touched by the nectar, fell down, but the head having gained immortality because of the contact of nectar, Brahma turned him into a planet. It is that planet which, entertaining animosity against them, swallows the Sun and the Moon, causing the eclipses.

   When the Asuras realised that they had been fooled by Mohini, they attacked the Devas, but with the help of the Lord the Devas were able to vanquish them.

   Now let us see what are the lessons conveyed by this story. The Devas and Asuras can be taken as representing the divine and demoniac tendencies in the human mind, which are described in chapter 16 of the Bhagavadgita. This is supported by the explanation given by Sri Sankara in his Bhashya on  the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1.iii.1. Sri Sankara says, "The Devas and the Asuras are the organs of speech and the rest. They become Devas when they shine under the influence of thoughts and actions as taught by the scriptures. Those very organs become Asuras when they are under the influence of their natural thoughts and actions, based only on perception and inference, and directed merely towards the attainment of worldly ends". The divine tendencies are fearlessness, purity of mind, control of the senses, straightforwardness, non-covetousness, humility, and the like. The demoniac tendencies are arrogance, anger, harshness, ignorance and the like. Both these types of tendencies are present in every normal human being. The proportion of divine and demoniac tendencies varies from person to person. Even in the same person sometimes the divine tendencies may be dominant and sometimes the demoniac, making the person behave differently at different times. Indra here represents such a human mind. When sage Durvasa came, the demoniac tendencies were dominant in Indra and so he behaved arrogantly. His discrimination was clouded. The curse of Durvasa shows that no one, however high the position he occupies, can escape the consequences of actions performed under the influence of demoniac tendencies.

   As soon as the sage uttered the curse, Indra realised the consequences and sought the grace of the Lord which alone can help man. The Lord asked him to make peace with the Asuras temporarily because they were at that time very strong and could not be defeated. This is another way of saying that it is not possible to get rid of the demoniac tendencies by fighting against them and trying to suppress them when they are strong. The divine tendencies must first be made stronger and then only can the demoniac tendencies be countered. The Devas were therefore asked to strengthen themselves by getting the nectar from the ocean.

   The figure of 'churning' is one which appears in the Upanishads also. It stands for the extraction of the essence. The Svetasvataropanishad says (1.14):--       

"Making one's own body the lower piece of wood and the pranava the upper piece of wood, and practising churning in the form of meditation, one should realise God as one would find out something hidden". (For lighting the fire for yajnas one piece of wood is placed vertically on another piece of wood placed horizontally and churning is done to produce fire. The two pieces of wood are known as Aranis). The same upanishad also says that the supreme Self can be perceived in the intellect, just as butter can be obtained from curd (1.16).

So, just as butter is obtained by churning curd, one can realise the Self by churning one's own intellect.

   In Sivanandalahari, verse 37, Sri Sankara says that the wise man should churn the ocean of the Vedas, using his virtuous mind as the rod and firm devotion as the rope, in order to realise God:--

"Just as the Devas churned the ocean of milk and obtained the moon, the wish-fulfilling tree, the cow Kamadhenu, the gem Chintamani, nectar and Goddess Lakshmi, so the wise churn the ocean of the Vedas, using their virtuous mind as the rod and firm devotion as the rope and attain you (Lord Siva), who confer the nectar of eternal bliss". 

This is the significance of this episode of churning the ocean of milk.    
   It has been repeatedly brought out in this episode that no one can succeed in any action without the grace and help of the Lord. When the Devas and the Asuras were carrying the Mandara mountain it fell down and only the Lord could take it to the ocean. When the mountain went down into the water, the Lord had to take the form of a huge tortoise and  lift it up. It was only after the Lord Himself took up the churning that things began to emerge from the ocean.

   The first thing to emerge from the ocean was the deadly poison, which was removed by Lord Siva so that it may not do any harm to living beings. The idea brought out here is that when a person progresses sufficiently in meditation, all the impurities in his mind such as desire, anger, greed, and the like, which harm his spiritual progress, are removed by the grace of God. The poison may be taken as standing for such impurities.


   While asking the Devas to churn the ocean for nectar, Lord Vishnu warned them not to covet any of the things that might come up during the churning (Bh.VIII.6.25).This is similar to the warning given to the spiritual aspirant not to be tempted by the siddhis which may come to him, but to keep his mind fixed on the ultimate goal, liberation. The Kamadhenu, kalpaka tree, etc, represent the siddhis

http://sanskritdocuments.org/sites/snsastri/episodes.html#_Toc107921204
Samudra Manthan 
The panel at the top shows the Devas and Asuras churning the ocean. In the panel below, framed by makara-toranas are the ratnas yielded by the manthan, including Lakshmi (centre), Uchhaishravas (right), and Apsaras (left). http://www.kaladarshana.com/sites/papanasanam/P1010197.html
Country: India
Site Name: Udaipur
Monument: an illustrated manuscript of the Bhagavata Purana text
Artist: Sahibdin
Subject of Photo: leaf with illustration of Visnu's Kurma Avatara and the Churning of the Ocean of Milk: First yields of the ocean
Photo Orientation: overview of leaf

Iconography: Bhagavata Purana
Dynasty/Period: Rajput Dynasties: Mewar
Date: colophon dated 1648 CE, 1648 CE

Material: paper / pigment
Dimensions: H - ca. 8.00 in W - ca. 14.25 in
Current Location: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, India

Scan Number: 0059934 http://huntington.wmc.ohio-state.edu
Samudra-Manthana Sculpture
Churning of the Ocean
The upper panel of the sculpture depicts Samudramathana. Circa 10th century, Alampur sculpture

The churning of the ocean of milk, Cambodia, Prasat Phnom Da, Angkor vat style, first half of the XIIth century, sandstone. Musée Guimet, Paris
The Churning of the Sea of Milk, Angkor relief. Photo by MeiLynThe Churning of the Sea of Milk, Angkor relief.


www.bsu.edu/classes/magrath/churning/churning.ppt‎ Churning pdf http://www.scribd.com/doc/193963692/Samudra-Manthanam-Churning-the-ocean
Known ancient sources, major deposits of tin.

"Achaemenid imperial art shows at least extensive iconographic borrowing from the ancient Near East, for example, the wingèd Ahura Mazdā icon borrowed from nearly identical Assur figures (Root, 1975; Jacobs, 1991)." http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/zoroastrianism-i-historical-review

Bruno Jacobs “Der Sonnengott im Pantheon der Achämeniden,” in J. Kellens, ed.,La religion iranienne à l’époque achéménide, Gent, 1991, pp. 58-80.

Margaret C. Root, The King and Kingship in Achaemenid Art, Leiden, 1975, pp. 169-176.

[quote]Aššur became a great commercial center and founded trading settlements, the best known of which were those in Asia Minor.
Under the king Šamši-Adad I in the late 19th-early 18th centuries, Assyria became a powerful state and conducted an active policy of conquest. Soon after, however, the Babylonian king Hammurabi (1792-1750) subjugated Assyria. In the eighteenth century Assyria also lost the monopoly of caravan trade. Toward the middle of the second millennium B.C. hegemony in northern Mesopotamia was gained by the Mitanni, an eastern neighbor of Assyria. About 1360 B.C. the Hittite king Suppiluliumaš vanquished the Mitanni, to whom Assyria was at the time subjected, and the Assyrian king Aššur-uballiṭ I seized part of the Mitanni territory and also brought Babylonia into subjection.

Map of tin and gold deposits and occurrences in Afghanistan

In the 14th-13th centuries the Assyrians conquered the whole of northern Mesopotamia. At the end of the twelfth century under Tiglath-pileser I, the Assyrians waged war in Babylonia, Syria, and Phoenicia, but toward the end of his reign their power began to decline, owing to the infiltration into northern Mesopotamia of Aramaic tribes inhabiting the Syrian desert west of the Euphrates...This first flurry of metallurgical activity is attested on the Iranian plateau earlier than in Mesopotamia. Nevertheless, the first indications of bronze appear simultaneously on the plateau and in the lowlands in the 4th millennium. A bronze flat axe was excavated from the necropolis at Susa I(A) (Berthoud, p. 13 no. 974) and a bronze needle from Sialk III-5 (Ghirshman, 1938, p. 206). From Godin unpublished analyses indicate that bronze is present in period V, which dates to the second half of the 4th millennium into the early 3rd millennium B.C. (Godin Project Archives). These random initial occurrences of bronze may have resulted from trade with the east. Afghanistan, where abundant copper and tin deposits are juxtaposed, is a likely locus for the technological innovation of bronze...Only at Susa is there evidence of bronze technology from the mid-3rd millennium: the “vase à la cachette” containing four bronzes, sixteen arsenical coppers, and three artifacts containing both tin and arsenic (Amiet et al.; Berthoud, p. 14). Analyses suggest that tin was being alloyed with arsenical copper (Stech and Pigott, p. 43). In the final centuries of the 3rd millennium, a period during which Susa had strong cultural ties with Mesopotamia (Amiet, p. 197), bronze was found with some frequency there; by that time many plateau settlements, including those at Tepe Sialk, Tall-i Malyan (Tall-e Malīān), and Tepe Yahya had been abandoned...The Sumerians were active in trade and the acqui­sition of exotic luxury materials. The rarity of tin may have enhanced its status in Mesopotamia, whereas the peoples of the Iranian plateau remained uninfluenced by such pressures (Stech and Pigott, p. 48). At any rate, tin “bypassed” the plateau en route to Mesopotamia (Beale, p. 144; Moorey, 1982, p. 88). Iranian metallurgi­cal traditions can thus be characterized as technologi­cally conservative, for, though copper artifacts were manufactured in quantity and in a variety of forms, simple smelted or melted arsenical copper was the main material used. At Tepe Hissar, for example, the quan­tities of slag, fragments of furnace lining, and molds suggest large-scale production of arsenical copper: tools, weapons, and elaborate ornaments (Schmidt, 1937; Pigott et al.). There is also evidence of lead and silver production. Bronze, however, was found only very rarely in the analysis of metal artifacts from the site (Pigott et al., p. 230; Berthoud et al., 1982, p. 50 n. 66; Reisch and Horton apud Schmidt, 1937, p. 359). Assemblages from Shahr-i Sokhta to the southeast, Tepe Yahya to the south (Heskel and Lamberg-Karlovsky, 1980; 1986; Heskel, 1982, pp. 73-97; Tylecote and McKerrell, 1971; 1986), and probably Shahdad, also to the south (Vatandoost-Haghighi; Moorey, 1982, pp. 83, 90-91; Salvatori; Salvatori and Vidale), consist primarily of arsenical copper artifacts, with rare bronzes (Heskel 1982, pp. 97-120; Hauptmann; see also Tosi, 1993). An arsenical-copper shaft-hole axe from a burial at Khurab (Ḵᵛorāb; Stein, 1937, p. 121) in Baluchistan has been the subject of several studies (Maxwell-Hyslop; Zeuner; During Caspers), including a detailed metallurgical analysis of its composition and manufacture (Lamberg-Karlovsky, 1969; Lechtman). Farther west at Tall-i Malyan in Fārs province artifacts from the late 4th- and early 3rd-millennium Banesh (Baneš) phase (Nicholas, 1980; forthcoming) are exclu­sively of arsenical copper, but preliminary analyses of finds from the subsequent Kaftari phase (early 2nd millennium) indicate that several are of bronze (Pigott, 1980, pp. 107; unpublished analyses of the Museum of Applied Science, Center for Archaeology/MASCA). Slags with entrapped metal prills from Malyan have been shown by analysis to be derived from copper/bronze production (Carriveau, pp. 63-66). Unpublished analyses from the site of Godin indicate that a number of bronze artifacts occur in period III contexts, about early 3rd to early 2nd millennium B.C. (Godin Project Archives). Thus the Godin III and Kaftari Malyan contexts may be the earliest on the plateau to contain bronze with some frequency, probably reflect­ing the geographical and cultural proximity of these sites to the lowlands of Mesopotamia and Ḵūzestān.
The suggestion of Afghanistan as an early locus of bronze metallurgy, though attractive, cannot yet be fully substantiated archeologically. The only well-­documented artifacts in bronze from the region were excavated at Mundigak (Mondīgak), in levels dating from the mid-4th through the 3rd millennium (Shaffer, p. 144; Jarrige, p. 291; see also Lamberg-Karlovsky, 1967, pp. 146-48). A few were of bronze, principally axes and a single adze, and their occurrence over a long span of time may indicate regular use of the alloy (Stech and Pigott, p. 47). Unfortunately, the bronze artifacts from Ghar-i Mar (Ḡār-e Mār “snake cave”) in northern Afghanistan cannot be firmly dated (Caley, 1971, 1972, 1980; Shaffer, p. 89; cf. Moorey, 1982, p. 99 n. 62)... ...The most comprehensive typological studies of a large corpus of Iranian copper-base artifacts from the region between the Indus and the Danube have been published by Deshayes (1958; 1960; 1963; 1965; De­shayes and Christophe). They include extensive dis­cussions of techniques of fabrication and evolution of forms, as well as of the general development of metal­lurgy in various culture areas of southwestern Asia and adjacent regions.[unquote] http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/assyria-

J. Deshayes, “Marteaux de bronze iraniens,” Syria 35, 1958, pp. 284-93.

Idem, Les outils de bronze de l’Indus au Danube (IVᵉ au IIᵉ millénaire), Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 71, 2 vols., Paris, 1960.

Idem, “Haches-herminettes iraniennes,” Syria 40, 1963, pp. 273-76.

Idem, “Nouveaux outils iraniens,” Syria 42, 1965, pp. 91-108.

Idem and J. Christophe, Index de l’outillage. Outils de métal de l’âge du bronze des Balkans à l’Indus II: Commen­taires, Paris, 1964.
THE TIN ROAD / SILK ROUTEArchaeologists now present evidence that dates the earliest international trade convoys to 2700 B.C. This trade of 5,000 years ago involved cargos of tin, brought from the mountains of Afghanistan overland across Iran to the city of Eshnunna (Tel Asmar in current-day Iraq) on the Tigris river in Mesopotamia. From there the cargos were transported overland, via the city of Mari on the Euphrates, to the port of Ugarit (current-day Ras Shamra) in northern Syria, and finally from there shipped to various destinations in the Middle East. Tin was an important commodity, as it was vital ingredient in the production of bronze. The bronze alloy formulated in the eastern Mediterranean in the 3rd Millennium BC brought about a revolution in economics, civilization and warfare. At that time, there were only two known sources of tin in the world: Afghanistan and Anatolia. Anatolian tin was used locally and the surplus was exported. The increased demand for tin for bronze production opened up trade with Afghanistan, and thus the first known trade route, the Tin Road, was born. This route was the predecessor of the much later, and more famous Silk Road, over which merchants traveled to and from China.

The 7,000 mile Silk Road network spanned China, Central Asia, Northern India, and the Parthian and Roman Empires. It connected the Yellow River Valley to the Mediterranean Sea and passed through the Chinese cities Kansu and Sinkiang and the present-day countries of Iran, Iraq and Syria. By 760 AD, during T'ang Dynasty China, trade along the Silk Road declined. It substantially revived under the Sung Dynasty in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, when China became largely dependent on its silk trade. In addition, trade to Central and Western Asia, as well as to Europe, recovered for a period of time from 1276-1368 under the Mongol Yuan Dynasty of China. The Chinese traded silk against medicines, perfumes, and slaves in addition to precious stones. As overland trade became increasingly dangerous, and overseas trade became more popular, trade along the Silk Road declined after this period. While the Chinese continued to deal in silk and furs with the Russians north of the original Silk Road, trade and travel along the road substantially decreased. It must be understood that the  Silk Road is more of a concept than a real road that can be drawn on a roadmap. The name was invented in 1877 by Ferdinand von Richthofen to describe the network of trade routes which linked China with the Mediterranean until they were made redundant by the European maritime discoveries of the late 15th c. The name was picked up again in the 1980s by UNESCO, and now signifies a larger concept for East-West trade rather than one specific highway. Scholars debate its exact configuration, and many varying descriptions of the route are encountered in texts.

Anatolia's connection with the Tin and Silk roads was not overland, but through its Mediterranean ports. The harbors on the Mediterranean coast were important junction points on this trade route. A route from the Syrian port of Ugarit passed through modern-day Antakya to Adana in Turkey. Tin mined in the Taurus mountains of southern Turkey was brought here for sale as well. In time, this route extended inland to Konya, by way of Niğde, eventually reaching as far as the Asian shore of the Bosphorus.
 
THE ASSYRIAN TRADE ROADIn the 2nd Millennium BC, a well-developed trade route between Anatolia and Mesopotamia was used by Assyrian merchants. About 500 years after the establishment of the Tin Road, a second trade route developed, still in use today. It originated in upper Mesopotamia and reached Kayseri via Mardin, Diyarbakir and Malatya. Created by Assyrian merchants who were the first to initiate trade between Anatolia and the Middle East, the route later was extended from Kayseri south to Niğde and north to Sivas. It eventually connected to Persia and was responsible for making Kayseri a leading trading center of the age.
In Seljuk times, there was a vast commercial fair called the "Yabanlu Pazari" (Bazaar of the Foreigners) that was held forty days a year at a place still called Pazarören near Kayseri. It is referred to by Mevlana in his Mesnevi. All the caravan routes converged at this point, not far from the site of a Bronze-age trading post. This fair's origins are thought to go back as far as the 2nd Millennium BC, when Kultepe, known in ancient times as Kanesh-Karum, was an important early Hittite commercial cities. Dating from 2000 BC, Kultepe near Kayseri was also one of the world's first cities to be open to free trade. Kültepe became an important Assyrian merchant stop, carrying goods up from Mesopotamia.

http://www.turkishhan.org/trade.htm



Haifa tin ingots

ranku 'liquid measure'; ranku 'antelope' Rebus: ranku 'tin' (Santali)

Or. ḍagara ʻ footstep, road ʼ; Mth. ḍagar ʻ road ʼ, H. ḍagar f., ḍagrā m., G. ḍagar f. 2. P. ḍĩgh f. ʻ foot, step ʼ; N. ḍegḍek ʻ pace ʼ; Mth. ḍeg ʻ footstep ʼ; H. ḍigḍeg f. ʻ pace ʼ. 3. L. dagg m. ʻ road ʼ, daggaṛ rāh m. ʻ wide road ʼ (mult. ḍaggar rāh < daggaṛ?); P. dagaṛ m. ʻ road ʼ, H. dagṛā m.(CDIAL 5523). Rebus: damgar 'merchant' (Akkadian) 

Tin-copper alloy called tin-bronze or zinc-copper alloy called brass, were innovations that allowed for the much more complex shapes cast in closed moulds of the Bronze Age. Arsenical bronze objects appear first in the Near East where arsenic is commonly found in association with copper ore, but the health risks were quickly realized and the quest for sources of the much less hazardous tin ores began early in the Bronze Age. (Charles, J.A. (1979). "The development of the usage of tin and tin-bronze: some problems". In Franklin, A.D.; Olin, J.S.; Wertime, T.A. The Search for Ancient Tin. Washington D.C.: A seminar organized by Theodore A. Wertime and held at the Smithsonian Institution and the National Bureau of Standards, Washington D.C. March 14–15, 1977. pp. 25–32.)

Thus was created the demand for tin metal. This demand led to a trade network which linked distant sources of tin to the markets of Bronze Age.

Zinc added to copper produces a bright gold-like appearance to the alloy called brass. Brass has been used from prehistoric times. ( Thornton, C. P. (2007) "Of brass and bronze in prehistoric southwest Asia" in La Niece, S. Hook, D. and Craddock, P.T. (eds.) Metals and mines: Studies in archaeometallurgy London: Archetype Publications) The earliest brasses may have been natural alloys made by smelting zinc-rich copper ores. (Craddock, P.T. and Eckstein, K (2003) "Production of Brass in Antiquity by Direct Reduction" in Craddock, P.T. and Lang, J. (eds) Mining and Metal Production Through the Ages London: British Museum pp. 226–7.)

Zinc is a metallic chemical element; the most common zinc ore is sphalerite (zinc blende), a zinc sulfide mineral. Brass, which is an alloy of copper and zinc has been used for vessels. The mines of Rajasthan have given definite evidence of zinc production going back to 6th Century BCE.
http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/t_es/t_es_agraw_zinc_frameset.htm Ornaments made of alloys that contain 80–90% zinc with lead, iron, antimony, and other metals making up the remainder, have been found that are 2500 years old.  (Lehto, R. S. (1968). "Zinc". In Clifford A. Hampel. The Encyclopedia of the Chemical Elements. New York: Reinhold Book Corporation. pp. 822–830.) An estimated million tonnes of metallic zinc and zinc oxide from the 12th to 16th centuries were produced from Zawar mines. (Emsley, John (2001). "Zinc". Nature's Building Blocks: An A-Z Guide to the Elements. Oxford, England, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 499–505.)

The addition of a second metal to copper increases its hardness, lowers the melting temperature, and improves the casting process by producing a more fluid melt that cools to a denser, less spongy metal. ( Penhallurick, R.D. (1986). Tin in Antiquity: its Mining and Trade Throughout the Ancient World with Particular Reference to Cornwall. London: The Institute of Metals.)

Tin extraction and use can be dated to the beginnings of the Bronze Age around 3000 BC, when it was observed that copper objects formed of polymetallic ores with different metal contents had different physical properties. (Cierny, J.; Weisgerber, G. (2003). "The "Bronze Age tin mines in Central Asia". In Giumlia-Mair, A.; Lo Schiavo, F. The Problem of Early Tin. Oxford: Archaeopress. pp. 23–31.)
Tin is obtained chiefly from the mineral cassiterite, where it occurs as tin dioxide, SnO2.The first alloy, used in large scale since 3000 BC, was bronze, an alloy of tin and copper.  Cassiterite often accumulates in alluvial channels as placer deposits due to the fact that it is harder, heavier, and more chemically resistant than the granite in which it typically forms. Early Bronze Age prospectors could easily identify the purple or dark stones of cassiterite from alluvial sources and could be obtained the same way gold was obtained by panning in placer deposits.

Pewter, which is an alloy of 85–90% tin with the remainder commonly consisting of copper, antimony and lead, was used for flatware.

Here is a pictorial gallery:



Panning for cassiterite using bamboo pans in a pond in Orissa. The ore is carried to the water pond or stream for washing in bamboo baskets.

People panning for cassiterite mineral in the remote jungles of central India.


The ore is washed to concentrate the cassiterite mineral using bamboo pans. Base of small brick and mud furnace for smelting tin.



The tin is refined by remelting the pieces recovered from the furnace in an iron pan. The molten tin is poured into stone-carved moulds to make square- or rectangular-ingots.


As the pictorial gallery demonstrates, the entire tin processing industry is a family-based or extended-family-based industry. The historical traditions point to the formation of artisan guilds to exchange surplus cassiterite in trade transactions of the type evidenced by the seals and tablets, tokens and bullae found in the civilization-interaction area of the Bronze Age.

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/08/ancient-near-east-bronze-age-heralded.html

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 11040

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>