Iconography and Historians

[Guest guest]

Iconography and Historians

 

In a country like India where religion plays an important

role, the study of icons (idols) can help to a great extend in

understanding the ancient history and culture. Iconography has two

branches – Iconology and Iconometry. Iconometry gives special

importance to the measurements of Icons. The study of Icons also

helps in understanding the enmity and envy between different

traditions within the same religion. For example think of the Icon of

god Sarabha. God Sarabha is pictured with the legs of animals and

body of a fearsome bird. The story says that god Sarabha incarnated

when it became difficult to control god Narasimha who was in a

destructive mood after killing the Asura Hiranay Kasipu. The icon of

god Sarabha who easily conquers god Narasimha is depicted in the

Dharasura temple. The concept of god Sarabha could be attributed to

the competition between Vishnavas and Saivas. It could be that to

oppose the popularity of Narasimha the Saivas invented the concept of

god Sarabha. To circumvent the concept of god Sarapha, again the

Vishnavas invented the concept of god Gandabherunda. God

Gandabherunda is depicted as a huge bird with two heads which easily

conquers god Sarabha. Now, on seeing such icons we can imagine and

understand the high competition between the Vishanava and Saivas.

Later the importance of god Gandabherunda and god Sarabha decreased

but Narasimha kept his importance as the idol (icon) that would be

installed even at Siva temples in the western side of the temple.

The Siva, Sakti, Vishnava, Jain, Budha (Vajrayana) Tantric cults

competed in this country for long. The Vedic religion was utilized by

them, and for living the vedic followers (read Brahmans) had to

compromise with this popular religious sects. The statement " Vedic

religion dissolved into the popular Tantric religion " depicts the

truth well, than the statement, " Vedic religion absorbed Tantric

beliefs to certain extend " . If you want to call the vedic

religion `Vedic/Aryan' then call, all those Tantric cults which

absorbed Vedas to a lesser or greater extend as `Tantric/ Non-

Vedic'. The Draveedian system was entirely different with its

ancient gods such as – Cheyon (Muruka), Mayon, Vendan, Kottava,

Ayyanar, Ayiravilli, Kali, Thirumal etc. Many gods those are not at

all related to the Vedic or Tantric religions.

Not only the gods, but the basic concept about the structure of the

universe itself was entirely different among these three streams.

The existence of the 3 distinct streams such as –

1) Vedic Culture

2) Tantric Culture

3) Dravidian Culture

Should be considered in any study of Indian history. But it not

happening now a days, because of the simple fact that not much light

is shed on the system, culture, concepts, and knowledge of Tantric

and Dravidian Culture. It is good not to mix-up the contributions of

Jain and Budha religions with this as well. Thus, the two other

streams are –

4) Jain culture

5) Budha Culture

The state of these streams after a lot of mix-up between them is

often taken to represent their original trend and shape. Which

results in errors like confusing Muruka with Subrahmania, Kali with

Parvati etc How many of us know that the concept of Yaksha/Yekshi (a

poplar male god and female goddess worshiped in Kerala) is related to

Jain religion, and concept of gods like like Aryaavalokiteswara,

Tara, Prajchaparamita, Samantabhadra, Manjusree etc (worshiped in

Kerala in ancient times) is related to Vajrayana Budha religion. Yet

again how many of us know that the Naga (snake) worship in South

India is related to the Non-Vedic Siva Tantric cults that were

popular even from the Sidhu-Saraswaty period? Of course the Vedic

gods like Indra etc were known in South India and the Yagas and Homas

a popular act of worship in temples. Thus it is clear that the

resultant culture which is a mix-up of all the above five streams is

now projected as the Draveedian culture. A true study of ancient

Dravidian culture and original gods is yet to happen.

A study of Iconography or literature (both of them are related to an

extend) reveals all these facts.

The historians are supposed to have an idea of Iconography,

even if we free them from having an understanding of true literary

history. How many of our historians fulfill this criterion? How

many historians know that they are supposed to learn subjects like -

1) Techniques to determine the antiquity of archeological

evidences

2) Iconography

3) Reading of ancient scripts

4) Avoiding " interpretation " of ancient script (as some thought

to be historians, especially Sindhu-Saraswaty historians, do now a

days, instead of " reading " the ancient scripts)

5) Preservation of Palmyra leaves and other archeological

evidences.

6) Astronomy (so that literary/archeological evidences could be

correctly understood and deciphered at times)

7) Linguistics and Linguistic history

8) Techniques of deriving history based on Primary evidence and

then substantiating it with secondary evidence.

9) A brief idea about all the subjects (such as Sankhya,

Viseshika, Aurveda, Astrology etc) that were popular in ancient times.

Yes, this list could be vast. How many historians(!) are their who is

trying to study and understand history based on the primary evidence

they could collect, instead of story making based on some info got

from searching the books or some " popular " ancient(?) literature? I

bet, you won't find many. This is the state of affairs as far as

the study of history is concerned in India.

I am just sharing some passing thoughts on history, as Kishore

patnayik ji directed our attention towards it.

Love,

Sreenadh