Warfare and Military System in Vedic Literature
by Rinki Deka | 2023 | 39,711 words
This page relates ‘Composition of Army’ of the study on Warfare and the Military System of ancient India as gleaned from the Vedic Literature. The purpose of this work is to study the defensive and offensive systems of the Vedic people, including their army divisions, political and administrative systems, use of arms and armours, fortification, ethics and other principles related to warfare; while reflecting the social system and cultural aspects of ancient India.
Composition of Army
The Vedic Āryans developed a very high code of warfare. The army of one king went to the territory of the enemy king—
pretaṃ pādau pra sphurataṃ vahataṃ pṛṇato gṛhān/indrāṇyetu prathamājītāmuṣitā puraḥ//[1]
In the relevant context of the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā, Sāyaṇācārya states—
yadvā pṛṇataḥ pālakasya pararāṣṭrādhīśasya śatroḥ gṛhān vahatam asmadīyāṃ senāṃ prāpayatam/
The kings fought face to face against each other with their enemies. The word abhivyādhin, means the fighters who fought face to face.[2]
Commenting upon the term, Sāyaṇācārya states—
abhivyādhinaḥ abhimukham āgatya vidhyanti hiṃsantī-tyabhivyādhinaḥ pratyarthinaḥ saṃnihitā bhaṭāḥ /[3]
In the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, the word senā indicates a host[4] or army.[5] Senā was an armed body, which was always ready for war. A commander or a leader of a befitting army was called Senānī.[6]
Sāyaṇācārya interprets the term as—
Uvaṭa interprets the term senānī as—
senāṃ nayatīti senānīḥ/[8]
He was also one of the king’s jewels.[9] He was appointed by the king to command in war.[10] He assisted the king in the battlefield, and also led expedition too trivial to demand the monarch’s personal attention. In the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa, the leader of a good army is called suṣeṇa and a conqueror of army is known as senājit.[11] It is also stated that the warrior should be born as one heroic, skilled in archery, and a mighty carfighter.[12] They are described as the disturber of the people.[13] The term saṃgrāma means war in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā[14] and the Taittirīya-saṃhitā.[15] But according to A.A.Macdonell and A.B. Keith, the word saṃgrāma primarily means an assembly, either in peace or in war, when it means an armed band.[16] The term saṃgrāma might have meant an assembly of persons, who looked into their needs
jointly in times of peace and also utilised their military skill in times of war.[17] Zimmer deduced that the viś, the grāma, the kula, etc., also constituted the units of military organisation.[18] They took an active part in any war that the king might wage against powerful enemies. The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā refers to different types of armies such as, kavacin or varmin, i.e. with on armour, akavacin or avarmin,i.e. armourless, ajmani, i.e. vehicle user, rathin,i.e. chariot user, arathin,i.e. chariotless, asādin, i.e. infantry and sādin,i.e. the cavalry.[19] Thus, there were primarily four types of armies, viz. charioteers, cavalry, infantry and elephantry. The Sāmavidhānabrāhmaṇa clearly mentions the fourfold classification of the army with elephants, horses, chariots and infantry.[20]
Among these four types of armies, the charioteers were indispensable in warfare. The use of chariots in warfare marked an important stage in evolution of the world military system. A Ṛgvedic hymn in the sixth maṇḍala addresses warchariots.[21] The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā also contains a hymn to the war-chariots.[22] The term ratheṣṭhā, in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā,[23] denotes the warrior who fights from the chariot. In a Ṛgvedic verse, it is mentioned that Indra with his all outstripping chariot wheel overthrew the twenty kings, who had come in arms to fight with Suśravas and sixty thousand nine hundred and ninety followers.[24] The term rathavāhana is mentioned in a Ṛgvedic verse,[25] which according to Griffith, means a platform, stand, or truck on which the chariot is placed when it is not in use. He also states that the word, in the present context, seems to mean also the oblation offered by the warrior to the ideal war-chariot personified, or to a tutelary deity of chariots.[26]
Sāyaṇācārya interprets this as follows—
rathavāhanaṃ śatrūn jitvā rathenohyamānaṃ dhanaṃ haviḥ bhavati/agnerhaviriva vardhakaṃ bhavatītyarthaḥ/[27]
The charioteer is also called as rathin,[28] or kṣattṛ[29] in the Vedic texts. The Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā mentions the term anukṣattṛ to mean an attendant on the charioteer.[30] Both the wheels of the chariot were made of gold and the axle was also golden.[31] But sometimes the axle was made of Araṭu tree.[32] The wheels had metal tyres besides a felly (pradhi), spokes and a nave. The hole in the nave was called kha.[33] The word pavi denotes the rim of the wheel. The rim and felly together were called nemi.[34] The Ṛgveda-saṃhitā describes the Aśvins’ car with golden fellies.[35] The pole of the chariot is known as īṣā and the fore part of the pole of the cart, the part in front of the yoke is called prauga, which is made of gold.
Sāyaṇācārya in his commentary says—
rathasya mukham īṣayoragraṃ yugabandhanasthānaṃ praugamityucyate/ taccātra suvarṇamayam/[36]
The Ṛgvedic term hiraṇyapraugaṃ refers to the chariot of god Savitṛ, that had a golden yoke.[37] The Kātyāyanaśrautasūtra mentions a chariot of bronze on both sides.[38]
The chariot had two charioteers, which is clear from the passage—
Sāyaṇācārya interprets this passage as—
samānaṃ indrarathasadṛśaṃ rathaṃ ātasthivāṃsā āsthitau dvau rathinau/
In the chariot the driver stood on the right, while the warrior was on the left, as indicated by his name, savyeṣṭha[40] or savyaṣṭhā.[41] Again to mean the lap of the chariot, the term rathopastha is used in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā.[42] This word, in the Aitareyabrāhmaṇa seems to denote the upper part of the chariot, on which the driver and the fighter stood.[43] In the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, it is mentioned that Vāyu was invoked to come with Indra seated in the car, or as charioteer.[44] Tvaṣṭṛ also exercised in yoking the chariot steeds for Indra.[45] The chariot was guided by a skilful charioteer. The term rathagṛtsa denotes a skilled charioteer.[46]
Uvaṭa explains the term rathagṛtsa as—
The charioteer guided his strong horses and drove the car to the place whatever the warrior liked.[48] He controlled the horses by the reins, and urged them on with a whip.[49] The girths of the horses are called kakṣyā.[50] The term pitaraḥ, in a Ṛgvedic verse(Ṛgveda-saṃhitā 6.75.9), is alternatively used in the sense of the guard of a chariot.[51] According to Griffith, the term pitaraḥ, is explained by the commentator in the relevant context as pālayitāraḥ, guards, defenders, that are apparently, those who attend the chariot of the chief.[52] Wilson also follows Sāyaṇācārya and translates the verse as follows–“The guards (of the chariot), revelling in the savoury spoil, distributors of food, protectors in calamity, armed with spears, resolute, beautifully arranged, strong in arrows, invincible, of heroic valour, robust and conquers of numerous hosts”.[53] The chariot was made of hard wood like Śiśu or Khadira.[54]
In the Vedic period, the chariot was usually a small-sized two-wheeled vehicle, which is clear from the passage—
Sāyaṇācārya interprets this passage as—
ubhā ubhe dve api cakrā cakre rathacaraṇe hiraṇyayā hiraṇmaye suvarṇanirmite//
But the chariots of the Aśvins are described as having three wheels—
The wheeled car was generally drawn by two horses,[57] but occasionally three or four horses were also engaged to draw the chariot. For example, king Kuruśravaṇa had three horses of his chariots.[58] The chariots drawn by four horses also are mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[59] Sometimes a single horse rides the chariot.[60] The use of asses for drawing chariots in war is also mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[61] The Aśvins’ chariot is stated to have three seats,[62] but a chariot with eight seats is also mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[63]
The seat of the charioteer is called vandhura, which is explained by Sāyaṇācārya as—
vandhuraḥ nīḍabandhanādhārabhūtāḥ../[64]
And also:
The chariot moved on high speed, and it is mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, where it is stated that when Agni goes on a mission of the gods, the neighing of the horses of the moving chariot, however audible, is not heard.[66] The Śulbasūtra works give the dimension of a Vedic chariot. According to the Āpastambaśulbasūtra, the pole of the chariot was measured one hundred eightyeight aṅgulis, akṣa was one hundred four aṅgulis and yuga was eighty-six aṅgulis.[67] The chief trainer and commander are called rathaprota and asamaratha, i.e. possessing a matchless chariot, who are described in the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa.[68] The rathakāra or chariot-maker[69] are mentioned as a caste in the Vedic literature.[70] The Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā refers to them as offspring of māhiṣya and karaṇī.[71]
Sāyaṇācārya states in the commentary of the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā—
vaiśyāyāṃ kṣatriyād utpanno māhiṣyaḥ/ śūdrāyāṃ vaiśyād utpannā karaṇī/[72]
The Bhṛgus are described as the chariot builders in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[73] The car of the Aśvins was built by the Ṛbhus.[74] The most important weapon of the car-fighter was was bow and arrows,[75] though he also used the spears, swords and draggers, etc., if necessary.[76]
The infantry or foot-soldiers were indispensable for the Āryans, and the importance of both infantry and chariotry is mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[77] The word asāda, which is explained by Sāyaṇācārya as—aśvādiyānarahitāḥ padātayaḥ, refers to the foot-soldiers.[78] They played a subordinate role to the chariots in open battle. The king and the nobles or Kṣatriyas came to the battle on chariots and the common people on foot. Agni is also referred to as conquering the most powerful opponents, as a combatant on a chariot who overcomes men fighting on foot.[79] The success of war was based on the strength of the warriors, their leaderships, moral strengths, etc.They used all types of weapons in war, but bow and arrows were the principal weapon of infantry; and lances, sword and javelin were also used by them.[80]
Another type of army was known as cavalry. Horse-riding was known as early as the Vedic age.[81] The chariots and horses played a prominent role in routing enemies, which is expressed in a Ṛgvedic passage aśvā rathebhiḥ saha vājayantaḥ /[82] Aśvasāda or horse-rider is also mentioned in the Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā.[83] A white horse with black ears is mentioned inthe Atharvaveda-saṃhitā.[84] Again, the term rohita denotes a red horse.[85] Indra has been described as the first of all to mount the horse, yoked to the chariot by Vāyu and given by Yama.[86] The Maruts are described as fighting people riding on the horse back.[87] The terms raghuṣyad[88], svaśva[89], pracetas[90], suyama[91], āśu[92], etc., are used to indicate the power of a war horse.
A Ṛgvedic verse refers to the encounter of hand to hand, or on horseback,
ni yena muṣṭihatyayā ni vṛtrā ruṇadhāmahai/ tvotāso nyarvatā/[93]
In the present context, the term muṣṭihatyā literally means striking with the fist.
Sāyaṇācārya interprets the term muṣṭihatyā as—
muṣṭihatyayā nitarāṃ muṣṭiprahāreṇa…/
The term arvatā, which literally means with a horse,[94] is also worth noting in this context. Sāyaṇācārya explains this term to mean fighting on horseback.[95] But Griffith holds that arvatā here stands, for rathena, i.e. with a car or chariot.[96] In the battlefield, the horses were used in cow-raids.[97]
Sāyaṇācārya in this context says—
gaviṣṭiṣu goviṣayecchāyukteṣu saṃgrāmeṣu aśvaḥ krandat śabdaṃ kurvan yathābhīṣṭaprāpakastatheti/[98]
However, there are references to the dust-raising horsemen in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā.[99] The term aśvapa is used to indicate the horse-trainer.[100] Again, the term aśvanāya is used to mean a horse leader.[101] The horsemen had only the sword and the lances or spears as their principal weapons in war.
Among the fourfold division of army, the elephantry also occupied a high position in the Vedic period. Elephants were used in war for riding and other purposes. In the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā,[102] the terms mṛga, vāraṇa, ibha, hastin, etc., are used to mean an elephant. The term hastipa is also used to denote an elephanttrainer.[103] The kings and the nobles used the elephant for riding.[104]
Sāyaṇācārya states in the relevant context thus—
rājeva/ yathā amavān/ rājñā saha vartate ityamaḥ amātyaḥ/ tadvān../ rājā ibhena gajena yuktaḥ san parabalaṃ pratigacchati tadvat/[105]
In the warfare, the mad elephants were used to smite down the foes, which is referred to in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[106] Wilson has explained the word śaphārujaḥ, in the relevant verse, as the striking with the hoof, i.e. trampling under foot.[107]
Sāyaṇācārya explains the term śaphārujaḥ as—
ābhimukhyena parabalānāṃ hantṛnairāvatādīn gajān/[108]
Thus, the elephants were used to assail the enemies and trample under their feet whatever came in their way. The victory of kings in battles mainly depended upon the elephants. Because of their large bodily frame, they are able not only to destroy the arrayed armies of the enemies, their forts and camps, but also to undertake works that are threat to life. Describing the Aśvins in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, it is mentioned that they were like two mad elephants bending their forequarters and smiting the foes.[109] A Ṛgvedic verse shows that the hunters seek the elephants.[110] In the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā, the elephants are described as the superior to the comfortable wild beasts.[111] In the Aitareyabrāhmaṇa, it is mentioned that the black elephants, with white tusks in thousand, were given by Bharata Dauṣyanti in the Aśvamedha sacrifice,[112] which indicated that these elephants were seized in war.
During the Vedic age, the size of the army was very large. The Vedic seers mention the number of armies brought into the battlefield during the Āryan-Dāsa struggle as 30,000,[113] 50,000[114] and 60,990.[115] The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā also mentions that thousand of warriors were participated in the war.[116]
Women also took an active part in warfare in the Vedic period. Women encouraged their husbands in the battlefield, and sometimes they fought against their enemies when necessary. They also accompanied their husbands to the battlefield. For instance, the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā notes that Viśpalā, the wife of king Khela, accompanied her husband to the battlefield and lost her leg in the fighting, and it was replaced by that made of iron through the grace of the Aśvins at the prayer of Agastya, Khela’s family priest.[117] Again, Mudgalānī drove her husband’s car in pursuit of some robbers and defeated them with the help of his bow and arrows.[118] Sarasvatī, the goddess of speech, also took part with Indra in his fighting against the demons.[119] In a Ṛgvedic verse, she is designated as vṛtraghnī, i.e. the killer of Vṛtra.[120] The goddess Vāc also stretches Rudra’s bow and fights for the good of mankind.[121] Therefore, in the evolution of Āryan civilization, it was necessary for every man and woman to defend themselves and their property from attacks and aggressions.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Ibid., 1.27.4
[2]:
mā no vidan vivyādhino mo abhivyādhino vidan/ ārāccharavyā asmadviṣūcīrindra pātaya //Ibid., 1.19.1
[4]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 9.96.1
[5]:
Ibid., 1.33.6, 7.25.1, 10.103.1,4,7, 10.142.4
[6]:
pra senānīḥ śūro agre rathānāṃ gavyanneti harṣate asya senā / bhadrānkṛṇvannindrahavāntsakhibhya ā somo vastrā rabhasāni datte //Ibid., 9.96.1 Also vide, Kātyāyana-śrauta-sūtra 15.3 3
[7]:
Sāyaṇa, Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 9.96.1
[8]:
Uvaṭa, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 16.17 Also vide, Ibid., 16. 26
[9]:
etadvā’asyaikaṃ ratnaṃ yatsenānīstasmā’evaitena sūyate…// Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 5.3.1.1 Also vide, Taittirīya-saṃhitā , 1.8.9.1
[10]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā ,7.20.5, 9.96.1, 10.84.2 Also vide, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 15.15, 16.17, 17.11, Taittirīya-saṃhitā , 4.5.2.1, Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 8.6.1.21
[11]:
tasya senajicca suṣeṇaśca senānīgrāmaṇyāviti…./ Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 8.6.1.20
[12]:
[13]:
[14]:
saṃgrāmaṃ yuddhaṃ../ Sāyaṇa, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 4.24.7
[15]:
Taittirīya-saṃhitā , 2.1.3.1
[16]:
Vide, Macdonell,A.A.& Keith,A.B.,op.cit.,Vol II, p.416
[17]:
[19]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 11.12.22-24
[20]:
hastyaśvarathapadātīnāṃ piṣṭamayīḥ pratikṛtīḥ kṛtvā….//Sāmavidhāna-brāhmaṇa , 3.6.11
[21]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 6.47
[22]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 6.125
[23]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.173.4,5, 2.17.3, 6.21.1, 8.4.
[24]:
[26]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op. cit., p.331
[27]:
Sāyaṇa, Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 6.75.8
[28]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.25.3, 2.39.2, 3.3.6, 5.83.3, 5.87.8 Also vide, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 4.34.4
[29]:
Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 16.26 Also vide, Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa , 3.4.7.1
[31]:
hiraṇyayī vāṃ rabhirīṣā akṣo hiraṇyayaḥ / ubhā cakrā hiraṇyayā //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 8.5.29
[32]:
araṭve akṣe nahuṣe sukṛtvani sukṛttarāya sukratuḥ//Ibid., 8.46.27 Vide, Griffith. R.T.H., op. cit., p. 434 Also Vide, Macdonell, A. A. & Keith, A.B., op. cit., Vol II, p.201
[33]:
khe rathasya khe’nasaḥ khe yugasya śatakrato / apālāmindra triṣpūtvyakṛṇoḥ sūryatvacam // Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 8.91.7 Also vide, Macdonell, A.A. & Keith, A.B., op. cit., Vol.II, p.201
[35]:
hiraṇyayā vāṃ pavayaḥ …/Ibid., 1.180.1
[36]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 1.35.5
[37]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.35.5
[39]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 2.12.8
[40]:
Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa ,1.7.9.1
[41]:
[42]:
Ibid. Also vide, Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 2.3.3.12
[43]:
tadānīṃ vanaspate ityṛcā jayārthinaḥ puruṣasya rathordhvabhāgamabhimṛśyānantaram..// Sāyaṇa, Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 8.2.6
[44]:
śatenā no abhiṣṭibhirniyutvāṅ indrasārathiḥ / vāyo sutasya tṛmpataṃ //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 4.46.2
[45]:
[46]:
Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 15.15 Also vide, Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 3.5.4
[47]:
Uvaṭa, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā ,15.15
[48]:
[49]:
Ibid., 5.83.3, 6.75.6
[50]:
kakṣyā rajjuryuktamātmanā saṃbaddhamaśvaṃ…./ Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 10.10.13
[51]:
pitaraḥ rathasya pālayitāraḥ….// Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 6.75.9
[52]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H ., op. cit., p. 331
[53]:
Vide, Wilson, H.H., op. cit., Vol.IV, p. 213
[54]:
[55]:
Ibid., 8.5.29
[56]:
Ibid., 1.34.5, 9, 1.118.2, 10, 10.41.1
[57]:
Ibid., 5.30.1, 5.36.5
[58]:
yasya mā harito rathe tisro vahanti sādhuyā / stavai sahasradakṣiṇe // Ibid., 10.33.5
[59]:
prātā ratho navo yoji sasniścaturyugastrikaśaḥ saptaraśmiḥ/ Ibid., 2.18.1
[60]:
Ibid., 10.101.11, 10.131.3
[61]:
vīḍupatmabhirāśuhemabhirvā devānāṃ vā jūtibhiḥ śāśadānā / tadrāsabho nāsatyā sahasramājā yamasya pradhane jigāya // Ibid., 1.116.2 Also vide, Ibid., 1.34.9
[62]:
Ibid.,1.34.9, 1.47.2, 1.118.1, 1.157.3, 7.71.4
[63]:
akṣānaho nahyatanota somyā iṣkṛṇudhvaṃ raśanā ota piśata / aṣṭāvandhuraṃ vahatābhito rathaṃ yena devāso anayannabhi priyam //Ibid., 10.53.7
[64]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 1.34.9
[65]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 1.118.1
[66]:
na yorupabdiraśvyaḥ śṛṇve rathasya kaccana/ yadagne yāsi dūtyam // Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.74.7
[67]:
aṣṭāśītiśatamīṣā tiryagakṣaścatuśśatam/ ṣaḍaśītiyugaṃ cāsya rathaścāraṇa ucyate/ iti ratha-parimāṇam/ Āpastambaśulba-sūtra , 6.5
[68]:
Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 8.6.1.18
[69]:
ye dhīvāno rathakārāḥ karmārā ye manīṣiṇaḥ/ Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.5.6 Also vide, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 30.6, Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa , 1.1.4.8, 3.4.2.1, Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 13.4.2.17
[70]:
ye ca rathakārāḥ rathanirmātāro jātiviśeṣāḥ/ Sāyaṇa, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.5.6 Also vide, Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 5.4.3.17
[71]:
rathakāraṃ māhiṣyeṇa kāraṇyāṃ jātam../ Mahīdhara, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 30.6 Also vide, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.5.6
[72]:
Sāyaṇa, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.5.6
[73]:
evedindrāya vṛṣabhāya vṛṣṇe brahmākarma bhṛgavo na ratham/Ṛgveda-saṃhitā ,4.16.20 Also vide, Ibid., 10. 39.12, 14
[75]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 6.75
[76]:
[77]:
sa grāmebhiḥ sanitā sa rathebhirvide viśvābhiḥ kṛṣṭibhirnvadya/ sa pauṃsyebhirabhibhūraśastīrmarutvānno bhavatvindra ūtī //Ibid.,1.100.10
[78]:
Sāyaṇa, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 11.12.24
[79]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 7.62.10
[81]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.162.17, 1.168.9, 5.61.1-3
[82]:
Ibid., 6.75.7
[83]:
aśvasādam aśvāroham// Uvaṭa, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 30.13
[85]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.94.10,2.10.2, 3.6.6
[86]:
[89]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 5.57.2
[90]:
aśvājani pracetaso’śvāntsamatsu codaya//Ibid., 6.75.13
[92]:
Ibid.
[93]:
Ibid., 1.8.2
[94]:
Ibid.
[95]:
arvatā asmadīyenāśvena ni ruṇadhāmahai ityanuṣaṅgaḥ/ padātiyuddhenāśvayuddhena ca śatrūn vināśayāma ityarthaḥ // Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[96]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op.cit., p. 5
[97]:
ghnanto vṛtramataranrodasī apa uru kṣayāya cakrire / bhuvatkaṇve vṛṣā dyumnyāhutaḥ krandadaśvo gaviṣṭiṣu // Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.36.8
[98]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[99]:
aśvapaṃ turagapālakam// Mahīdhara, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 30.11
Chāndogya-upaniṣad , 6.8.3,5
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 8.33.8, 10.40.
hastipaṃ gajapālakam// Mahīdhara, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 30.11
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
Vide, Wilson. H.H., op. cit., Vol. VI., p.148
Sāyaṇa, Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.44.9
sṛṇyeva jarbharī turpharītū naitośeva turpharī parpharīkā / udanyajeva jemanā maderū tā me jarāyvajaraṃ marāyu //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.106.6
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.22.1-6
hiraṇyena parīvṛtān kṛṣṇāñśukladato mṛgān/ maṣṇāre bharato’dadācchataṃ badvāni sapta ca//Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 8.4.9
asvāpayaddabhītaye sahasrā triṃśataṃ hathaiḥ / dāsānāmindro māyayā//Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 4.30.21
tvametāñjanarājño dvirdaśābandhunā suśravasopajagmuṣaḥ / ṣaṣṭiṃ sahasrā navatiṃ nava śruto ni cakreṇa rathyā duṣpadāvṛṇak // Ibid., 1.53.9
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 8.8.11, 19.13.2 Also vide, Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 17.33
utsma vāto vahati vāso asyā adhirathaṃ yadajayatsahasram / rathīrabhūnmudgalānī gaviṣṭau bhare kṛtaṃ vyacedindrasenā //Ibid.,10.102.2
Ibid., 6.61.3-7
ahaṃ rudrāya dhanurā tanomi brahmadviṣe śarave hantavā u / ahaṃ janāya samadaṃ kṛṇomyahaṃ dyāvāpṛthivī ā viveśa //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.125.6