From ascetics to bigots: on the use of Greek sources to prove the existence of the caste system in Ancient India

These assertions offer room for diverse interpretations. One can interpret them the way Colebrooke did. If the caste-system story is assumed as true, like Colebrook, one could agree that Callisthenes and Bardaisan are referring to the hereditary acquisition of Brahmin caste status. If not, alternative explanations are possible. For instance, one may interpret them as a suggestion that some individuals possess certain skills or qualities inherently (“Brachman”) while others must exert effort to attain them (“monks”). Just as it is common to describe someone as a “born artist” or how “something comes naturally to someone”, one could also remark that someone is “given to wisdom by birth”. Megas- thenes accords it with a more story-like structure.

“From the time of their conception in the womb they [that is, Brachmanes] are under the guardian care of learned men, who go to the mother and, under the pretence of using some incantations for the welfare of herself and her unborn babe, in reality give her prudent hints and counsels. The women who listen most willingly are thought to be the most fortunate in their children” [McCrindle 1877, 9$].

Whatever it is that Megasthenes is describing here, those who are familiar with the Mahabharata may notice that it resembles the story of Abhimanyu, who learnt to break a difficult military formation while still in his mother's womb. If we now compare Megasthenes' descriptions with Callisthenes' from a century earlier, cited earlier (“Brachman nation was not an order like that of the monks, which one could enter if he chose - but a society, admission into which was allotted from above by the decrees of God”), we can see that they are essentially two distinct formulations of the same information.

To return to Colebrooke, his four points described so far do not justify translating “Samanaeans” as (Buddhist) Shramana. At this point, it is only possible to say that Brachmanes and Samanaeans refer to two slightly distinct groups of philosophers. Two further points come to his rescue.

Fifth, Colebrooke presents the phonological similarity between the words Samansans and Shramana as evidence that Samansans “seems to bear some affinity to the Sramanas or ascetics of the Jainas and Bauddhas” [Colebrooke 1873, 182]. Col. William Henry Sykes, a well-known Indologist, also reiterates this claim [Sykes 1841, 134]. A few years later, E. A. Schwanbeck, who collected and published the scattered fragments of Megasthenes' now-lost Indica in 1846, concluded that the term “Germanes” “found in all the MSS. of Strabo are incorrect”, and the correct word is “Sarmanes”. Moving from the phonological similarity proposed by Colebrooke, we now turn to the graphical similarity to settle the matter. “The mistake need not surprise us, since the EA [pronounced as `Sa'] when closely written together differ little in form from the syllable rA [pronounced as `Ga']” [McCrindle 1877, 98, fn.*].

Sixth, further supporting his argument, Colebrooke made what he refers to as a “most in point” or an extremely important point. Citing a passage from Clement of Alexandria's description of two types of Indian Gymnosophists, Sarmanes and Brachmanes, he described a group of Sarmanes called Allobii in terms of their austere way of life. He then declared that “[t]ere are likewise, among the Indians, persons obeying the precepts of Butta” [Colebrooke 1873, 182-183].

Consolidation of the Story

Neither Colebrooke nor any other scholar ever has provided conclusive evidence to support the claim that the Greeks were referring to the Indian caste system. Cole- brooke's arguments are based on a collection of random facts and claims woven together into a narrative. For example, he quotes diverse writers, from the Greek historian Strabo (63 BCE - 24 CE) to the bishop of Gaza, St. Porphyrius (c. 347-420 CE), who is said to have converted Gaza to Christianity. Megasthenes (350-290 BCE), a historian and diplomat, is also mentioned indirectly through Strabo. These writers span different domains and cover seven centuries. Colebrooke brings together their observations about the Brachmanes, stories about Pramnae making fun of them, and the fact that the Brach- manes worshipped the sun. He also presents observations about how religious knowledge is received by Samanaeans and Brachmanes, a description of the austere lifestyle of the Sarmanes, and some phonological observations about the manuscripts.

He then connects all these things with texts from ancient India, such as the Vedas and Sankhya, and contemporary ethnographical data, such as the ones collected by Colin Mackenzie. Given the wide range of material that Colebrooke connected randomly, if his arguments looked credible to his contemporaries and later scholars, the credit should primarily go to the persuasive power of the story of the caste system, which he presupposes. That is, the apparent coherence of his narrative and the motivations behind his choices stem from the patterns within the story of the caste system. If we eliminate this caste-system story from the equation, it is evident that Colebrooke's selection of facts and opinions is arbitrary.

Following Colebrooke's 1807 essay, two main trends emerged. The first trend was the insistence that “the natives of Hindoostan ... agree in almost every point with the description given of them by Megasthenes” [Prichard 1819, 373] and other classical writers. Later, writing in 1852 for the third volume of his monumental Indische Alterthumskunde, the German Indologist Christian Lassen argued that Indian customs such as endogamy and occupational exclusivism were largely accurately depicted by Megasthenes [Kart- tunen 1997, 83].

The second trend entailed an examination and analysis of the accuracy and inaccuracies present in the Greek writers' comprehension of Indian society and the caste system and an assertion that the information that they provided, as Elphinstone puts it, contain both “general truth and partial inaccuracy” [Elphinstone 1841, 449-450]. This trend spurred interpretive endeavours aimed at reconciling the various Greek descriptions of India with colonial ethnological hypotheses about the country. For instance, numerous attempts followed that strived to harmonise the Greek notion of India's seven-fold division into the four varnas of Indian society. Such writings cited both Greek descriptions of Indian society and the accounts provided by European writers like Francis Buchanan (1762-1829) and James Forbes (1749-1819). Several authors during the 19^th century pursued this approach: Prichard [Prichard 1819, 399], Heeren [Heeren 1833, 315-316, fn. 1], Elphinstone [Elphinstone 1841, 450-451], Schwanbeck in 1846 [cited in: McCrindle 1877, 98, fn.], Dollinger [Dollinger 1862, 52], Wheeler [Wheeler 1874, 192], J. Wilson [Wilson 1877, 339], Bunbury [Bunbury 1879, 561], and Tozer [Tozer 1897, 151].

An inherent aspect of these developments was the growing consensus among writers of that period that the Greeks had indeed documented various aspects of the caste system, with or without some inaccuracies. However, there was no consensus or clarity as to which specific Greek claim describes which aspect of the caste system. Soon, they attributed this confusion to the Greeks themselves. Consequently, the focus of the discussion shifted towards Greek inaccuracies, although these were not regarded as severe. Scholars believed that it was the Greeks who had failed to comprehend the intricacies of the complex Indian social system.

The German historian Arnold Hermann Ludwig Heeren wrote in his monumental Ideen uber Politik, den Verkehr, und den Handel der vornehmsten Volker der alten Welt (1815), translated in English in 1833, that a “very slight acquaintance ... with India will be sufficient to prove” that Megasthenes' seven divisions of “Hindu castes” are wrong [Heeren 1833, 315-316, fn. 1]. However, he also defended Megasthenes by suggesting that since he “resided for a short time only at the court of Sandracottus”, he may “not immediately have understood the subject”. Dollinger similarly remarked that the Greeks described the “most distinctive feature in Hindoo society, the division into castes, . in a way which agrees in the more important points with native authorities” [Dollinger 1862, 51]. But, he rued, “the Brahmins appeared to the Greeks as philosophers rather than primarily as priests”. Numerous other writers also identified such “errors”: for example, the authors who wrote for the Encyclopaedia Britannica [Encyclopaedia Britannica 1833, 191], Elphinstone [Elphinstone 1841, 450-451], H. H. Wilson [Wilson 1846, 210], J. Wilson [Wilson 1877, 339], Bunbury [Bunbury 1879, 561], Hunter [Hunter 1886, 168], and Tozer [Tozer 1897, 151].

Once the basics of the narrative about how the ancient Greeks attest to the caste system's existence were established in this century, it never changed. Acknowledging that Greek authors provide evidence for the existence of the caste system, pointing out their errors and attempts to fit them into the then narrative of the caste system became commonplace in the 20^th century [see, for example: Smith 1904; Vaidya 1921; Ellam 1930; Blunt 1931; Allan, Haig, and Dodwell 1934; Basham 1954; Srinivas et al. 1959; Thapar 1961]. An analysis of these writings, therefore, is a luxury that the length of this article cannot accommodate.

brahman philosophy ancientgreek caste

Conclusion

Let us begin with a summary of the argument so far. Greek writings, primarily from the Hellenistic period onwards, describe various aspects of the life of “Indian philosophers” whom they primarily called Gymnosophists and Brachmanes. Today, scholars link these figures to Brahmins and other (Jain and Buddhist) ascetics and see these descriptions as evidence of the caste system. However, examining the Greek texts reveals that they do not describe the so-called caste system as we understand it today. So, how did the idea that Greeks discussed the caste system emerge? The article examined the changing views about the Brahmins in European literature over time. Initially, they were seen as descendants of the Gymnosophists. Later, under the influence of the Christian Reformation, European writers began to differentiate between ancient and contemporary Brahmins, praising the former and condemning the latter. As narratives of Indian decline emerged, scholars sought its roots in the past. However, no connection between Greek descriptions and the “caste system” was made at this time. In the 18^th and 19^th centuries, with the crystallisation of the idea of the caste system and the story of the Buddhist revolt against Hinduism, scholars turned to the Greeks for evidence.

In Colebrooke's important essay, we noted how interpretations can shape historical narratives. He demonstrated that writing history is to “interpret” the material in a way that begins to yield the story you intend to narrate, and scholars never stopped doing it. The lack of explicit textual evidence regarding the Greek mention of the so-called caste system or any of its aspects, after Colebrooke, resulted in the proliferation of interpretations to show the caste system in Greek writings. These interpretations take predetermined conclusions about the existence of the caste system and its immoral nature, which I have called the “story of the caste system” here, as true, and force Greek texts to confirm it. Since the integrity of the caste-system-story is the focus here, our understanding of Greek literature permits errors to creep in. Consider these two errors, for instance.

First, as noted earlier, these interpretations ignore the diverse backgrounds, historical periods, and approaches of the Greek authors they quote. Second, attempts to find evidence for the caste system in Greek literature end up insulting both Greek scholars and Indians. While reputed Greek scholars are dumb enough to be misled by Indians, especially the Brahmins, the Brahmins are crafty and ever so eager to mislead even their scholarly guests. The idea that Brahmins (and Indians) are responsible for the errors in Greek descriptions of the caste system, in fact, is an often-repeated old trope in the field [for e.g.: Wilson 1877, 338; Bevan 1922, 409; Thapar 1961, 57].

Either the Greek thinkers showed how ancient Indians practised an immoral caste system or, if my arguments were to hold, they did not. Regardless of which side one would choose at the end of this article, there is something unhappy about the poverty of choices here. Is this all that can be said today about the famed Greek thinkers who wrote about India? ¹ I propose we could begin to appreciate Greek descriptions of Indian society only when we could look beyond the colonial story of the caste system. The scholarly world has been so preoccupied with saving the story of the caste system that they have failed to notice that Greek descriptions of India do not bolster their story, as they insist, but rather undercut its key properties.

The socio-cultural world that writers like Megasthenes were able to observe seems so profoundly different from the world that our social sciences can conceive today that we would dismiss it as a fantasy. Let us raise a few questions pertaining to this scenario. The Greek scholars mentioned numerous names for Indian philosophers, most of which emphasised their way of life rather than their activities. For instance, “Gymnosophists” mean naked sophists, “Hylobioi” means forest hermits, “Calingae” are those who lived near the sea, “Allobioi” inhabit no cities or houses and “Semnoi” spent their lives naked. The other names in the seven or six divisions of Indian society refer to the occupations performed, such as soldiers, artists, and farmers. What does this observation suggest? Could they not have mentioned, for instance, soldiers fighting in the mountains, at sea, or on horseback? There must have been impoverished traders, for instance, living with minimal clothing or farmers residing in forests. However, it seems that Greek writers used lifestyle-based distinctions - naked, mountain dwellers, etc. - only for the philosophers. The distinction of being a sophist, therefore, lies not in what one does or where one lives, but rather in some other aspect that is captured by the description of their lifestyle. What does this suggest? Does each name hint at a different school of thinking? If each group could produce philosophers, did each group possess its own philosophers, or did all philosophers belong to a single group? Did one relinquish their group membership and identity upon becoming a philosopher? Can we even talk about the “group identity” of these philosophers if they could come from and marry someone from any group? How do we deal with the issue of caste ranking and the moral stigma and prejudice attributed to it in this case?

Only when we shift our focus away from the caste narratives can we begin to answer these questions or at least frame them better to aid further research.

References

1. Allan J., Haig T.W. and Dodwell H.H. (1934), The Cambridge Shorter History of India, Cambridge University Press, London.

2. Ambedkar B.R. (2014), Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Writings and Speeches, [Vol. 3], edited by Vasant Moon, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, New Delhi.

3. Anglicus B. (1582), Batman Vppon Bartholome His Booke De Proprietatibus Rerum, Newly Corrected, Enlarged and Amended..., Imprinted by Thomas East, London

4. Anonymous (1774), The Universal Magazine of Knowledge and Pleasure, John Hinton, London.

5. App U. (2010), The Birth of Orientalism, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

6. Arora U.P. (1991), “The Indika of Megasthenes - An Appraisal”, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 72/73, ¹ 1/4, pp. 307-329.

7. Balagangadhara S.N. (1994), “The Heathen in His Blindness...” Asia, the West, and the Dynamic of Religion, E.J. Brill, Leiden.

8. Barbosa D. (1518 [1917]), The Book of Duarte Barbosa: An Account of the Countries Bordering on the Indian Ocean and their Inhabitants..., Vol. I, Mansel Longworth Dames (ed.), Hakluyt Society, London.

9. Basham A.L. (1954), The Wonder That Was India: A Survey of the Culture of the Indian SubContinent before the Coming of the Muslims, Grove Press, New York.

10. Bayle P and Des M. (1735), The Dictionary Historical and Critical of Mr. Peter Bayle..., Volume the Third, F-L., 2^nd ed., J.J. and P. Knapton et al, London.

11. Beal S. (1882), Abstract of Four Lectures on Buddhist Literature in China, Trubner & Company, London.

12. Beckwith C.I. (2017), Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

13. Bevan E.R. (1922), “Chapter XVI: India in Early Greek and Latin Literature”, in Rapson E.J. (ed.), The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.391-426.

14. Blount C. (1693), The oracles of reason ... in several letters to Mr. Hobbs and other persons of eminent quality and learning, [s.n.], London

15. Blunt E. (1931), The Caste System of Northern India, Oxford University Press, Humphrey Milford.

16. Bronkhorst J. (2007), Greater Magadha: Studies in the Culture of Early India, Brill, Leiden.

17. Bunbury E.H. (1879), A History of Ancient Geography Among the Greeks and Romans, Vol. I, John Murray, London.

18. Burnet T. (1736), Doctrina Antiqua De Rerum Originibus..., Translated by Mead, and Foxton, E. Curll, London.

19. Chambers E. (1728), Cyclopedia: Or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences..., Vol. I, 5^th (1741), Midwinter, London.

20. Cohn B.S. (2007), “Notes on the History of the Study of Indian Society and Culture”, in Singer M. B. and Cohn B.S. (eds), Structure and Change in Indian Society, Aldione Transaction, New Brunswick, pp. 3-28.

21. Colebrooke H.T. (1873), “Observations on the Sect of Jains”, in Cowell E.B. (ed.), Miscellaneous Essays, Vol. II, New Edition, Trubner & Co., London, pp. 171-201.

22. Coleridge H.J. (1881), The Life and Letters of St. Francis Xavier, Vol. 1, Burns and Oates, London.

23. De Jong J.W. (1976), Brief History of Buddhist Studies in Europe and America, Bharat-Bhara- ti, Varanasi.

24. De Nobili R. (2000), Preaching Wisdom to the Wise: Three Treatises by Roberto de Nobili S.J., Missionary and Scholar in 17^th Century India, translated by Amaladass A. and Clooney F. X., Satya Nilayam Publications, Chennai.

25. Dollinger J.J.I. (1862), The Gentile and the Jew in the Courts of the Temple of Christ: An Introduction to the History of Christianity, [Vol. 1 of 2], translated by Darnell N., Longman, London.

26. Ellam J.E. (1930), Swaraj: The Problem of India, Logos Press, New Delhi.

27. Elphinstone M. (1841), The History of India, [Vol. 1], John Murray, London.

28. Encyclopaedia Britannica (1833), The Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and General Literature, [Vol. V], 9^th ed., Popular Reprint H.G. Allen, New York.

29. Estienne C. [Carolus Stephanus] (1609), Dictionarium Historicum, Geographicum, Poeticum, Apud Balthazarum, Gaii.

30. Frazer R.W. (1898), A Literary History of India, T. Fisher Unwin, London.

31. Gale T. (1672), The Court of the Gentiles... Part I. Of Philologie, 2^nd revised and enlarged ed., H. Hall, Oxon.

32. Gelders R. (2009), “Genealogy of Colonial Discourse: Hindu Traditions and the Limits of European Representation”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 51, ¹ 3, pp. 563-589.

33. Habib I. (2002), Essays in Indian History: Towards a Marxist Perception; With, The Economic History of Medieval India: A Survey, Anthem Press, London.

34. Hahn T. (1978), “The Indian Tradition in Western Medieval Intellectual History”, Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Vol. 9, pp. 213-234.

35. Haq S.N. (1996), “The Indians and Persian Background”, in Nasr S. H. and Leaman O. (eds), History of Islamic Philosophy, Routledge, Oxon, pp. 52-70.

36. Haque S.M. (1987), Ibn An-Nadim on Religious Sects in Ancient India, PhD Dissertation, University of Calcutta, Calcutta.

37. Heeren A.H.L. (1833), Historical Researches into the Politics, Intercourse, and Trade of the Principal Nations of Antiquity, [Vol. III], D.A. Talboys, Oxford.

38. Herbert T. (1638), Some Yeares Travels into Divers Parts of Asia andAfrique..., Revised and Enlarged, Jacob Blome, London.

39. Hunter W.W. (1886), The Indian Empire: Its People, History, and Products, 2^nd ed., Trubner & Co., London.

40. Jalki D. (2023), “Evolution of the Figure of the Brahmin in Early Muslim Writings”, Onati Socio-Legal Series, Vol. 13, ¹ 1, pp. 29-57.

41. Jaucourt L. de. (2012), “Samanen”, in The Encyclopedia of Diderot & d'Alembert - Collaborative Translation Project, translated by Langille E.M., Michigan Publishing, Ann Arbor,

42. Jerome Saint (1893), “Against Jovinianus: Book I”, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. Second Series, Vol. VI, translated by Schaff P. and Wace H., The Christian Literature Company, New York, pp. 346-386.

43. Juncu M. (2016), India in the Italian Renaissance: Visions of a Contemporary Pagan World 1300-1600, Routledge, New York.

44. Karttunen K. (1997), India and the Hellenistic World, Finnish Oriental Society, Helsinki.

45. Kulke H. and Rothermund D. (1986), A History of India, Routledge, London.

46. Leathley B. (2019), Reassessing Rogerius's Hinduism: Antiquarianism and Perennial Philosophy in the Making of Early Modern Religion, Master Thesis, Leiden University, Leiden.

47. Lempriere J. (1788), Bibliotheca Classica: Or, A Classical Dictionary..., Baker E. H. and Charles Anthon (eds), Reading, London.

48. Lopez Jr.D.S. (2013), From Stone to Flesh: A Short History of the Buddha, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

49. Lubin T. (2013), “Asoka's Disparagement of Domestic Ritual and Its Validation by the Brahmins”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 41, ¹ 1, pp. 29-41.

50. Majumdar R.C. (1960), The Classical Accounts of India, Firma K.L. Mukhopadhyay, Calcutta.

51. Massey W.M. (1752), “A Brief Account of the Brachmanes, or Bramins”, The London Magazine, Or, Gentleman's Monthly Intelligencer, Vol. XXI, pp. 171-172.

52. Maurice T. (1794), Indian Antiquities or Dissertations ... of Hindostan..., Vol. V, Author and W. Richardson, London.

53. McCrindle J.W. (ed.) (1877), Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian; Being a Translation of the Fragments of the Indika of Megasthenes Collected by Dr. Schwanbeck..., Thacker, Spink & Co., Calcutta.

54. Millar R. (1731), The History of the Propagation of Christianity and Overthrow of Paganism..., Vol. II, 3^rd ed., A. Millar, London.

55. “Of the Bramins” (1731), in The Religious Ceremonies and Customs of the Several Nations of the Known World..., Vol. III, Nicholas Prevost, London, pp. 245-249.

56. Parker G. (2008), The Making of Roman India, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

57. Parmar H. (2015), Strabo and India, PhD Dissertation, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

58. Penzer N.M. (ed.) (1937), The Most Noble and Famous Travels of Marco Polo Together with the Ttravels of Nicolo de 'Conti, translated by Frampton J., Adam and Charles Black, London.

59. Prichard J.C. (1819), An Analysis of the Egyptian Mythology: To Which Is Subjoined a Critical Examination of the Remains of Egyptian Chronology J. and A. Arch.

60. Robertson W (1804), An Historical Disquisition Concerning the Knowledge Which the Ancients Had of India..., 4^th ed., T. Cadell and W Davies, London.

61. Ross A. (1655), Pansebeia, or, A View of All Religions in the World ..., Printed by T. C. for John Saywell..., London

62. Sale G., Psalmanazar G., Bower A., Shelvocke G. and Campbell J. (1748), An Universal History, from the Earliest Account of Time, [Vol. XX], T. Osborne, London.

63. Saran A.B., Gaya P. (1992), Sun Worship in India: A Study of Deo Sun-Shrine, Northern Book Centre, New Delhi.

64. Smith V.A. (1904), The Early History of India: From 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, Including the Invasion of Alexander the Great, The Clarendon Press, Oxford.

65. Srinivas M.N., Damle Y.B., Shahani S. and Beteille A. (1959), “Caste: A Trend Report and Bibliography”, Current Sociology, Vol. 8, ¹ 3, pp. 135-151.

66. Stoneman R. (2022), Megasthenes' Indica: A New Translation of the Fragments with Commentary, Routledge, Oxon.

67. Stoneman R. (2019), The Greek Experience of India: From Alexander to the Indo-Greeks, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

68. Strabo (1917), The Geography of Strabo, [Vol. I], Translated by Jones H. L., William Heinemann, London.

69. Strabo (1930), The Geography of Strabo, [Vol. VII], Translated by Jones H. L., William Heinemann, London.

70. Sykes W.H. (1841), Notes on the Religious, Moral, and Political State of India Before the Mahomedan Invasion Chiefly Founded on the Travels of the Chinese Buddhist Priest Fai Han in India A.D. 399..., F. W Calder, London.

71. Terry E. (1655), A Voyage to East-India..., T. W. for J. Martin, London

72. Thapar R. (1961), Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, Oxford University Press, London.

73. Thapar R. (2002), The Penguin History of Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300, Penguin Books, London.

74. Tozer H.F. (1897), A History of Ancient Geography, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

75. Vaidya C.V. (1921), History of Mediceval Hindu India: (Being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.), The Oriental Book Supplying Agency, Poona.

76. Varthema L. di (1863), The Travels of Ludovico Di Varthema in Egypt, Syria, Arabia Deserta and Arabia Felix, in Persia, India, and Ethiopia, A.D. 1503 to 1508..., Badger G.P. (ed.), Translated by Jones J. W, Hakluyt Society, London.

77. Vassiliades D.Th. (2000), The Greeks in India: A Survey in Philosophical Understanding, Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi.

78. Vassiliades D.Th. (2004), “Greeks and Buddhism: Historical Contacts in the Development of a Universal Religion”, The Eastern Buddhist, Vol. 36, ¹ 1/2, pp. 134-183.

79. Vincent D.D.W (1797), The Voyage of Nearchus from the Indus to the Euphrates: Collected from the Original Journal Preserved by Arrian, and Illustrated by Authorities Ancient and Modern..., T. Longman et al., London.

80. Wheeler J.T. (1874), The History of India: Hindd, Buddhist, and Brahmanical, Trubner & Co., London.

81. Wilson H.H. (1846), Sketch of the Religious Sects of the Hindus, Bishop's College Press, Calcutta.

82. Wilson J. (1877), Indian Caste, [Vol. 1], Times of India office, Bombay.

83. Witzel M. (2006), “Brahmanical Reactions to Foreign Influences and to Social and Religious Change”, in Olivelle P (ed.), Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 457-499.

84. Wotton W (1705), Reflections Upon Ancient and Modern Learning..., 3^rd corrected ed., Tim Goodwin, London.

85. Yamazaki G. (1997), “Introduction: Social Discrimination in Ancient India and Its Transition to the Medieval Period”, in Kotani H. (ed.), Caste System, Untouchability, and the Depressed, Manohar, New Delhi, pp. 3-20.

86. Ziegenbalg B. (1714), Propagation of the Gospel in the East: Being an Account of the Success of Two Danish Missionaries..., J. Downing, London.

87. Zwinger T. (1586), Theatrum Humanae Vitae, Per Eusebium Episcopum, Basileae.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru