Arrow poisons in South Asia Part 1. Arrow poisons in Ancient India

Journal Elsevier

of Ethnopharmacology, Scientific Publishers

12 (1984) Ireland Ltd.

l-24

Review Paper

-^-

ARROW POISONS IN SOUTH ASIA PART 1. ARROW POISONS IN ANCIENT

N.G. BISSET

-

INDIA

and G. MAZARSa

Pharmacognosy Research Laboratories, University of London, Manresa Road, d’Histoire de la Mkdecine, Universitk Strasbourg (France)

Department of Pharmacy,.Chelsea College, London SW3 6LX (U.K.) aCentre Europken Louis Pasteur, 4 Rue Blaise Pascal, 67070

Summary The use of arrow poisons in ancient India is discussed. While it is possible that Mesolithic hunting communities may have applied poison to their arrows, passages in the l?g Veda and A tharua Veda indicate its use in warfare. The meaning of the word iSa, used in the &g Veda to denote the poison smeared on the arrowheads, is examined; but the available evidence, while almost certainly excluding a mineral (arsenical) source, does not allow a conclusion to be drawn between an animal and/or plant origin. Certain hymns in the A tharua Veda point to aconite tubers as one source. Later Sanskrit (and Buddhist) literature shows that poisoned arrows continued to be used and that a second source of poison was (putrefying) snakes - a source confirmed by an account in the classical literature of Alexander the Great’s campaign in western India. Detailed descriptions of the symptoms and methods of treatment of wounds caused by poisoned arrows are to be found in the Sanskrit medical literature.

1. Introduction Up until now the subject of arrow poisons in ancient India has received scant attention. Per-rot and Vogt (1913)’ and Lewin (1923) make only a

‘They refer on p. 161 of their book to the “. . . . livres sac& 4, 7 et V, 18, 15, 8. . . .” There is nothing on arrow poisons weapons and in fact the references are to the A tharva Veda. 0378-8741/84/$07.50 Published and Printed

0 1984 in Ireland

Elsevier

Scientific

Publishers

de Zoroastre (Avesta, VI, in the Avestan account of

Ireland

Ltd

2

brief mention of the &g Veda and of the prohibition against the use of arrow poisons in Manu, thus indirectly implying that they were known, and the authors cited are better acquainted with the accounts in the classical literature deriving from the campaign of Alexander the Great in western India in 326-325 B.C. However, even with the present-day greater ease of access to Vedic and Sanskrit literature, more recent accounts of warfare (Singh, 1965) and archery (Pant, 1978) in (ancient) India go little further than to say that the poison put on arrows was of vegetable origin. Nevertheless, as the story presented here shows, by turning to the Sanskrit literature, medical and other, it is possible to paint a somewhat fuller picture .- but a picture that still lacks detail and precision. Unlike Chinese literature, in which events are often accurately dated (see the account of Chinese arrow poisons by Bisset (1979)), Indian literature is cast in a different mould. There is little interest in history as such and references to historical and datable events are rare (cf. footnote 3). This present paper forms an introduction to a discussion of the use of arrow poisons throughout the Indian subcontinent in more recent times which it is hoped to give in Part II. Since aconite has been a major source of poison, its role in Indian and Indian-influenced Central-Asian traditional medicine will be considered in Part III, along with the botany, chemistry, and pharmacology of Indian Aconitum species. 2. Prehistoric

period

As the Upper Palaeolithic gave way to the Mesolithic, there was continuous technological development, manifested, among other things, by a reduction in the size of the stone artefacts. Such microlithic industries have been found scattered widely throughout the subcontinent, associated with what appears to be the cultures of hunters, among others, and they cover a period ranging from approx. 9000 B.C. to approx. 1000 B.C. As is evident from cave paintings, these so-called Mesolithic hunters also had the bow and arrow, which, together with the light stone tool kit, must have formed an important part of their hunting equipment; presumably, microliths formed the points of the arrows which were used. In discussing the Mesolithic use of the bow and arrow, Allchin et al. (1978) speculate on the possibility that it was associated with the use of poison. This is indeed a possibility, since the aim is not necessarily to kill the game directly but at least to disable it or make it so ill that it soon weakens and the hunter can quickly catch up with it and finish it off. However, the question requires closer examination, which is beyond the scope of the present paper’. Archaeological evidence is lacking, for, in contrast with Africa, no mounted arrowheads have been preserved, and among ZAmong the points requiring consideration are: the potential plant sources in different parts of the subcontinent and also whether means of preparing and concentrating the poison were necessary and indeed available.

3

the assemblages of tools there are no stones which can be interpreted as having been used for mixing poison. Some of these Mesolithic groups of hunters, pastoralists, and others were in contact at an early date with settled communities and later on with the Neolithic Harappan and other urban centres of the Indus region (Allchin, 1966; Allchin et al., 1978; Allchin and Allchin, 1982). 3. Vedic literature The Indus civilization extended over a wide area in the fertile Indus and Punjab plains and reached its apogee in the period 2550-2050 B.C. It seems then to have broken up following the migration of Indo-Aryans from the northern Iranian plateau into the Noah-weste~ part of the Indian subcontinent, possibly in two waves - the first one before 2000 B.C., the second and main one about 1500 B.C. The Indo-Aryans were a military aristocracy who owed much of their success to their possession of the horse and chariot (Allchin and Allchin, 1982). Conclusive archaeological evidence of their culture still has to be established and the case for the occurrence of these migrations rests primarily on linguistic evidence. Be that as it may, it is during this period that the first examples of the Vedic literature, composed in Sanskrit and mostly in verse, were collected and memorized. 3.1. @g Veda In the earliest of these collections, the @g Veda, an anthology of hymns believed to have been put together about 1200 B.C3, there is already men-

3Some indication of the nature of the evidence provided by the early Sanskrit literature is given in the following paragraphs. The fountainhead of Indian culture is the four principal Vedas: $g, Yajur, Sama and Atharua Veda. Although traditionally represented as a subsidiary (upa) Veda of the l2g Veda or as an annex (upiiriga) to the A tharua Veda, the &ur Veda, which deals with the science of medicine, in reality has nothing to do with either of them and is the fruit of medical observation and thought over a period of several centuries preceding the Christian era. Similarly, although usually attached as a subsidiary Veda to either the I;lg Veda or the Yajur Veda, the Dhanur Veda, which treats of the science of war and more especially archery, is an independent entity. The $g Veda survives in only one recension, that by %kalya, while two considerably different recensions of the Atharua Veda are extant - the Paippalada recension and the later and better preserved, but inferior, Saunakiya recension. It is rarely possible to date this literature with any degree of accuracy, because it belongs to an oral tradition that was handed down for centuries before being committed to writing. The Vedas were composed in the second half of the second millenium and the first half of the first millenium B.C.,but it was not until some unascertainable date before approx. 600 B.C.,by which time writing had become widespread in India, that they were arranged and codified. More difficulties arise from the fact that the earliest of the extant manuscripts go back no further than about the 13th century A.D. In addition, the material treated in the

4

tion of poisoned arms. Hymn VI. 75, entitled “To Arms”, is a battle hymn or benediction recited by the purohita (royal chaplain) over the arms of the king prior to a military expedition or battle (Geldner, 1951; Renou, 1956; Gonda, 1975 pp, 144 and 192). Various weapons in the arsenal are singled out and described and praised in verses which include the following: 15.

The divine arrow is smeared with poison, with a head of antelope horn and a mouth of iron. To this seed of Parjanya I bow low. 16. Once shot, fly away, arrow, sharpened with prayer. Go straight to our foes, and do not leave a single one of them there. (translation: O’Flaherty, 1981; cf. Sarasvati and Vidyalankar, 1980)

The shaft of the arrow was made of reed growing in the rainy season (born of the rain) and emanating ultimately from Parjanya, the god of the fructifying rain (Renou, 1956; Sarasvati and Vidyalankar, 1980; O’Flaherty, 1981). The arrow with its head of horn (ruru-s’Tr@) was distinct from those with a metal tip (ayomuizha). The hymn comprises 19 verses, but from verse 11 on the character of the text changes and it may well be that this latter part of the hymn was added at a later stage (Geldner, 1951 p. 177 footnote 110). It is not possible to suggest when this took place. The Sanskrit word used here to indicate the presence of poison on the arrow is Z%ta, which means “smeared with Zlu”. However, translation of the word Zlu in the present context is attended with difficulty, and much has been written about the question. Two of the meanings assigned to it in the Vedas contains very few references to datable historical events and such as there are may be of little help, because over the centuries interpolations were frequently made; adjacent passages may thus derive from very different periods. In spite of these problems and in spite of the often greatly discordant chronological estimates, there is a measure of agreement regarding the approximate dates of composition of the sources quoted here (O’Flaherty, 1975): t;lg Veda A tharva Veda

: 1200 : 900

B.C.; the commentary

by Sayapa

dates

from

1350

A.D.

B.C.

Various forms of the texts were devised in order to ensure (relatively) accurate preservation and oral transmission of the original Vedic text (Gonda, 1975 pp. 267 et seq.). A so-called pada-piifha (word text), thought to have been prepared by &kalya early in the 1st millenium B.C., gives separately in their original form, i.e. unaffected by the (continuous Sanskrit rules of euphonic elision, etc., all the words of the sa@itZ-patha text); at the same time, some analysis of the text was made. Further steps to preserve the texts and ascertain their meaning led to the krama-patha, a step-by-step arrangement of the text in which each word is given connected with the preceding and following words. More complicated forms of the text based on this arrangement, ja@-p$ha and ghanap$ha, were also produced. The priiti&ikhyas, manuals enabling the continuous text to be correctly reconstituted orally from the word text, form yet another safeguard. Not all the Vedas still have these various forms of aid. See further, Gonda (1975 pp. 16-17).

5

dictionaries (Bijhtlingk and Roth, 1852/55; Monier-Williams, 1899; Mayrhofer, 1953) are: (a) discharge of poisonous matter from venomous animals, and (b) yellow arsenic, orpiment. Both these meanings are attested in the SukutusarphiEi (8 6.1). The first of these meanings suggests the possibility of an animal source of poison and, in view of the later evidence for arrow poison derived from snakes (see 5 7), is not one to be lightly discarded. However, more attention has been paid to the second meaning. In the nighqztus (or glossaries) of materia medica such as the Dhanuantari-nighup@ and So$hala-nighantu, the word Ela is given as a synonym of haritda, i.e. yellow arsenic - insoluble, and therefore non-toxic, arsenic(II1) sulphide and this is still the current meaning of haritda (Sharma, 1969). According to the Sukrutasarphita (5 6.1), however, haritda is a visa or poison, but yellow arsenic only becomes toxic when contaminated or mixed with the soluble white arsenic or arsenic(II1) oxide. Geldner, without commenting on the point (1907,1909), in his rendering of the IJg Vedan hymn (1951) translated hla as “Arsenik”, which is white, rather than yellow, arsenic. Evidently, he accepted the meaning of ala as an arsenical substance, in line with the nighantus, but extrapolated it back to the Vedic period without establishing whether such substances were known at the time. Liiders (1916) agreed with Geldner and argued that, although the A tharua Veda makes it clear that the arrow poison was of plant origin (see 5 3.3), mineral and plant poisons might have been used side by side. This is, of course, possible, but there is little or no evidence to suggest that compounds of arsenic have ever been in regular use anywhere in the world as an arrow-poison constituent. Arsenic is not mentioned in early Sanskrit texts, so that if Bla here were indeed to have the meaning of haritda, the passage would certainly be a later interpolation4. The question is further complicated by the possibility that Elu may instead be a plant poison. In the Atharva Veda (see 3 3.3)’ da may mean “weed”, for SFZyal;la, one of the principal commentators on the Vedas, says that 81~ is a grass-creeper (sasyaualli) and that the word forms part of three names: alasdb, silarijdd, and nikigalasdld; but it is doubtful whether these names can be assigned any determinate sense (Whitney, 1905 pp. 292, 293; cf. Bloomfield, 1890 p. xlv; MacDonell and Keith, 1912; Harshe, 1952). In the Kuusi’hczsEtra (cf. 5 3.3), among the rituals (remedies) prescribed for retention of urine and constipation (XXVI.18) is an infusion of ala, lotus stem (bisa) or ula; since the patient is to drink it, Zla here is not likely to be very ‘Liiders also suggested that haritiila might already have been in use as a cosmetic in Vedic times (as it was later on). This would imply the availability of a source of the pure substance (or means of purifying it), since contamination with soluble arsenic compounds would be dangerous, especially on prolonged use. SThe A tharua Veda was codified later than the Rg Veda (cf. footnote themes are considered to be older than many in the $g Veda (Gonda, seq.).

3) but certain of its 1975 pp. 267 et

6

toxic. Elsewhere (XXXV.28), an arrow shaft made of black hla wood (but cf. Liiders, 1916 p. 325 footnote 1) is used in a magic ritual to ensure the love of a woman. The foregoing indications must apply to more than one plant, herbaceous and woody. One final point remains to be mentioned. According to Ammer (1948~52), linguistic evidence indicates that some of the Sanskrit expressions relating to weapons, including ZZ&zta,may not be of Indo-Aryan origin, Instead, they may derive from the weapon technology of the peoples conquered by the Ij.g Vedan wave of Indo-Aryan invaders. Doubtless, the autochthonous inhabitants would be more likely to have the requisite knowledge of the local Indian sources of poison. Summarizing: Ala, the arrow poison mentioned in the &g Veda, has been suggested to be of animal, mineral, or plant origin. It seems improbable that it will have been mineral, i.e. arsenical, in nature. There are indications that BZamay have been of animal or plant origin, but it is not possible to decide in favour of one or the other, especially as later evidence shows that arrow poisons were derived from both plant and animal sources. Until such time as more information becomes available, it seems best simply to translate &7hta as “smeared with &“. 3.2. Dhanur Veda It is appropriate at this point to discuss an interesting passage from the Veda, the treatise on archery by Vasistha. Verses 69-72 read in translation as follows:

~~a~~r

And now that the impregnation (vegetable coating for arrows)/ the smearing of the arrowhead with the root of a reed. Here is how it can be recognized/ Among the reeds there is [one] which sweatsa. It is yellow in cotour. In its roots a poison is produced. It is this root which must be taken and it [the reed] always rustles, even when there is no wind. That is what characterizes it i/69// I am going to tell about the from this marvellous plant! (cuirasses) like the leaf of a One must thoroughly crush

impregnation (piiyana) of the point with an ointment thanks to which one can pierce the most resistant armour tree //70/i long peppers, salt, and the plant hu+fab in cow’s urine/

One must smear the weapon with the paste and heat it in the fire //71/l until the yellow substance from the plant has the colour of the neck of the flame/Then must give the excellent weapon pure water’ //72/J

one

a Literally: that in which among the reeds there flows (nipatati) a drop (bindu). b kusta = Saussurea lappa C.B. Clarke (Asteraceae). *. = kustha 1. c Literally: One must satiate the excellent weapon with pure water.

This belief that the poison could be “burned” into the tip of the arrow, at the same time tempering and hardening it, has been reported from southwest China and more recently western Burma. In the ~a~c~ao yeshi (see: Yang Shen, 1880; translation: Sainson, 1904), or Unofficial History of the

Nanchao, an independent Tibeto-Burmese kingdom which was situated in present-day southlwestern China during the 8th-13th centuries, there is a note by Hu Wei in his revised edition of 1775 about yutao, certain ceremonial and sacrificial swords which were among the presents sent to the Tang court at the end of the 8th century. These swords at the moment of their being forged were plunged into a poisonous preparation and when they were withdrawn they shone like the stars. A man wounded with a weapon of this kind died. The point was earlier noted in the (Xin) Tang Shu, (New) History of the Tang Dynasty (Ouyang, 1975; see also: Schafer, 1963). The Maras, a group living in the Chin Hills in western Burma, used to make a poison to be smeared on steel arrow points by placing the heads of a snake, large black or red ant, centipede, and bee or wasp in an earthenware pot and leaving them until they putrefied. The arrowhead was warmed, smeared with the poison and then placed in a fire until red hot and plunged into water (Parry, 1932). There may well be undertones of the Chinese hu poison here; cf. Bisset (1979). 3.3. Atharva Veda The youngest of the four principal Vedas is the Atharua Veda, and it is mainly concerned with ritual. Manuscripts of the Paippalada recension include a hymn (1.46), not found in the Saunakiya recension, which is evidently “for the recovery of a benefactor” who has been pierced by an arrow. The desire to be healed of the effects of any poison present is the main aim of the hymn. Translated from the French of Renou (1964), and taking into account the suggested emendation of Hoffmann (1968/69), the relevant parts read as follows: Destroy [man]!

the poison

of his [arrow]

wound!

May the arrow,

the sickness,

go from

this

.. that the poison may be outside the body of this [man]! May the arrows fall far from him! May the brahman drive back the arrow from here, as the pilot [guides] the ship from the river bank.

Among the hymns of the more completely preserved Saunakiya recension are two which are to be recited during performances of the ritual for the removal of poison. The first one (IV.6), “Against the poison of a poisoned arrow”, includes the following verses: you first, 0 poison. You did not intoxicate him or 3. The winged eagle devoured injure him - you became as drink for him. hand that hurled [the arrow] at you from the curved bow - from 4. The five-fingered its tip I have exorcized the poison. that has been smeared on it, and 5. From the tip of the arrow, from the substance from the plume I have exorcized the poison. From the barbed horn and the neck I have exorcized the posion.

8 6. Powerless, 0 arrow, is your tip; and powerless is your poison. Also, of powerless wood is your powerless bow, 0 powerless one. 7. They who ground [the poison], who smeared it on, who hurled it, and they who let it loose -they have all been made impotent. The mountain that grows the poison plants has been made impotent. 8. Impotent are they that dug you up; impotent are you, 0 plant. Impotent is the mountain height from which this poison sprang.

Recitation of the Atharvan hymns was accompanied by rituals which were intended to reinforce the curative effects of the hymns. The texts in which these rituals were laid down are therefore important for the understanding and interpretation of the Atharua Veda. Among them is the Kuusi’kaszitra, which contains a magic ritual (XXVIII.l-4) specifically associated with this hymn against arrow poison. It involved a mixed drink placed in a water pot smeared with the dregs of ghee and stirred by means of two arrows whose poisoned heads pointed upwards. This symbolized the flight of the poison away from the person being treated. The patient was given the drink until he vomited (cf. Bloomfield, 1897 pp. 373-374; Caland, 1900 pp. 87-88). The word used here for poisoned arrow is digdha. The second hymn (IV.7), “Against poison”, has the following verses: 5. . . . . You that have been dug with a spade, do not cause injury! 6. For covers (?), garments, and skins they bought you - you are a thing for barter, 0 plant (herb). You that have been dug with a spade, do not cause injury! (translations reworded from: Bloomfield, 1897; Whitney, 1905).

The magic ritual noted above may also have been performed in association with this hymn (Bloomfield, 1897 pp. 373-374; Caland, 1900 p. 87). From these two hymns several facts about the poison are evident, in summary: its source is a plant or herb growing in the mountains; it has to be dug up; and it is obtainable by barter. The commentary by Sayana says that k3ndCLuip, tuberous poison, or kEndE or kfind&miilu, tuber or tuberous root, is the plant intended (Bloomfield, 1897; Whitney, 1905). It is very clear from the facts noted that the source of the poison must almost certainly have been aconite. Many species of the herbaceous genus Aconitum grow in the mountainous regions along the northern border of the Indian subcontinent and their subterranean tubers are well-known as containing the highly poisonous aconitine and related diterpenoid ester alkaloids (see: Benn and Jacyno, 1983; Pelletier and Page, 1983; Pelletier and Mody, 1979). Aconite tubers have been the most widely used of all known arrowpoison sources - throughout a large part of temperate Europe and Asia and as far as Alaska in North America (Perrot and Vogt, 1913; Lewin, 1923; Bisset, 1976,1979, 1981). Where the material came from is uncertain - probably not from the northwest, since the Dardic tribes of the mountain valleys there are not known to have put poison on their arrowheads (which, not unexpectedly, appear to be of a type originating in Central Asia) (see e.g. Robertson, 1896; Allchin and

9

Allchin, 1982). Aconite has, however, been the main ingredient in arrow poisons made all along the southern slopes of the Himalaya from Nepal as far as Arunachal Pradesh and beyond, and it seems more likely that it is from this part of the mountain range that the tubers were obtained. As regards the covers (?), garments, etc., mentioned in the second hymn, according to Bloomfield (1897) the implication is that the poisonous plant, itself worthless, was bartered for worthless things: wisps of straw, old garments and worn-out skins; but he regarded the symbolism as obscure. On the other hand, it might be argued that the poison plant, the aconite, was obtained by barter from mountain tribes, who, being greatly inferior to brahmins, could be fobbed off with what to the brahmins would be relatively worthless things. The Athorua Veda also has several hymns (V.13, VI.12, VII.56 (58), VII.88 (93), X.4) intended for use in rituals (detailed in the KuuSihas~tra (XXIX and XxX11)) to promote the healing of wounds caused by poisonous snakes, scorpions, insects, etc., and this is perfectly understandable for a part of the world in which snake-bite is so common6. One of these hymns (X.4), “Against snakes and their poison”, nevertheless also refers to plant poisons in general and to the already encountered k&d8 poison in particular: 22. What poison is in fire, in the sun, what in the earth, ka~Qk~uk~ - let your poison come out; let it come.

in herbs,

khndE-poison,

(translation;

Whitney,

1905).

Whether at this period so-called poisons derived from snakes were also applied to arrows cannot be made out, but it would have been an entirely natural step given the enormous snake population of the subcontinent and the frequency of snakebite. 4. Buddhist

canon

That poisoned arrows were not an uncommon part of Indian daily life is also evident from the Buddhist canon. The Majjhima-nikzya, Middle Length Sayings, of the PBli recension, several times (I.429 (Cafa-MZa~ulikyasutta); 11.216 ~~euadakasu~~a), II.256 and 259 (S~~ukkha~~us~~~u)) uses the simile “. . . . it is as if [. . . .] a man was pierced by an arrow that was thickly smeared with poison . . . .” (Horner, 1957, 1959). 5. Later Sanskrit

literature

In spite of the innumerable

fights and battles

which feature

so promi-

6Unofficial estimates suggest about 100,000 fatalities per year for the Indian subcontinent and, assuming a mortality rate of 2.4%, this means about 4,000,OOO cases of snakebite per year (Habermehl, 1981).

Fig. 1. A miniature from the RQ~~~~~~~, the Persian translation of the ~a~~b~~r~~a, showing a battle between the armies of Arjuna and TEmradhraja, with BrHhma and other deities in the sky. (British Museum, Department of Oriental Books and Manuscripts: Or. 12076, folio 76a; Mughal style, dated 1598).

11

nentiy in certain parts of the MahtTbhiLrata and RZmiiyapa (cf. Figs. 1 and Z), the two great epics put together between approx. 300 B.C. and 300 A.D., it is rarely that weapons are said to carry poison. One MahGbhZrata reference (book 3 (37) 190.72; translation: van Buitenen, 1975 p. 603) shows that the poisoned arrow was for use against man: Go fetch me one of the colorful arrows I keep, and dip it in poison, man. Pierced by it Vamadeva shall lie . . . .

References in the RZmayat;la (translation: Shastri, 1952 pp. 297, cf. 172174) indicate that animals, including elephant, could be hunted with poisoned arrows: Seeing nought and deeming it to be the sound of an elephant, I took from my quiver an arrow dipped in the poison of a snake and discharged it whence the sound came. Having discharged the keen and poisonous shaft, . . . . . . . lay . . . like a young elephant wounded by a poisonous arrow.

Noteworthy here is the statement that the poison of a snake was used (see further 0 7). In this connection it is in~~st~g to see that in the ~~h~~~~ra~a (book 3 (42) 268.1 et seq.; translation: van Buitenen, 1975 p. 747; cf. Singh, 1965 p. 115) it is said that the ramparts of Lanka were guarded by soldiers with earthen pots or jars containing poisonous snakes. Bana, a much-travelled author of the 7th century A.D., in his prose romance K@dambar~ (kath8mukha, p. 94) includes a description of a hunt by Sabaras’ in the forests of the Vindhya mountains (in western Madhya Pradesh) and he relates how the hunters rendered their arrows more effective by smearing them with poison. The passage may reflect first-hand experience, and again the (poisoned) arrow is likened to a snake with poison in its fangs. The poison, if of plant origin, will not necessarily have been aconite, which does not grow in this part of India; but if it were, it would have to have been obtained by trade. The Sanskrit word used in these various works to indicate poisoned arrow is digdha. 6. Indian medical literature That the toxicological knowledge of the ancient Indian physicians was highly developed at the time of Buddha (6th century B.C.) is corroborated by several texts in the Pali recension of the Buddhist canon (Lienhard, 1979). In the DtghanikTiya, toxicology (Pali uisauijja; Sanskrit uipxuidy?f) is already recorded as a separate branch of medical science, and the j8takas8 furnish the ‘This was the name of a wild mountain tribe, later extended to include any savages or barbarians. ‘A jcitaka is an account of a former birth of Guatama Buddha.

Fig, 2. A hunting scene from the RLirnZiyqa. Indian style, dated 1713).

(British

Museum,

Department

of Orientai

Books and Manuscripts:

Add. 15295,

folio 242;

13

names of two well-known authorities on toxicology, Alambayana and Naggaji. Unfortunately, their works have not survived, but they are referred to in later medical texts (see further: Mitra, 1974). 6.1. Sus?utasa~hiki In fact, poisons, bites of venomous animals, and wounds from arrows are ever-recurring topics in the Indian medical literature. It is evident from this literature that several kinds of poison were in use in ancient India (see below). Almost all the Sanskrit medical treatises that have survived have a description of the symptoms arising from being wounded by a poisoned arrow and of the different treatments to be carried out. The oldest description occurs in the Sus’rutasu@zit~ (Collection of Susruta), a work dealing especiahy with surgery and put together not later than approx. 300 A.D. Like other medical treatises it is not an entirely original work and it contains much from earlier sources. The section of the book devoted to toxicology is entitled Kalpasth~na. It comprises eight chapters, three of which are of concern here. Chap. 2 On sth~ua~au~~a, or “poison [obtained from] immobile things”, i.e. plant and mineral poisons: There are 53 plant poisons, divided into 9 groups according to the part of the plant from which they are derived (II, 2-5): root (8)9, leaf (5), fruit (12), flower (5), bark, pith, and gum (7), latex (3), and bulb (13). Few of them have been identified, but among the bulb poisons, which are described as very strong in their actions, there are two : uatsanfibha: The text says it has four varieties, but no details are given. It has been stated to be Aconitum ferox Wall. ex Skinge. $rigivi~a: This has been identified as Aconitum -chasmanthum Stapf ex Holmes.

No such exact identifications can be made and the Sanskrit names must simply be regarded as indicating two different varieties of poisonous aconites which cannot be further specified (Singh and Chunekar, 1972). Vatsa~~~ha was probably a generic name which included several Aconitum species. Nowadays, however, it is a Sanskrit synonym of the vernacular names usually applied to A. ferox. Examination of commercial samples of “A. ferox” has shown that material from as many as six different Aconitum species may be present (Kirtikar and Basu, 1935; Nadkarni, 1954; Mehra and Puri, 1970). According to Singh and Chunekar (1972), A. chasmanthum is now the preferred source of uatsanabha. The two mineral poisons, dhlRuvi$a, mentioned in this chapter are phenlisina (white arsenic) and harit?ila (yellow arsenic). *The figures in parentheses indicate the number of poisons in each group.

14

Chap. 3 On jafigamaui?a, or “poison [obtained from] creatures”, i.e. animal poisons: Animal poisons are obtained from various secretions and excretions as well as different parts of the bodies of venomous animals; these include cats, dogs, monkeys, mice, rats, reptiles, snakes, scorpions, spiders, insects, fish, etc. A point of special interest is the statement (III, 5) that “the dead body of a snake or insect is poisonous in itself”. This could well be taken to mean that arrow poison was prepared from dead snakes, as reported by Diodorus Siculus (3 7), and not just from snake venom. See also below. [Chap.

4 On sarpadagta,

or “snakebites”]

Chap. 5 On the treatment of snakebites: It is in this chapter that the symptoms due to a poisoned arrow are described:

(V, 5760)

If a person is wounded by a poisoned arrow (digdha) there is a flow of black-coloured blood, a constant burning sensation, and production of black-coloured, putrefied, and morbid flesh in the wound, and there is thirst, faintness, giddiness, burning, and fear. When all the above-mentioned symptoms are present, such wounds are envenomed. Whether bitten by a spider (lfitndas{u) or wounded by a poisoned arrow (digdha), where putrefaction has set in the putrid flesh should be carefully removed and the vitiated blood should be extracted by applying leeches. After the system has been cleansed with the help of emetics and purgatives (i.e. the vitiated humours (dop) eliminated upwards and downwards), the wound should be sprayed with a decoction of h?Tri bark and a poultice prepared with antivenom drugs of cool potency mixed with clarified butter and placed inside a piece of linen should be applied.

According to Singh and Chunekar (1972), kgiri and its synonyms are a group of names for five laticiferous trees belonging to the genus Ficus: F. bengalensis L. (ua_ta), F. religiosa L. (pippala), F. racemosa L. (udumbara; this plant is used as an antidote for aconite poisoning -the remedy is a hot mixture of udumbara juice and ghee (Pathak, 1970)), F. lacer Buch.-Ham. __I (plaksa), and an unidentified Ficus species (parzsa - this is sometimes replaced by Sirisa, a plant also mentioned by V%gbhata (see below) as being employed in the treatment of wounds due to poisoned arrows). It is significant that the symptoms due to a poisoned arrow are described in the chapter on the treatment of snake-bites, and it can reasonably be inferred that snakes were an important source of poison for arrows. Moreover, these symptoms are very similar to the ones listed by Diodorus Siculus as arising from being wounded by an arrow smeared with poison obtained from the decomposition of dead snakes (see 3 7). The symptoms described by Susruta are reproduced in later medical works, e.g. M~dhauanid&za (approx. 700 A.D.), in the section Visaroganid&za (13. -14); BhauaprakSlSa (16th century), in the chapter on poisons (16 17); and Yogaratnakara (17-18th century), also in the chapter on poisons (l-2).

15

6.2, A@iligahydayasa~hit~ Of considerable interest is the detailed hydayasamhita of VZgbha$a (7th century sthiZna (XXXV, 40-47) :

information

given in the A$%gacalled Uttasa-

A.D.) in the section

If a person is wounded by a poisoned arrow (u&&g&a), he faints again and again, he goes pale and quickly becomes weak, and his body tingles as if covered with insects. His loins, back, head, shoulders, and joints become painful. Black and putrefied blood flows from the wound. There is thirst, faintness, fever, and burning. After only a moment the eyes become clouded over and there is vomiting, difficulty in breathing, and coughing. The wound becomes reddish yellow round the edges and brown in the middle, and extremely painful. It quickly becomes inflamed and, after the flesh has turned black, continues to putrefy with a frothy discharge. In a person who is not wounded in a vital spot (marman), the heart soon stops. After the tip of the arrow (Salya) has been removed, the wound is cauterized with a heated iron or a caustic (&Era) made from muskaku, Suet& somutuuk, t&rzruuulli, Sirisa, and g~dhrunakhi is dabbed round it. The wound is smeared with Sukun&& prutiui@, and the root of uyZighri. If possible, it is treated in the same way as an insect sting.

muskaka: According to Singh and Chunekar two kinds have been in use:, (a) Schrebera swietenioides Roxb. and (b) Elaeodendron glaucum (Rottb.) Pers. The plant intended here could well be the second one, as it has a high alkali (k@ra) content, this being the reason for its name k@ras’re@ha which means best alkali. guet8: There is uncertainty about the identity of this plant. Among the species suggested are AEbizzia procera (Roxb.) Benth., Vitex negundo L. and Symphorema sp. It seems to be an error to identify it as Achyranthes aspera L., as was done by Hilgenberg and Kirfel(1941), since this is the apBm&-ga of the Sanskrit texts. somatuak: This is the bark of Acacia catechu (L.f.) Willd. (khadira). tamravalli: A synonym of rnafijistha, which is known to be Rubia cordifolia L. SirQa: This is an Albizzia species - perhaps A. Zebbek (L.) Benth. or A. odoratissima Benth. or A. procera (Roxb.) Benth. (see sieth, above). gydhranakhY: In both the Sus’rutasamhith and As@rigahydayasamhita it is mentioned only once. Singh and Chunekar suggest that it is either Capparis zeylanica L. or a species of Zizyphus, possibly 2. jujuba Lam. -s’ukanasa: Singh and Chunekar identify this plant as Corallocarpus epigaeus Benth. ex Hook. on the basis of the medical properties of the plant. It is emetic, purgative, anti-inflammatory, and alexipharmic (cf. Kirtikar and Basu). Singh and Chunekar say also that it should never be confused with sjlon?ika (Oroxylum indicum (L.) Vent.). prativi$: Aconitum heterophyllum Wall. ex Royle

16

xan thocarpum Schrad. et Wendl. (See: Singh and Chunekar, 1972; also Kirtikar and Basu, 1935; Nadkarni, 1954; Chopra et al., 1958). Again, there is a measure of similarity with the symptoms described by Diodorus Siculus (Ej 7). vyilghr7: Solanum

6.3. Siddhas8ra

The Siddhas~r~ of Ravigupta {mid-7th centu~) prescribes a much simpler treatment for wounds caused by a poisoned arrow (XXVII, 32): turmeric (~u~u~~),rock salt {sa~nd~~u~), and honey (~~a~dra) mixed with ghee is said to be extremely beneficial and the wounded person must be made to drink it. This verse occurs in works by a number of later (9th-14th century) writers such as Vrnda, Ananti, Cakradatta, and Vangasena. 7. Classical literature

The R8mSiyaqa and the MahWztTrutu (5 5) and later accounts often liken arrows to snakes, especially poisonous snakes (van Buitenen, 1973, 1975, 1978), perhaps because of their darting quality. While this does not necessarily imply that their poison was used on these weapons, there is, nevertheless, the passage in the ~~rn~ya~a already quoted, and information gained during Alexander the Great’s campaign in Parthia and the western part of India in 326-325 B.C. suggests that in that region, at least, the use of an arrow poison derived from snakes was quite common. Among the sources extant are the classical authors Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius and Justinus; they are all of much later date, ranging from the 1st century B.C. to probably the 3rd century AD. Diodorus Siculus, writing in the time of Augustus Caesar (63 B.C. - 14 A.D.),tells how Alexander took Harmatelia, the City of the Brahmins, in 325 B.C., and he describes both the preparation and effects of the arrow poison that Alexander’s soldiers encountered there: The last city of the enemy, called Harmateliaa. . . . A large number of the king’s forces were wounded, and these met with a new and extreme danger. The enemy had smeared their weapons with a deadly poison in which they had complete confidence in deciding to take up arms. The power of the poison derived from certain snakes which they had caught and whose dead bodies they had left in the sun. The heat caused the flesh to putrefy and it began to secrete drops of moisture in which was also secreted in a concentrated form the poison of the animals. As a result, when a man was wounded his body immediately became numb and this was followed soon after by sharp pains, while convulsions and shivering shook his whole being, The skin became cold and livid and bile appeared in the vomit. Moreover, a black froth exuded from the

a The name also appears as Harmata. The city was situated Khas in the Sanghar District of the Sind, Pakistan.

to the north

of modern

Mirpur

17 wound and gangrene set. in. This spread rapidly and on reaching the vital parts of the body brought about death with terrible suffering. The same effects occurred wit,h those who had received serious wounds and with those who, even simply by accident, had received a mere scratch. account, in spite of its brevity, is nevertheless the most detailed one has come down to us from classical sources. Since Diodorus writes merely “from certain (some) snakes”, there is no possibility of deciding what species were used. That the poison was liquid from snakes putrefying in the sun could still mean that actual venom from the snakes was present, and although possibly not a major component of the exudate its more stable constituents, e.g. the phospholipases and certain neurotoxins, could well survive and remain active (Iwanaga and Suzuki, 1979; Karlsson, 1979). The symptoms caused by the poison are not unlike those brought about by cobra venom (cf. Habermehl, 1981). Such elapid venoms tend to be neurotoxic and to have a greater neurotoxin and lower enzyme content than crotalid or viperid poisons (Karlsson, 1979; Iwanaga and Suzuki, 1979). However, there are cobra venoms which have little neurotoxic activity and whose main effects are to cause swelling and necrosis; cf. for example, the report by Tilbury f982) on African spitting cobras - a type of snake also prevalent in India. It is, of course, these varying actions that make it so difficult to decide on the snakes )ased in making the arrow poison, The highly lethal presynaptic neurotoxins are related to the enzyme phospholipase A and some of them produce necrosis of muscle fibres, a property more commonly associated with cytotoxins (Karlsson, 1979). It seems that the different specificities of the neuro- and cyto-toxins may be traceable to certain regions in their (polypeptide) molecules and that they are connected with the varying degree of conformational lability inherent in such molecules. This conformational lability plays a part in determining the particular activity deployed, since upon it will depend the receptor sites and binding concerned (Dufton and Hider, 1977, 1980). An additional possibility to be borne in mind is that the decomposing snakes could become infected with anaerobic bacteria, e.g. Clostridium species, and this could also be responsible for the gangrene reported to set in after being wounded by the poisoned arrows. This

that

8. Artha- and Dh~a~tra Artha&?stru is the science of statecraft and deals with politics, both internal and external, and administration. The earliest surviving work of the kind is the Kuu[iltya Arthakistru, which is a very detailed treatment of the subject in 15 books and it represents the culmination of the development of the ,&Tstru (treatise). When it was written has long been a matter of debate, and dates ranging from the end of the 4th century B.C. to as late as the 3rd or 4th century A.D. have been discussed (cf. Kangle, 1965; Trautmann, 1971).

18

Book 2 is chiefly concerned with the duties of the executive officers of state. Chapter 18 sets out those of the Director of Forest Produce and among the products with which he is concerned are poisons. These are of both animal and vegetable origin and one of them is uatsanabha, a particularly virulent kind of poison prepared from an aconite and said to resemble the nipple of a cow. The plant source has long been identified as Acon~tum ferox Wall. ex Seringe. But no such precise identification is possible, for the material of uatsanZ~ha will certainly have comprised the tubers of more than one species of Aconitum ($6.1). Chapter 19 describes the responsibilities of the Supe~ntendent of the Armoury and although among the weapons in his care are bows and arrows of various kinds, there is no indication that they might be used with poison. The words for poisoned arrow - ZlZkta, digdhu, liptu - are not listed. Nevertheless, the Superintendent of the Armour-y is expected to be familiar with all the aspects of the utilization of forest produce - no doubt particularly in connection with the manufacture of weapons. Book 14, Concerning Secret Practices, comprises four chapters and presents a very different picture. Chapter 1 is an extended discussion of secret practices for the destruction of enemy troops and it considers in great detail various poisons and mixtures of poisons and the different ways in which they can be used. 5Yitra (sentence) 29 does indicate that arrows with poison on them could be in use; once again, aconite is the principle active ingredient: The man, whom

an arrow,

prepared

with the seeds of Zilmaliand uidciri, joined

with

m&z and l~~isun~bhu and smeared with the blood of muskrat, hits, when wounded [by it,] bites ten people, and each of those bitten in turn bites another ten people. (translation: Kangle, 1963 p. 577; see also Meyer, 1926).

~~~~~1~:Usually the silk cotton tree Bombax ceibu L. (= ~a~rnia malaburic~ (DC.) Schott et Endl. = Bombax malubaricum DC.), but the name is also applied to the white mulberry, Morus indica I,. uiddrT: The widespread Ipomoea digitatu L., but the name is also given to Pueruria tu berosu DC. miila: The word simply means “root” (of a plant or tree). However, it is most commonly used for the radish, Ruphunus sativa L. With or without a qualifying adjective it is applied to many other plants, among them species of Aristo~ochia, Bryonia, Costus, Crinum, Euphorbiu, Kuempferiu, ~l~mbago, etc., some of which have poisonous properties. (See: Singh and Chunekar, 1972; Chopra et al., 1958; Nadkarni, 1954; Kirtikar and Basu, 1935). What is also clear from the ~u~~~~~~uArthaGstru is the important role given to poisoners - rusuda - and poisoning, real or pretended, as a political weapon, and this can be judged from the numerous references under that heading to the text of the treatise in the index of the translation by Meyer (1926). However repugnant these clandestine means may be felt to be, to

19

Kautilya, as to Machiavelli with whom he has been compared, the selfinterest of the State was supreme and the end was considered to justify the means (Kangle, 1965 pp. 269-273). In evident contrast is the teaching of the Dharmaitistru works. These were addressed to the individual and originally they concerned the observance of his duties in life - dharma - very much from the point of view of a moral preceptor. The word dharrnu also means law, but it is only in the later works that increasing attention came to be paid to this aspect and Manu is the first dhurmu~~stru writer to treat the law in a more or less systematic fashion. Like Kau@lya’s book, however, that by Manu is not an entirely original treatise and it contains much from earlier sources. In this most famous of the law books, M~nu~udhurmu~~stru, dating perhaps from between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D., it is specifically enjoined (VII.90) that: One should not, fighting in battle, slay enemies by concealed weapons, nor with barbed or poisoned [weapons], nor with fire-kindled arrows. (translation: Burnell and Hopkins, 1884; cf. Oppert, 1880)

Book VII from which the quotation is taken, leans heavily on the It deals with the king and his liability to be corrupted and also discusses such subjects as taxation, peace, and war (Derrett, 1973). The more or less contemporaneous ~it~~rak~~ik~ (VII.45) has a similar prohibition. The Gupta and post-Gupta period, approx. 300-700 AD., is usually described as the classical age of India and in regard to the literature of the period is a well-merited title. The viewpoint of the dharrna&%tru emerges clearly in passages occurring in two plays written during this period, towards the end of the 4th or beginning of the 5th century A.D. In M&wikEgnimitru (M8lavika and Agnimitra) (11.13), presumed to be by Kalidasa, who is looked upon as the most outstanding writer of classical Sanskrit, and Mlcchakatika (The little clay cart) (X.28), attributed to &idraka, the authors invoke the picture of an arrow smeared with poison as a symbol of a morally reprehensible person. ArthaSiistra.

9. Conclusions While it is possible that Mesolithic hunting communities may have made use of poisoned arrows, it is not until the Vedic period is reached that there is good evidence for their use. Hymns of the l$g Vedu and Atharua Veda (1200-900 B.C.) allow the conclusion that poisoned arrows were employed in war. The word dla, used in the 1;2gVedu for the poison smeared on the arrowheads, cannot be assigned a definite meaning. While a mineral, i.e. arsenical, source is almost certainly excluded, it is not possible to decide whether it represents an animal or plant poison. Evidence in the Athuruu Vedu points to Ac~n~t~m tubers as a major source of arrow poison.

20

Passages from the Buddhist canon (Mujjhima-Nihaya) and later Sanskrit literature (Mahdbhdrata, Rdmayana; Sus’rutasarphittd, A@igahydayasa~hitd, Siddhasdra; Arthakistra, M&uwadharma.Gstru) indicate the continued use of arrow poisons in hunting and warfare and for clandestine purposes. They reveal that decomposing snakes furnished a second source of poison; this is confirmed in the account of Alexander the Great’s campaign in western India (325 B.C.) by Diodorus Siculus. While detailed descriptions of the symptoms and the methods of treatment of wounds caused by poisoned arrows continued to be given in the Sanskrit medical literature as late as the 17th and 18th centuries, it is not yet clear to what extent poisoned arrows were still being used. Acknowledgements It is a pleasure to thank Prof. Pierre Filliozat, Paris, and Prof. Liliane Bodson, Liege, for valuable help in connection with the translations of the passages from the Dhanur Veda and Diodorus Siculus, respectively. The figures are reproduced by kind permission of the Trustees of the British Museum. Sanskrit

bibliography

Agfarigahydaya of VHgbhata , 5th edn., edited by Vaidya Sri Yadunandana Upadhyaya. Kashi Sanskrit Series 156, Benares, 1975. A@igasapgraha by VBgbhata, with Hindi translation and commentary by Atrideva Gupta. Part 1, Introduction (in Sanskrit) by NandakiiorSarmI, Nirnaya Sagar Press, Bombay, 1951. Part 2, Benares Hindu University Press, Benares, 1962. BhEuaprakGa of Sri BhPvamiSra, with the ‘Vidyotini’ Sanskrit commentary, edited by Brahmasarikara MiSra and Rupalalji VaiSya. Kashi Sanskrit Series 130, 2 Vols., Benares, 1961. BheZasal;nhitH, edited by GirijldayZlu Sukla. Vidyabhavan Ayurveda Granthamala 25, Benares, 1959. Dhanuruedasaphita of Vasistha, edited and with Bengali translation by Pandit Iswar Chandra Sastri and Arun Chandra Sinha. Moharaja Kumud Chandra Memorial Series 1, Calcutta, 1922. Dhanuantarinigha~fu~, edited by Priya Vrat Sharma and translated into Hindi by Guru Prasad Sharma, Jaikrishnadas Ayurveda Series 40, Chaukhambha Orientalia, Benares, 1982. KEdambari of Baga, with the Chandrakala Sanskrit and ‘Vidyotini’ Hindi commentaries, edited by Krishna-mohana SHstri, Kashi Sanskrit Series 151, Benares, 1950. KauSikasEtru of Kausika, edited by M. Bloomfield. Journal of the American Oriental Society 14 (1890) i-lxviii + l-424. M@hauanid?inam of Sri MHdhava Kara, with the ‘Madhukosa’ Sanskrit commentary by Sri Vijayarakaita and Srikanthadatta, 2nd edn., revised and edited by Yadunandan UpBdhyHya. Kashi Sanskrit Series 158, 2 Vols., Benares, 1960. R@jf-nighaqfu-sahito dhanuantariya-nighanfuh, 2nd edn., edited by Vaidya NBrZyana S%triPurandare and V.G. Apse. AandHSrama Sanskrit Series 33, Poona, 1925. Siddhasara of Ravigupta, edited by R.E. Emmerick. Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland Supplementband 23, Vol. 1, The Sanskrit text, 1980, Vol. 2,

The Tibetan version with facing English translation, 1982, F. Steiner, Wiesbaden. So~hu~a-n~gha~~u (n~masa~gru~a and gu~asa~graha) of Vaidygc%ya Sodhala, edited by Priya Vrat Sharma. . . , Gaekwad’s Oriental Series 164, Oriental Institute, Baroda, 1978. Sus’rutasamhit~ of Mahar+SuSruta, with Ayurveda-tattva-sandipikg, Hindi commentary, notes, . . . . , 3rd edn., edited by KavirZija Ambikfidutta S&tri. Kashi Sanskrit Series 156, 2 Vols., Benares, 1974. Susrutasamhita of Susruta, with the Nibandhasamgraha commentary of Sri Dalhanacharya and the NyZiyachandrika Panjikg of Sri GayadHsgcharya on Nidznasthhna, 3rd edn. revised. Nirnaya Sagar Press, Bombay, 1938. YogaratnZikara, with the ‘Vidyotini’ Hindi commentary by Laksmipati S%stri, 2nd edn., edited by Brahma&ikara Sgstri. Kashi Sanskrit Series 160, Benares, 1973.

References Allchin, B. (1966) The Stone-tipped Arrow, Late Stone-age hunters of the tropical Old World, Phoenix House, London, p. 121. Allchin, B. and Allchin, R. (1982) The Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney, pp. 62-96,125-127,298-308,347-361. Allchin, B., Goudie, A. and Hegde, K. (1978) The Prehistory and Palaeogeography of the Great Indian Desert. Academic Press, London, New York, San Francisco, pp. 326-330. Ammer, K. (1948/52) Die L-Formen im Rgveda. Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des Morgentandes 51, 117-137,132. Benn, M.H. and Jacyno, J.M. (1983) The toxicology and pharmacology of diterpenoid alkaloids. In: S.W. Pelletier (Ed.), Alkaloids: Chemical and Biotogical Perspectives, Wile~Inter~ience, New York, Vol. 1, pp. 153-210. Bhish~ratna, K.L. (1911) An ~ngi~h ~a~latjon of the Sushr~ta Samhjta. Calcutta, Vol. 2, Kalpasthana (section on toxicology), chapters l-5, 673-727. B&et, N.G. (1976) Hunting poisons of the North Pacific region. Lloydia 39, 87-124. Bisset, N.G. (1979, 1981) Arrow poisons in China. Part I. JournaZ of Ethnopharmacology 1,325-384; Part II. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 4, 247-336. Bloomfield, M. (1890) The KZucika-satra of the Atharva-veda. Journal of the American Oriental Society 14, Introduction, i-lxviii. Bloomfield, M. (1897) Hymns of the Atharua-Veda. Together with extracts from the ritual books and the commentaries, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 25-27, 373-378. Bohtlingk, 0. and Roth, R. (1852/55) Sanskrit-Wb’rterbuch, Kaiserliche Akademie von Wissenschaften, St. Petersburg, Vol. 1, columns 700 and 702. Buitenen, J.A.B. van (1973, 1975, 1978) The Mahiibharuta. Translated and edited, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London, Vols. l-3. Burnell, A.C. and Hopkins, E.W. (1984) The ordinances of Manu, Triibner, London, p. 159. Caland, W. (1900) Altindisches Zauberritual. Probe einer Uebersetzung der wichtigsten Theile des Kausika Sutra. Verhandl. Kon. Akad. Wetensch., Afd. Letterk. [n.s.] 3 (2) 87-88. Chopra, R.N., Chopra, I.C., Handa, K.L. and Kapur, L.D. (1958) Chopra’s indigenous Drugs of India, 2nd edn., U.N. Dhur & Sons, Calcutta. Curtius (Rufus), Quintus (1946) History of Alexander. English translation by J.C. Rolfe, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., W. Heinemann, London, Vol. 2, book 9, chap. viii, 22-27. Derrett, J.D.M. (1973) Dharma.&stra and Juridical Literature. Part of Vol. 4 of: J. Gonda (Ed.), A History of Indian Literature, 0. Harrassow&z, Wiesbaden, pp. 31-33.

22 Dufton, M.J. and Hider, R.C. (1977) Snake toxin secondary structure predictions. Structure activity relationships. Journal of Molecular Biology 115, 177.-193. Dufton, M.J. and Hider, R.C. (1980) Lethal protein conformations. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 1980, 53-56. Geldner, K.F. (1907, 1909) Der Rigveda in Auswahl, W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, Part 1, Glossar, p. 24; Part 2, Kommentar, pp. 99-101. Geldner, K.F. (1951) (Der) Rig-Veda. Aus dem Sanskrit ins Deutsche tibersetzt und mit einem laufenden Kommentar versehen. Part 2, Harvard Oriental Series 34, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 176-178. Gonda, J. (1975) Vedic Literature (SamhitBs and BrZhmanas). Vol. 1, fast. 1 of: J. Gonda (Ed.), A History of Indian Literatuie, Otto Harrassow& Wiesbaden, pp. 8, 15-17, 41-42, 144, 192, 267 et seq. Habermehl, G.G. (1981) Venomous Animals and their Toxins, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 131 et seq. Harshe, R.G. (Ed.) (1952) Sivakosa of Sivadatta M&a. Sources of Indo-Aryan Lexicography 7, Deccan College, Poona, p. xliv. Hilgenberg, L. and Kirfel, W. (1941) A+rigahydayasamhitB. Ein altindisches Lehrbuch der Heilkunde, E.J. Brill, Leiden, p. 688. Hoffmann, K. (1968/69) Remarks on the new edition of the Paippalada-Samhitz. IndoIranian Journal 11, l-- 10. Horner, I.B. (1957, 1959) The Collection of The Middle Length Sayings (Majjhimanikzya), translated from the Pali. Pali Text Society Translation Series 30 and 31, Luzac, London, Vol. 2, pp. 99-100, Vol. 3, pp. 4--5, 42244. Iwanaga, S. and Suzuki, T. (1979) Enzymes in snake venom. In: C.Y. Lee (Ed.), Snake Venoms. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Vol. 52, pp. 61-158. Justinus (Marcus Junianus) (1936) A bregh des histoires de Trogue Pompee et prologue de Trogue Pompie, translated by E. Chambry and L. Thely-Chambry, Garnier, Paris, Vol. 1, book 12, chap. 10. Kangle, R.P. (1963) The Kaufiliya ArthaGstra. An English translation with critical and explanatory notes, University of Bombay Studies Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Pali 2, University of Bombay, Bombay, Vol. 2, p. 577. Kangle, R.P. (1965) The Kaufiliya ArthasZstra. A study, University of Bombay Studies Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Pali 3, University of Bombay, Bombay, Vol. 3, pp. 106, 269.-273. Karlsson, E. (1979) Chemistry of protein toxins in snake venoms. In: C.Y. Lee (Ed.), Snake Venoms. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Vol. 52, pp, 159-212. Kirtikar, K.R. and Basu, B.D. (1935) Indian Medicinal Plants, 2nd edn. by E. Blatter, J.F. Caius and K.S. Mhaskar, L.M. Basu, Allahabad, Vol. 1, pp. 47-50, Vol. 2, p. 11661167. Lewin, L. (1923) Die Pfeilgifte. Nach eigenen toxikologischen und ethnologischen Untersuchungen 2nd edn., J.A. Barth, Leipzig, pp. 41-43. Lienhard, S. (1979) Remarks on the early history of Indian medical terminology. Scientia Orientalis no. 16, pp. 9-20. Liiders, H. (1916) Ali und Ala. In: Aufsiitze zur Kultur- und Sprachgeschichte vornehmlich des Orients, Ernst Kuhn zum 70. Geburtstag. . . . gewidmet. . . . , M.H. Marcus, Breslau, pp. 313-325. MacDonell, A.A. and Keith, A.B. (1912) Vedic Index of Names and Subjects, J. Murray, London, Vol. 1, pp. 35 (arundhatT), 66 (ala), vol. 2, p. 450 (siliiciand siZiiiijziRi). Mayrhofer, M. (1953) Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Worterbuch des Altindischen -- A Concise Etymological Sanskrit Dictionary, C. Winter, Heidelberg, Vol. 1, pp. 79 (alhktah), 80 (iilam).

23 Mehra, P.N. and Puri, H.S. (1970) Pharmacognostic investigations on aconites of ‘ferox’ group. Research Bulletin of the Punjab University 21, 473-493. Mehta, U. and Thakkar, U. (1980) Kautilya and his Arthasastra, S. Chand, Ram Nagar, New Delhi. Meyer, J.J. (1926) Das altindische Buck uom Welt- und Staatsleben. Das ArthaGastra des Kautilya, 0. Harrassowitz, Leipzig, p. 643. Mitra, J. (1974) History of Indian Medicine from pre-Mauryan to Kusanu Period, Jyotiralok Prakashan, Varanasi, pp. 3-7, 74 no. 13, 104 no. 250a. Monier-Williams, M. (1899) A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, new edn., Clarendon Press, Oxford, p. 153 (&kta). Nadkarni, K.D. (1954) Indian Materia Medica, 3rd edn., revised by A.K. Nadkarni, Popular Book Depot, Bombay, Dhootapapeshwar Prakashan, Panvel, Vol. 1, pp. 23-25 (~~ffts~n~~~~). O’Flaherty, D. (1975) Hindu Myths. A sourcebook translated from the Sanskrit, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, pp. 16-17. O’Flaherty, D. (1981) The Rig Veda. An anthology, one hundred and eight hymns selected, translated and annotated, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, pp. 236-239. Oppert, G. (1880) On the Weapons, Army Organisation, and Political Maxims of the Ancient Hindus, with Special Reference to Gunpowder and Fire Arms, Higginbotham, Madras, Triibner, London, p. 73. Ouyang Xiu (1975) Xin Tang Shu (New History of the Tang dynasty), Zhonghua shuju, Beijing, chap. 222a, p. 6275 (first published in 1061). Pant, G.N. {1978) Indian Archery, Agam Kala, Prakashan, Delhi, pp. 177, 191-192, Parry, N.E. (1932) The Lakhers. With an introduction and supplementary notes by J.H. Hutton, Macmillan, London, p. 50. Pathak, R.R. (1970) Therapeutic Guide to Ayurvedic Medicine, Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan (Ed.), Patna, pp. 245-246. Pelletier, S.W. and Mody, N.V. (1979) The structure and synthesis of C,,-diterpenoids. In: R.H.F. Manske and R.G.A. Rodrigo (Eds.), The Alkaloids. Chemistry and Physiology, Academic Press, New York, San Francisco, London, Vol. 17, pp. l-103, and Refs. therein, Pelletier, S.W. and Page, S.W. (1983) Diterpenoid alkaloids. In: The Alkaloids, Royal Society of Chemistry Periodical Report, Vol. 13, pp. 281-308; see also previous volumes in the series. Perrot, E. and Vogt, E. (1913) Poisons de fleches et poisons d’epreuve, Vigot, Paris, pp. 161-162. Renou, L. (1956) Hymnes spdculatifs du Veda, Gallimard, Paris, pp. 39-42, 233-234. Renou, L. (1964) Notes sur la version “PaippalBda” de 1’Atharvaveda (premiere serie). Journal

Asiatique

Renou, L. (1965) Journal

252,

421.

~450, 439.

Notes sur la version “PaippalEda” de I’Atharvaveda (deuxieme serie).

Asiatique

253,

15- ~42.

Renou, L. (1967) In: J. Varenne (Ed.), Le Veda, premier livre sacrt; de l’lnde, Planete, Paris, Gerard, Verviers, p. 211. Robertson, G.S. (1896) The Kafirs of the Hindu Kush, Lawrence & Bullen, London, p. 575. Sainson, C. (1904) Nan-tchai ye-the. Histoire particulii?re du Nan-tchao. Traduction d’une histoire de l’ancien Yun-nan, E. Leroux, Paris, pp. 53-54, footnote 10. Sarasvati, S.S.P. and Vidyalankar, S. (1980) Rgveda Samhita. With an English translation, Veda Pratishthana, New Delhi, Vol. 7, pp. 2224 2225 and 2337 .2338. Schafer, E.H. (1963) The Golden Peaches of Samarkand. A study of T’ang exotics, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, p. 263. Sharma, P.V. (1969) ~rauyagu~a vijntina, 2nd edn., Chowkhamba Vidyabhawan, Benares, parts II and III, p. 827.

24 Sharma, P.V. (1972) Indian Medicine in the Classical Age, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies 85, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, Varanasi, p. 74. Shastri, H.P. (1952) The Ramayana of Valmiki, Shanti Sadan, London, Vol. 1, pp. 173-174, 297. Singh, S.D. (1965) Ancient Indian Warfare with Special Reference to the Vedic Period, E.J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 94, 106, 115, 153. Singh, T.B. and Chunekar, K.C. (1972) Glossary of Vegetable Drugs in Brhattrayi. Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies 87, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, Varanasi, pp. 14 (apamarga), 112 (kusfha), 126 (ksSri), 143 (gydhranakhT), 260 (pratiui@i), 289 and 177 (tamraualti = marijijisfhh), 312 313 (muskaka), 370~ ~371 (uiddri), 382 and 68 (uy@hri = kanfakiiri), 397 (sctmati), 399. 400 (s’irisa), 402. -403 (SukaniisE), 407 and 357 (&rigiuiFa = uatsanabha), 410~ -411 (Syoniika), 416--417 (sueti?), 456 and 1299 130 (somatuak = somaualka = khadira). Tilbury, C.R. (1982) Observations on the bite of the Mozambique spitting cobra (Naja mossambica mossambica). South African Medical Journal 1982, 3088313. Trautmann, T.R. (1971) Kaufilya and the ArthaGstra. A statistical investigation of the authorship and evolution of the text, E.J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 183, 185. Whitney, W.D. (1905) Atharua-ueda Samhitc. Translated with a critical and exegetical commentary, revised and brought nearer to completion and edited by C.R. Lanman, Harvard Oriental Series 7 and 8, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1522154, 154 156, 250-252, 278.--280, 292, 293, 578. Yang Shen (1880) Nanchao yeshi (Unofficial history of the Nanchao), revised by Hu Wei in 1775, Yunnan shuju, Yunnanfu, chap. 1, p. 18b.

Other references

consulted

Emmerick, R.E. (1979) Arsenic and sida. In: G. Mazars (Ed.), Les medecines traditionnehes de I’Asie, Seminaire sur les sciences et les techniques en Asie, Universite Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, Actes du Colloque de Paris, 11-12 June 1979, pp. 93--102. Meulenbeld, G.J. (1974) The MEdhauanidHna, and its chief commentary. Chapters l-10. Introduction, translation and notes, Orientalia Rheno-Traiectina 19, E.J. Brill, Leiden. Mukhopadhyaya, G. (1922/29) History of Indian Medicine, University of Calcutta, Calcutta, 3 vols. Renou, L. (1950) La ciuilisation de l’lnde ancienne d ‘aprds les textes Sanskrit, Flammarion, Paris, pp. 173-l 74.