Recent Russian Publications On Indian Epic

Here's a comprehensive summary of J.W. De Jong's "Recent Russian Publications On The Indian Epic" in English:

This article by J.W. De Jong reviews and analyzes recent Russian scholarship on the Indian epics, the Mahābhārata (M) and the Rāmāyaṇa (R). De Jong contextualizes this work by first tracing the history of European engagement with the Indian epics, noting the influence of classical Greek and Roman epic studies in the 19th century. He highlights early theories that viewed the Indian epics as compilations of popular lays, similar to Lachmann's theories on Homer. Scholars like Soerensen and Jacobi attempted to identify original cores within these texts by excluding interpolated passages. Later scholars like Dahlmann defended the unity of the Mahābhārata, while ethnologists like Held and structuralists like Wikander and Dumézil explored societal organization and tripartite ideology as underlying structures.

A significant portion of the review focuses on the impact of Milman Parry's groundbreaking work on the oral nature of Homeric poetry. Parry's concept of the "formula" – a group of words regularly used under the same metrical conditions to express a given essential idea – and his analysis of "traditional epithets" demonstrated how such features are characteristic of oral composition. Parry's student, A.B. Lord, further developed these ideas in "The Singer of Tales," introducing the concept of "themes" (recurring units of action or description) as essential building blocks of oral epics. De Jong notes how the work of Parry and Lord, along with Russian scholars like V.V. Radlov (who described similar "elements of production" in Central Asian oral poetry), provided a framework for understanding the oral-formulaic composition of epic poetry.

The core of the article then delves into the contributions of two Russian scholars: Ja. V. Vasilkov and P. A. Grintser.

Ja. V. Vasilkov's Contributions:

Vasilkov's articles, cited as primary Russian publications, apply the principles of oral-formulaic theory, particularly Lord's work, to the Indian epics. De Jong highlights Vasilkov's key observations:

• Oral-Formulaic Technique: Vasilkov argues that the Mahābhārata exhibits characteristics of oral composition, such as the use of formulas and formulaic expressions.
• Supporting Words: He identifies "supporting words" (semantically positive or neutral words that complete a pāda or line) as crucial elements in the oral poet's toolkit, enabling improvisation and the creation of patterned verses. These supporting words, often ending in specific metrical patterns, contribute to the formation of "pure formulas" (entire pādas) and more complex, developed formulas.
• Themes: Vasilkov emphasizes the importance of "themes" (recurring narrative elements like duels, ascetic exploits, battles) in the Mahābhārata, noting how they can be introduced by formulaic expressions and developed through further formulas. He provides examples of thematic analysis of specific chapters.
• Inconsistencies and Repetitions: He explains that inconsistencies and repetitions within the Mahābhārata are not necessarily flaws but are inherent to oral performance, arising from the poet's need to adapt the narrative for different audiences or to incorporate various traditional versions of stories.
• Bard vs. Rhapsode: Vasilkov differentiates between the improvising "bard" and the memorizing "rhapsode," asserting that the Mahābhārata's sheer scale makes it more likely to have been performed by bards. He notes devices like repetition and the use of "tataḥ" (then) that facilitate oral composition.

P. A. Grintser's Contributions:

Grintser's extensive book, "The Old Indian Epic. Genesis and Typology," is presented as a major work in the field. De Jong focuses on the first part of Grintser's book, which examines the characteristics of oral epic technique in the Indian epics.

• Oral and Written Tradition: Grintser analyzes the interplay between oral and written traditions in the Indian epics, identifying features that indicate oral composition.
• Formulaic Analysis: He undertakes a detailed formulaic analysis, categorizing formulas into six groups: attributive, narrative, auxiliary, direct speech, maxims, and similes. He compiles an extensive list of these formulas, noting their placement in even or uneven pādas.
• Formula Definition: Grintser, like some other scholars, considers even single words as formulas, a point De Jong critiques as potentially too broad, potentially conflating traditional vocabulary with formulaic diction. De Jong suggests a longer minimum syllable count for clearer identification of formulas.
• Formulaic System of Indian Epic: Grintser argues that the Indian epic's formulaic system differs from the Homeric one, lacking the same degree of simplicity and economy. He notes that Indian formulas can have varied meanings and that supporting words are flexible in their application.
• Oral vs. Literary Epic: He contends that the high percentage of formulas and formulaic expressions in battle scenes points to the oral character of the epics, while didactic portions, though rich in maxims, show more influence from written traditions.
• Transitional Texts: Grintser discusses the concept of "transitional texts" – intermediary stages between pure oral composition and final written texts – and the challenges of identifying them in the Indian context. He ultimately believes that both epics existed as fully completed oral poems before being written down, with manuscripts undergoing later editorial changes.
• Themes and Repetitions: He confirms the extensive use of themes and repetitions as characteristic of oral epic composition, explaining that repetitions are driven by compositional needs and the formulaic nature of the language. He cautions against assuming borrowings solely based on shared themes.
• Inserted Episodes: Grintser highlights the abundance of inserted episodes in the Mahābhārata as a significant feature, often introduced through dialogue and serving to fill temporal gaps or reflect deeper thematic concerns.
• Recensions and Chronology: He addresses the existence of multiple recensions and versions of the epics, suggesting that apparent later additions are often consequences of the contamination of these parallel versions rather than simple interpolations. He also discusses the historical basis of the epics, acknowledging the difficulty in pinpointing specific events due to the long period of oral transmission and the blending of elements from different epochs.
• Rāmāyaṇa's Transition: Grintser observes a stylistic shift in the Rāmāyaṇa towards a more subjective, emotional, and literary style compared to the Mahābhārata, with formulas sometimes used ornamentally rather than functionally.

Overall Assessment and Conclusion:

De Jong concludes by emphasizing the significance of these Russian publications for understanding the Indian epics as oral compositions. He acknowledges that while earlier scholars recognized the oral transmission of these texts, Vasilkov and Grintser have provided more systematic and detailed analyses using the framework of oral-formulaic theory. De Jong highlights the comprehensiveness of Grintser's work, noting its extensive bibliography and valuable insights, and expresses hope for its translation into English. He reiterates the value of formulaic analysis in tracing the construction and history of these epics, while also noting the challenges presented by their immense size and textual variation compared to Homeric studies. Ultimately, the article underscores the ongoing importance of applying oral-formulaic methods to further illuminate the complex nature of the Indian epics.