I have said above that the chief ground for placing the greater portion of the Rgveda-Samhita in a very early period is the archaic character of its … - Kshetresa Chandra Chattopadhyaya

It is not true that mandalas I (or large portions of it), VIII and particularly X of the Rgveda-Samhita are the only later additions. There are enough indications to show that additions were made even in "the family books", the original nucleus of the Samhita. If we make a careful study of the arrangement of these "family books", ... the fol- lowing scheme seems to have been followed by the original redactors: - 1. the family groups were arranged according to the decreasing number of the hymns in each of these books; 2. within each family group the Agni hymns came first, then the Indra hymns and then the Visvadeva hymns (if there were any) and after them hymns to the other deities in due order; and . 3. within each devatii sub-group, the hymns were ar- ranged according to the diminishing number of stanzas contained in them.

But K. Chattopadhyaya'" has penetratingly corrected Parpola's authorities: King Sudas has been called in the Rgveda Paijavana, Yaska in a Nirukta passage (II.24) '" paijavanalt pijava- nasya putrah, says that Pijavana was the name of Sudas's father. King Divodasa is also mentioned as the ancestor of Sudas. Professors Macdonell and Keith'" incline towards the view that Divodasa was the grandfather of Sudas, and Pijavana his father. Their reasons for this supposition fail to convince me. R.V. VII. 18.22 mentions Paijavana Sudas as the ruiptr of Devavant: Devavant seems to be used here for Divodasa.!" ruiptub probably means "of the son", for "son" is the usual meaning of the word naptr or napiu in the Rgveda, But even if the later meaning of "grandson" be put on the word, as Sayana has done (devavato riijiio naptub pautrasya) , how will Professors Macdonell and Keith explain the concluding verse of the hymn : imam , , naro marutab sascatanu divodasam, nd pitaram sudasab avis/ana paijavanasya ketam dunasatn ksatram ajdram duvoyu, where Divodasa is explicitly calledthe father , (pita) of Sudas? This passage clearly establishes that Divodasa was the father and not the grandfather of Sudas. As regards Pijavana he may have been the same person as Divodasa as Geldner'" supposes, or may have been some remote ancestor.

Consequently the hymns in which these passages occur should be assigned to the period of the later Vedic literature. Other passages that similarly show late linguis- tic characteristics must also be considered as of late date. But the converse of this proposition is not necessarily true. It is possible that even in later ages unbroken family traditions enabled the priestly bards to compose hymns in antique form. In fact, there are several indications to show that this actually happened. Consequently, there must be some hymns in the Rgveda-Samhiui which, though early in form, are actually late in date.... The different attempts that have been made so far for the detailed chronological stratification of the Rgveda-Samhiui by Arnold, Belvalker, Weist and others have either failed or met with only partial success, for failing, among other reasons, to re- cognise that poems antique in form may yet be late in date. I therefore apply the criterion of thought for determining the early and the late passages in this text.