Sergey Igorevich Trunev

Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Culture Studies of Saratov State Technical University named after Yu.A. Gagarin Russia, Saratov

The Prospects of Indo-European Research in the Context of Preservation of Cultural Heritage

As it is known, the Roerich Pact was the first document regulating procedures of preservation of material cultural heritage under any extreme circumstances. The care of preservation of spiritual heritage was N.K. Roerich's special care. In a number of texts of the Russian thinker it is understood not as preservation, but, on the contrary, as disclosing, connection, enrichment. N.K. Roerich's words: "Have recollected the attempts which have flashed in literature to associate the words Christ and Krishna, and have again recollected about Iosafe and Buddha…. Fans of the East and the West instead of prickly oppositions, have passed to constructive restoration of the images" [1]. In this case it means search of the general archetypical contents at the expense of comparison of the similar images belonging to different cultures.

The concept indo-european families of languages has arisen in the XIX-th century. Regular comparative philological and mythological research begins with the same time. And Z. Djumezil considers 1938 a birth of the new comparative mythology, based on a recognition of conformity of a pantheon of gods to social structure indo-european societies. It is interesting that in 1931 M. Eliade begins his independent teaching and scientific activity, whose ideas in the field of comparative mythology and religious studies accepted the concept of an archetype offered by K.G. Jung. Closely connected with comparative linguistics, the comparative mythology has had development in the works of the Soviet scientists (T.Y. Elizarenkova, V.V. Ivanov, V.N. Тoporov, etc.), investigating both Indian, and slavic cultures in the context of others indo-european cultures.

In 1903 Bala Gangadhara Tilaka's book "The Arctic native land in Vedas" was published. This book has laid the foundation the "Arctic hypothesis", according to which arias were not autochthonic inhabitants of India and Iran, but migrated from areas of the Arctic North owing to adverse climate changes. The given hypothesis as a whole has not been confirmed. The further textual research of the Soviet scientists (G.M. Bongard-Levin, E.A. Grantovsky, etc.) allowed to bring in to it a number of significant updatings. At all problems connected with the establishment of the historical native land of protoindoeuopian substratum, nowadays scientists tend to the conclusion about its being on the territory of modern Russia (Uralian) and Kazakhstan. Thus, a modified kind Bala Gangadhara Tilaka's Arctic hypothesis was original ideological basis of indo-european research.

According to a number of authoritative research the traditional Russian (slavic) culture represented (as much as we can judge it in general) generally complete formation in which frameworks indo-european component unconditionally dominated. The basis of traditional cultures is made by religious-philosophical pictures of the world. If they develop, they pass the following stages in their development: 1) folding of the uniform system from the set of diverse doctrines, ritual and household expert; 2) separation of the theory from base ritual expert; 3) disintegration of the uniform picture of the world into components, rudimentarily remaining in national creativity.

Pity, but traditional Russian culture has passed all noted stages in its development: from folding into organic whole. Before disintegration (in connection with Christianity acceptance) into rudimentary components remained up to the beginning of the XX-th century in a country life, art, ceremonies.

The destiny of traditional culture of India has appeared to be happier: thanks to a solicitous attitude of Indians to sacred texts and preservation of their communication with household and ritual experts, it currently represents a single whole. The whole weaved from a lot of local traditions. Thereupon comparative studying of the traditions making a basis of traditional culture of India (first of all, Vedic and Hinduism traditions), will allow us to penetrate more deeply in our own culture, to restore it and by means that to preserve many of its lost elements.

Here it is necessary to mention of modern indo-european criticism researches. The Indian scientist R.N. Dandekar summarizing all the critical arguments was one of the most consecutive in a small work "Indo-european research and Vedic mythology" [2]. The basic arguments are these: 1) both comparative linguistics and comparative mythology, have certain methodological borders, and should not become research basic points. 2) it is impossible to suppose interpretations of universally widespread representations as representations specifically indo-european. 3) It is impossible to underestimate the value of anthropological and ethnographic factors in the formation and mythology development. 4) the Vedic mythology is not static. With the given arguments follows: it is necessary to agree to recognise, however, that they at all do not reduce the value of indo-european researches. Certainly, comparative linguistics and mythology should interpret the archaeological and ethnographic data, but they should anticipate them as well. The circle of investigated religious-mythological notions should be closed on the set of indo-european cultures, however it is necessary to consider also the possibility of interference various in the language relation, but geographically adjoining cultures. It is impossible to underestimate the role of anthropological and ethnographic factors, but it is necessary to remember that traditional pictures of the world have, first of all, language expression. At last, development Vedic mythology does not deny the presence of the limited set of basic indo-european notions which have been laid down in the basis of Vedic culture.

If to accept the specified remarks, the specification of N.K.Roerich "building restoration Images" can be executed correctly, i.e. without belittling of specificity of cultures compared among themselves. And in this case the spiritual heritage of each of them will be not only kept, but also appreciably enriched. For this purpose it is also necessary to create the possibilities for continuous information interchange: the texts making the basis of traditional spiritual culture, research monographs and periodicals. Blessing, but modern communication facilities allow us to do this.

______________

1. Рерих Н.К. Великая Матерь// Рерих Н.К. О Вечном… - М.: Республика, 1994. С. 187.

2. Дандекар Р.Н. Индоевропеистика и ведийская мифология // Дандекар Р.Н. От Вед к индуизму: Эволюционирующая мифология. М.: Вост. лит., 2002. С. 12-24.



______________

•  The Roerich Pact and the Banner of Peace as a Remarkable Phenomenon of the World Culture
Reports and Speeches at the International Social and Scientific Conference.
Delhi – Kullu – Shimla – Kalimpong October 22– November 5 2010


© The International Council of Roerich Organizations by name of S.N. Roerich. http://www.roerichs.com/Lng/en