Concordance of the Fauna in the Ramayana
Summary
In compiling a concordance of the fauna mentioned in the Rāmāyaṇa, Shibdas Chaudhuri responds to the need for a systematic index of animals in the great epic. He observes that the Rāmāyaṇa, like the Mahābhārata, exists in multiple recensions, making it difficult to prepare a complete critical edition. To keep the project manageable he follows the Gauḍīya version and confines himself to the animals mentioned in that text, supplementing the list with references from the Mahābhārata, Vedic literature and archaeological finds at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. The article opens with a discussion of the enduring popularity of the Rāmāyaṇa and the value of studying its natural history. Chaudhuri notes that animals play key roles in the narrative, from sacred creatures associated with deities to domestic animals that reflect daily life. The concordance is organised alphabetically by Sanskrit names. For each animal Chaudhuri provides the references in the Rāmāyaṇa by canto and verse and gives equivalent terms from lexicons such as the Amarakośa. Brief descriptions identify the animal (for example, ajā for he-goat, ajina for black antelope’s skin, anāḍura for ox, anjana for elephant). Cross-references cite the same or similar animals in Vedic texts or in the Mahābhārata. Footnotes explain obscure terms and cite secondary literature. Through this catalogue the author demonstrates the breadth of animal references in the epic: cows, horses and elephants appear in ritual contexts; deer and antelopes are associated with ascetics; monkeys and bears form the army of the vānaras; serpents and birds have allegorical functions; and exotic creatures underscore the epic’s cosmopolitan world-view. By juxtaposing mythological references with archaeological evidence and linguistic glosses, Chaudhuri’s concordance aids scholars in exploring the ecological and cultural milieu of the epic. It highlights how the Rāmāyaṇa reflects knowledge of domesticated species, wild fauna of the Indian subcontinent and symbolic associations of animals. The work also underscores the challenges of philological research, where differing recensions and commentary traditions must be reconciled. While not exhaustive, the concordance is a valuable tool for historians of religion, literature and ecology.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
This concordance demonstrates that animals in the Rāmāyaṇa are more than incidental details. By cataloguing species and citing parallels in other sources, it situates the epic within a wider cultural and ecological context and shows how animal symbolism informs its narrative. The project encourages further comparative study of the Mahābhārata and Vedic texts and provides a foundation for examining how ancient Indians perceived and classified the natural world. As such it serves both as a reference for scholars and as a reminder that the epic intertwines human stories with a rich zoological landscape.