Found something relevant to the red bit in the following:
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Sushmita+Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sushmita @ Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->[...]
Koenraad Elst's article "Sati en andere zelfdoding" (Sati and other suicide
[...]
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Origin</b>
People sometimes say that widow-burning was brought into India in a later migration from Central-Asia, that of the Shakas or Scythians, in the middle or end of the first millenium B.C. These Scythian tribes are then supposed to have been the ancestors of the martial Rajput caste in Rajasthan, the caste to which Rup Kanwar and the most famous satis belonged. This seems to me an attempt to push away from oneself a difficult to defend custom. Of the Scythians, it is indeed known that they sent widows to their death with their husband, as well as servants and horses with their master â whether <b>burnt with them or buried with them</b>. From archaeological excavations in Southern-Russia it appears that widows were already climbing the funeral pyres of their deceased husbands in the fourth millennium before our chronology, in the so-called Kurgan-culture, an apparantly proto-Scythian and definitely Indo-European culture.
[The connection with India should however not be sought in the Scythian invasion of the 1st century B.C., but in the much older common Indo-European roots, because the custom also occurred among the Celtic and Germanic people. So we hear in the Edda, in the book Sigurdarkvida, that Brunhilde <b>stabs herself</b> after the death of Siegfried in order to be buried with him; in addition she first has her slaves killed and she also invites free servants to voluntarily die with her. So she <b>doesnât climb the funeral pyre</b>, but nevertheless follows her husband into death. Also among the Celts did this custom occur in large scale. Great power and wisdom are ascribed to a woman about to commit sati, which is why for e.g. Brunhilde predicts the future at the last moment for next of kin.
Bernard Sergent (Les Indo-Européens, Payot, 1995, p.223), observes a connection between sati and the status of a woman. In spite of feminist claims that this custom once again proves the male contempt for woman, it in fact occurred the least in those Indo-European societies where the woman was most disparaged in both practice as well as mythology, like the Greek {society}. A woman who does not have much honour to maintain, wonât accompany one to the pyre; itâs precisely the proud and relatively free/liberated/emancipated Celtic and Germanic women who did this.]
In India, besides the Rajputs, the martial Marathas and Sikhs also knew this custom, though to a lesser extent. Other castes did not know this practice at all or specifically disapproved of it, in particular the brahmans (although they too practised sati in British-Bengal, in particular after the modernisation of the law of succession). In most duty-prescribing books (400 B.C. to 200 A.D?), among others of Manu and Yajnavalkya, there is no mention of widow-burning at all. Only the Vishnu-dharma-shastra gives the widow the choice between celibacy and self-immolation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45297[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45313[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know why "The connection with India should however not be sought in the Scythian invasion of the 1st century B.C., but in the much older common Indo-European roots".
Because, see here, an interesting bit about China - China, which is not classed as 'IE' just yet:
<b>Extract from 'The Giant Book of Facts', Octopus Books, 1987, London</b>
p.248
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Who was the 'First Emperor'?</b> He was Cheng Ying, who adopted the tite; of Shih Huang-ti (meaning the 'First Emperor') when he became ruler of the whole of China in 221 BC.
Shi-Hunag-ti was by no means the first emperor of China, but he was probably the first really powerful one. He reogranized the country's economy, standardizing its coinage and its weights and measures, which helped to speed up trade and so make people more prosperous.
<b>Standardization</b> One reform that helped trade perhaps more than any other measure was the regulating of the width of carts and wagons. The soft ground of the roads wore into deep ruts, which exactly fitted the carts of each region. With standardization, goods no longer had to be off-loaded from one cart on to another when they reached a frontier between one state and another.
<b>Terracotta regime</b> When the 'First Emperor' died he was buried in great state. <b>Earlier rulers of China</b> went to their graves accompanied by a large entourage of courtiers, wives and servants (who either voluntarily committed suicide or were put to death). In an ingenious way, Shih Huang-ti went as close as he dared to reviving this ancient custom.
He, too, was buried with a huge retinue - an army of 6,000 soldiers. But these soldiers were modelled lifesize in terracotta, a kind of pottery. Each one has an individual face; they were not mass-prodiced.
The huge tomb which contains the remains of the emperor and his model army was found in 1974, and is still being excavated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->From what I understand, Sati doesn't mean death of all the 'servants, courtiers or slaves' as it did in China or among Germanic people.
Then why not seek an Indian connection with China; why only with the 'IE' world? Better yet, I'd say China and Germanic people had more points in common w.r.t this form of ritual suicide, than there are between India and either in this case.
<b>No, no, I'm not implying</b> that this is some 'IE' link between China and Europe - although I daresay IE-dude Victor Mair would jump around about how this is conclusive proof that the 'Oryans did indeed bring civilisation to China'.
My point is merely that many cultures have certain behaviours in common - and that oftentimes, this is just by coincidence. Rituals around death occur in all human societies, it is not impossible that some societies independently came up with a few which many others also happened to have practised in some seemingly similar form. (For instance, some African communities have rain dancing, so do some Native American ones. Doesn't immediately imply a connection.)
But when India has some phenomenon vaguely like any in Europe, it is immediately pounced on as something common to 'IE'. Like in this case; even though as far as I know, India's Sati is different from the suicide-ritual practised by Germanic and Chinese people. (That is, I am not aware that in Sati people other than the - usually Kshatriya - wife burn themselves after a husband passes away.)
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Sushmita+Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sushmita @ Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->[...]
Koenraad Elst's article "Sati en andere zelfdoding" (Sati and other suicide
[...]
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Origin</b>
People sometimes say that widow-burning was brought into India in a later migration from Central-Asia, that of the Shakas or Scythians, in the middle or end of the first millenium B.C. These Scythian tribes are then supposed to have been the ancestors of the martial Rajput caste in Rajasthan, the caste to which Rup Kanwar and the most famous satis belonged. This seems to me an attempt to push away from oneself a difficult to defend custom. Of the Scythians, it is indeed known that they sent widows to their death with their husband, as well as servants and horses with their master â whether <b>burnt with them or buried with them</b>. From archaeological excavations in Southern-Russia it appears that widows were already climbing the funeral pyres of their deceased husbands in the fourth millennium before our chronology, in the so-called Kurgan-culture, an apparantly proto-Scythian and definitely Indo-European culture.
[The connection with India should however not be sought in the Scythian invasion of the 1st century B.C., but in the much older common Indo-European roots, because the custom also occurred among the Celtic and Germanic people. So we hear in the Edda, in the book Sigurdarkvida, that Brunhilde <b>stabs herself</b> after the death of Siegfried in order to be buried with him; in addition she first has her slaves killed and she also invites free servants to voluntarily die with her. So she <b>doesnât climb the funeral pyre</b>, but nevertheless follows her husband into death. Also among the Celts did this custom occur in large scale. Great power and wisdom are ascribed to a woman about to commit sati, which is why for e.g. Brunhilde predicts the future at the last moment for next of kin.
Bernard Sergent (Les Indo-Européens, Payot, 1995, p.223), observes a connection between sati and the status of a woman. In spite of feminist claims that this custom once again proves the male contempt for woman, it in fact occurred the least in those Indo-European societies where the woman was most disparaged in both practice as well as mythology, like the Greek {society}. A woman who does not have much honour to maintain, wonât accompany one to the pyre; itâs precisely the proud and relatively free/liberated/emancipated Celtic and Germanic women who did this.]
In India, besides the Rajputs, the martial Marathas and Sikhs also knew this custom, though to a lesser extent. Other castes did not know this practice at all or specifically disapproved of it, in particular the brahmans (although they too practised sati in British-Bengal, in particular after the modernisation of the law of succession). In most duty-prescribing books (400 B.C. to 200 A.D?), among others of Manu and Yajnavalkya, there is no mention of widow-burning at all. Only the Vishnu-dharma-shastra gives the widow the choice between celibacy and self-immolation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45297[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45313[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know why "The connection with India should however not be sought in the Scythian invasion of the 1st century B.C., but in the much older common Indo-European roots".
Because, see here, an interesting bit about China - China, which is not classed as 'IE' just yet:
<b>Extract from 'The Giant Book of Facts', Octopus Books, 1987, London</b>
p.248
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Who was the 'First Emperor'?</b> He was Cheng Ying, who adopted the tite; of Shih Huang-ti (meaning the 'First Emperor') when he became ruler of the whole of China in 221 BC.
Shi-Hunag-ti was by no means the first emperor of China, but he was probably the first really powerful one. He reogranized the country's economy, standardizing its coinage and its weights and measures, which helped to speed up trade and so make people more prosperous.
<b>Standardization</b> One reform that helped trade perhaps more than any other measure was the regulating of the width of carts and wagons. The soft ground of the roads wore into deep ruts, which exactly fitted the carts of each region. With standardization, goods no longer had to be off-loaded from one cart on to another when they reached a frontier between one state and another.
<b>Terracotta regime</b> When the 'First Emperor' died he was buried in great state. <b>Earlier rulers of China</b> went to their graves accompanied by a large entourage of courtiers, wives and servants (who either voluntarily committed suicide or were put to death). In an ingenious way, Shih Huang-ti went as close as he dared to reviving this ancient custom.
He, too, was buried with a huge retinue - an army of 6,000 soldiers. But these soldiers were modelled lifesize in terracotta, a kind of pottery. Each one has an individual face; they were not mass-prodiced.
The huge tomb which contains the remains of the emperor and his model army was found in 1974, and is still being excavated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->From what I understand, Sati doesn't mean death of all the 'servants, courtiers or slaves' as it did in China or among Germanic people.
Then why not seek an Indian connection with China; why only with the 'IE' world? Better yet, I'd say China and Germanic people had more points in common w.r.t this form of ritual suicide, than there are between India and either in this case.
<b>No, no, I'm not implying</b> that this is some 'IE' link between China and Europe - although I daresay IE-dude Victor Mair would jump around about how this is conclusive proof that the 'Oryans did indeed bring civilisation to China'.
My point is merely that many cultures have certain behaviours in common - and that oftentimes, this is just by coincidence. Rituals around death occur in all human societies, it is not impossible that some societies independently came up with a few which many others also happened to have practised in some seemingly similar form. (For instance, some African communities have rain dancing, so do some Native American ones. Doesn't immediately imply a connection.)
But when India has some phenomenon vaguely like any in Europe, it is immediately pounced on as something common to 'IE'. Like in this case; even though as far as I know, India's Sati is different from the suicide-ritual practised by Germanic and Chinese people. (That is, I am not aware that in Sati people other than the - usually Kshatriya - wife burn themselves after a husband passes away.)