Page:Indian Journal of Economics Volume 2.djvu/635

 A OBIO ULT UP. AL 0110ANISA TIOl in the period of the Big Veda as will be een from the practice of in.naive cure of he il. There mg a conginuous reference  fields and trs in the whole of the  Veda, showing e t imnce of iculmr Various words 'o en used for the fields or ctivatod land for w ld d ploughland. We shl ko thom up  m d study the conditions of iotur of e a of the o. The word urr occurs repeatedly in the Veda' in ihe sense of fertile lnd or ploughland. fmiquiy of his word may be reod. o iht period in the history of the Aryans when they had not separated in different directions.' In Greek the ame word, practically in the same form, occurs for the same idea. Aroua stands there for what urnat&t means in the Rig Veda So that philology would establish unequivocally the origin of cultivation o! fertile lands, however crudely it might have been, in that distant Aiatic home of the Aryans. UYpra in the Rig Veda means the land which is acquired for purposes of cultivation. But whatever is acquired for culti- vation may not be equally suitable for the purpose; some naturally would pay for their cultivation, while others would not, so there must be the distinction between fertile land and waste fields. In the Rig Veda apnvati means fertile, whereas artan means waste fields (i, 127, 6). There is some uncertainty as to whether these are sub-divisions of ,rvara lands or whether urvara should be identified with apnvati. Whatever that might have been the point for us is that the people made the distinction, even in nomen- clature, between oulturable lauds and waste hinds. t i, 197, 8; iv, 41, 8; v, 88, 4; vl, 38, 4; z, SO, 8; s, 149, 8. ?! Rig The erly