batch.motif.hindu-ramayana-griffith-gutenberg-l60159-l60209
---
record_id: batch.motif.hindu-ramayana-griffith-gutenberg-l60159-l60209
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
passage_locator:
label: HIPPOLYTE FAUCHE. / ADDITIONAL NOTES. / H. H. WILSON. / THE SUPPLIANT DOVE.;
lines 60159-60209
start: '60159'
end: '60209'
translation: The Ramayan of Valmiki
notes: Generated from OpenAI Batch run motif-extraction-2026-04-28-high-priority;
human review required.
canonical_text:
quote: "“the epic poem properly so called which celebrates the expedition of Ráma
against the Rákshases”"
summary: A scholarly note argues for an early date for the original Ramayan while
acknowledging later oral and rhapsodic accretions. It summarizes and rejects A.
Weber’s argument that Megasthenes’ silence and the poem’s unity imply a later
date, using comparisons with Homeric epic and the limited scope of Megasthenes’
Indica.
language: English
quote_policy: quoted
literal_observations:
- id: obs:1
text: The writer says he has argued that the original composition of the Ramayan
should be assigned to about the twelfth century before the Christian era.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:1
- id: obs:2
text: The writer states that he does not think the epic originally appeared in the
same form in which it is now possessed.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:2
- id: obs:3
text: The writer says the poem, during rhapsodical and oral propagation, appropriated
episodes, traditions, legends, and ancient myths.
category: sequence
evidence_refs:
- ev:2
- id: obs:4
text: The writer describes the epic poem properly so called as celebrating Rama’s
expedition against the Rakshases.
category: action
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: obs:5
text: The passage reports A. Weber’s argument that Megasthenes’ lack of mention
of the Mahabharat or Ramayan implies that neither poem could have existed at that
time.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- id: obs:6
text: The passage reports Weber’s view that the Ramayan’s unity of composition,
connected parts, and allegorical character show it to be more recent and later
than the Mahabharat.
category: attribute
evidence_refs:
- ev:5
- id: obs:7
text: The writer counters that Megasthenes wrote a description of India rather than
a history or literary history of India.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:6
- id: obs:8
text: The writer argues that using Megasthenes’ silence about literature to infer
the nonexistence of a poem would be like using a geologist’s silence about literature
to make the same inference.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:7
- id: obs:9
text: The writer argues that unity of composition is not proof of recent age, citing
the Iliad and Odyssey as works with greater unity than the Ramayan.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:8
- id: obs:10
text: The writer concludes that artistic perfection is not proof of a recent age.
category: speech
evidence_refs:
- ev:9
figures:
- id: fig:1
name_or_label: Rama
description: Named as the figure whose expedition against the Rakshases is celebrated
by the epic poem.
role_refs:
- role:1
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: fig:2
name_or_label: Rakshases
description: Named as the beings against whom Rama’s expedition is directed.
role_refs:
- role:2
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: fig:3
name_or_label: A. Weber
description: An eminent philologist whose contrary opinion on the date of the Ramayan
is discussed.
role_refs:
- role:3
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- ev:5
- id: fig:4
name_or_label: Megasthenes
description: A writer who lived for some time in India and whose silence about the
Mahabharat and Ramayan is used in Weber’s argument.
role_refs:
- role:4
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- ev:6
- id: fig:5
name_or_label: Homer
description: Cited by the writer in an analogy concerning unity of composition and
antiquity.
role_refs:
- role:5
evidence_refs:
- ev:8
- id: fig:6
name_or_label: Virgil
description: Cited as part of the comparison in which Homer would be brought down
to the age of Augustus and Virgil if unity proved recentness.
role_refs:
- role:5
evidence_refs:
- ev:8
roles:
- id: role:1
label: expedition leader
assigned_to:
- fig:1
basis: The passage says the epic celebrates the expedition of Rama against the Rakshases.
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: role:2
label: opponents in expedition
assigned_to:
- fig:2
basis: The Rakshases are named as the beings against whom Rama’s expedition is directed.
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: role:3
label: philological critic
assigned_to:
- fig:3
basis: Weber is described as an eminent philologist who argues for a later date
for the Ramayan.
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- ev:5
- id: role:4
label: ancient describer of India
assigned_to:
- fig:4
basis: The passage says Megasthenes lived for some time in India and wrote a description
of India.
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- ev:6
- id: role:5
label: comparative literary example
assigned_to:
- fig:5
- fig:6
basis: Homer and Virgil are invoked in an analogy about unity of composition and
literary chronology.
evidence_refs:
- ev:8
symbols: []
scenes:
- id: scene:1
label: Argument for the antiquity and growth of the Ramayan
summary: The writer states that the original composition of the Ramayan belongs
around the twelfth century B.C. while also saying that the poem’s present form
includes later appropriated episodes, traditions, legends, and myths from oral
propagation.
figure_refs: []
symbol_refs: []
evidence_refs:
- ev:1
- ev:2
- id: scene:2
label: Description of the epic’s central expedition
summary: The epic poem is described as celebrating Rama’s expedition against the
Rakshases.
figure_refs:
- fig:1
- fig:2
symbol_refs: []
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
- id: scene:3
label: Weber’s contrary dating argument
summary: Weber is reported as arguing that Megasthenes’ silence and the Ramayan’s
unity, connected parts, and allegorical character indicate a later date for the
poem.
figure_refs:
- fig:3
- fig:4
symbol_refs: []
evidence_refs:
- ev:4
- ev:5
- id: scene:4
label: Reply to Weber’s argument
summary: The writer answers that Megasthenes’ work was not a literary history and
that unity of composition does not prove recent date, comparing the Ramayan with
Homeric epic.
figure_refs:
- fig:4
- fig:5
- fig:6
symbol_refs: []
evidence_refs:
- ev:6
- ev:7
- ev:8
- ev:9
candidate_motifs:
- id: motif:1
label: heroic expedition against hostile beings
taxonomy_refs: []
basis: The passage explicitly says that the epic poem celebrates Rama’s expedition
against the Rakshases.
evidence_refs:
- ev:3
confidence: low
cautions: This is a scholarly summary of the Ramayan’s subject, not a narrative
episode in the passage; no specific mythic events are described here.
- id: motif:2
label: oral epic accretion of episodes, legends, and ancient myths
taxonomy_refs: []
basis: The passage says the poem appropriated episodes, traditions, legends, and
ancient myths during rhapsodical and oral propagation.
evidence_refs:
- ev:2
confidence: medium
cautions: This is a literary-historical pattern described by the note, not a mythic
motif enacted within the narrative.
comparison_claims: []
evidence:
- id: ev:1
type: summary
locator: 60159-60164
quote_or_summary: The writer says he has argued that the original composition of
the Ramayan should be assigned to about the twelfth century before the Christian
era.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:2
type: summary
locator: 60164-60170
quote_or_summary: The writer says the epic did not spring into life in its present
form and that, through rhapsodical and oral propagation, it appropriated episodes,
traditions, legends, and ancient myths.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:3
type: quote
locator: 60170-60173
quote_or_summary: "“the epic poem properly so called which celebrates the expedition
of Ráma against the Rákshases”"
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; short excerpt quoted.
- id: ev:4
type: summary
locator: 60176-60183
quote_or_summary: The passage reports Weber’s argument that because Megasthenes
made no mention of the Mahabharat or Ramayan, neither poem could have existed
at that time.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:5
type: summary
locator: 60183-60187
quote_or_summary: The passage reports Weber’s view that the Ramayan’s unity of composition,
chain of parts, and allegorical character make it more recent than the date assigned
by the writer and later than the Mahabharat.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:6
type: summary
locator: 60187-60193
quote_or_summary: The writer replies that Megasthenes did not write a history or
literary history of India, but a description, largely physical, of India.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:7
type: summary
locator: 60193-60200
quote_or_summary: The writer compares drawing literary-historical inferences from
Megasthenes’ silence to inferring nonexistence of literature from a geologist’s
silence while describing a country’s terrain and structure.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:8
type: summary
locator: 60200-60207
quote_or_summary: The writer argues that if unity of composition proved recentness,
Homer would have to be dated to the age of Augustus and Virgil, since the Iliad
and Odyssey have more unity than the Ramayan.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
- id: ev:9
type: summary
locator: 60207-60209
quote_or_summary: The writer states that perfection in the fine arts is no proof
of recent age and that art can produce remote works later ages cannot equal.
source_text_path: texts/public-domain/hindu/project-gutenberg/ramayana-griffith.md
rights_note: Public domain source; concise summary used.
confidence:
extraction: high
motif_candidates: low
comparison_claims: high
notes: The passage is a scholarly literary-historical discussion rather than a mythic
narrative. Figures and roles are clear, but motif candidates are limited and should
be reviewed.
reviewer_status:
status: needs_review
reviewer: ''
reviewed_at: ''
notes: Machine-generated draft from OpenAI Batch; not human-reviewed.
extracted_by: openai_batch:gpt-5.5
extracted_at: '2026-04-28'
notes: |-
No taxonomy references were assigned because the available motif families and symbol list are not directly supported by the passage’s literal content.
batch_run_id=motif-extraction-2026-04-28-high-priority
custom_id=motif_extract:hindu-ramayana-griffith-gutenberg__l60159-l60209
passage_sha256=6d1f30d37c2e7789ef59be608093c9d3d0a72056c7d1a698bb553874cc5c1f96