Tuisto, Founder of the Germanic People (according to

Tacitus) was Tvaṣṭṛ of Rigveda. Links Mleccha

(Meluhha) of Indus Script with Germanic people of
Germania.
Tuisto, Founder of the Germanic People (according to Tacitus)

Tuiscon (Tuisto) as depicted in a German broadside by Nikolaus Stör c. 1543, with a caption by
Burkard Waldis.

1
Meyer considers Tuisto and Tvaṣṭṛ of Rigveda to be identical. [Meyer (1907) sees the
connection as so strong, that he considers the two to be identical.( Meyer (1907): referenced in :
North, Richard (1997). Heathen Gods in Old English Literature. Cambridge University
Press.(p.269)] Tuisto is described as being "celebrated" (celebrant) by the early Germanic
peoples in song, with Tacitus reporting nothing negative about Tuisto. (Lindow, John. (2001)
Norse Mythology: A Guide to the Gods, Heroes, Rituals, and Beliefs, p. 296).

Tacitus' reference to Mannus as the son of Tuisto is instructive and jibes with the Indian tradition
of Manu as a form of Tvasta together with Maya, Silpi and Visvajna. Vishvakarma [ God ]
created five prajapathies — from his five faces such as Sadyojāta,Vāmadeva,
Aghora,Tatpuruṣha,Īsāna.[11] They are Manu, Maya, Tvasta, Silpi, Visvajna. These memories
among the people is so strong that the narrative of Tacitus about Tuisto may indeed be a
recollected memory of Tvaṣṭṛ and also Visvakarma of Rigveda It is no mere accident that
both Tvaṣṭṛ and Visvakarma of Rigveda are related as the divinities venerated by artisans,
artificers, smiths who make vajra, the thunderbolt and other weapons and metal implements.

These narratives are evidence validating Indus Script Corpora as catalogus catalogorum of
metalwork, together with archaeometallurgical evidences, say, recovered from Chanhu-daro.

These narratives together with the evidence of Gundestrup Cauldron with Indus Script
hieroglyphs may be evidence of migrations of Bharatam Janam into Europe establishing contacts
with Germanic peoples described in Tacitus' Germania.

The links of Mleccha (Meluhha) with Germanic people of Germania date to ca. 3rd millennium
BCE.

2
 A ‘Sheffield of Ancient India’:
Chanhu-Daro’s Metal working Industry. Illustrated London News 1936 – November 21st, p.909.
10 x photos of copper knives, spears , razors, axes and
dishes..http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2015/06/tvastr-as-visvakarma-karu-smith-cire_17.html

Tuisto was Tvaṣṭṛ of Rigveda who produced the metal weapon: vajra, the thunderbolt. The
divinity Tvaṣṭṛ is mentioned in the Mitanni treaty, which establishes him as a Proto-Indo-Iranian
divinity. Tvaṣṭr is Śukrācārya's son, Śukrācārya (the weapons' mentor of the asura) is Bhṛgu's
grandson and Vāruṇibhṛgu's son. Tvaṣṭr is the father of ViŚvarupa.

See: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2015/06/tvasta-metal-artificer-was-meluhha.html This

includes RV 10.90 which identifies Tvaṣṭṛ (Sanskrit: व्टृ ) is the first born creator of the
universe. Also included is RV 1 . which venerates Visvakarman n associations with Vrtra and
Dadhici, episodes later elaborated in Bhagavata Purana.
See: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2015/06/tvastr-is-metaphor-for-veneration-
of.html Tvaṣṭr is a metaphor for veneration of metalwork artificers, Bhāratam Janam, in
Rigveda. RV 1.80.16 refers to Dadhyanc, son of Atharvan; RV 1.80.1 refers to Indra wielding
the metal vajra thunderbolt weapon against VRtra. RV 1.85.9 refers to Indra slaying VRtra using
the vajra made by TvaSTA and releasing the water of oceans. RV 1.32.1, RV 1.32.5 to 14, RV
1.52.2 to 15, RV 1.61.6 to 12, RV 1.80.3 to 5, RV 1.80, 3 to 13, RV 1.85.9, RV 1.86.6, RV

3
2.1.11, RV 3.54.15, RV 4.42.7, RV 6.47.2, RV 10.48.8, RV 10.65.2, RV 10.65.10, RV 10.66.8
also refers to Indra's battle against VRtra and as the slayer of VRtra. The gloss vRTrhA of RV
2.1.11 is also explained by Sayana as 'destroyer of sin'.

These references reinforce the role of Tvaṣṭā as a metal artificer who made metallic
weapons. This gets elaborated in a narrative in the Bhagavata Purana related to a son of Tvaṣṭā
called Vis'varupa who was killed in battle.

There is a remarkable episode of mispronunciation by Tvaṣṭā, making him a mleccha.

This mispronunciation with a wrong accent on the phrase: Indra-śatro resulted in the birth of
Vrtra who, instead of becoming a slayer of Indra, gets killed in battle by Indra.

"The sagas, which are the sole record of their past history, say that the God Tuisto (Or Tuisco,
the deity that gives its name to Tuesday)sprang from the earth, and that he and his son Mannus
were the authors and founders of the race. To Mannus they ascribe three sons, whose names are
borne respectively by the Ingaevones["Grimm's identification of the Ingaevones with the Saxons,
of the Iscaevones with the Franks, and of the Herminones with the Thuringians is convenient "
(Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. 38]mext to the ocean, the Herminones in the middle of the countiy, and
the Iscaevones in the rest of it. Others, with true mythological license, give the deity several
more sons, from whom are derived more tribal names, such as Marsians, Gambrivians, Suabians,
and Vandals ; and these names are both genuine and ancient. The name Germany, however, is
new and of recent application, owing to the fact that the first of these peoples to cross the Rhine
and dispossess the Gauls, a tribe now known as the Tungrians, then got the name of "Germans".
Thus what was originally a name given to a tribe and not that of a race gradually came to be
accepted, so that all men of the race were called Germans, by the victorious tribe first as a name
of fear, and by themselves afterwards when the name had once been coined. "(The Agricola and
Germania of Tacitus, 1894, Tr. KB Townshend, Methuen & CO.Aberdeen Univ. Press,pp.54-55)
https://archive.org/stream/tacitusagricolag00taciiala/tacitusagricolag00taciiala_djvu.txt

Srimad Bhagavatam 6.9.11

4
 http://vedabase.net/sb/6/9/11/en2
http://prabhupadabooks.com/pdf/SB6.2.pdf
"While the gods Indra and Agni stood for Power and Wisdom, the gods PUSan and Bhaga,
Rbhus, TvaSTA and Vis'vakarman presided over the economic activities of the people. The
technical and the ritual aspects of productive activity were closely united just as the forms of
wealth were conceived in close connection with the favour of the gods...All rUpas are of
TvaSTA (the divine fashioner). TvaSTA inherited them from Agni or, as Aitareya has it,
TvaSTA is nothing but speech. In other words, all forms are originally contained in divine
wisdom, the ultimate illuminer. It is from there that the artificing and fashioning mind derives
them. Reality is conceived as a luminous powere which creates things or forms out of itself. The
human mind is capable of responding to the Light and apperceiving the forms in which it
expresses itself. The forms which man perceives, thus, are not phantasms produced by the senses
or the mind but created things rooted in reality."(Pande, GC, 1990, Foundations of Indian
culture: spiritual vision and symbolic forms, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, p.61, p.344)
"According to the Bhagavat Purana, he chanted: “Indra-satro vivardhasva ma ciram jahi
vidvisam” (“O enemy of Indra, flourish to kill your enemy without delay”). (Bhagavat Purana
6.9.11). Tvasta intended to chant the word indra-satro, meaning, “O enemy of Indra.” Instead of
chanting those words short, Tvasta chanted it long, and its meaning changed from “the enemy of
Indra” to “Indra, who is an enemy.” Consequently, instead of a son who would kill the king of
the gods, he had a son who would die at Indra’s hands. The smallest mistake in pronunciation led
to his plans being foiled." -- Nimai Agarwalhttp://kidspiritonline.com/2014/12/the-power-of-
words-in-my-tradition/
[quote]hata-putras tatas tvasta

juhdvendraya satrave

indra-satro vivardhasva

ma ciramjahi vidvisam

5
TRANSLATION

After Visvarupa was killed, his father, Tvasta, performed ritualistic ceremonies to kill Indra. He
offered oblations in the sacrificial fire, saying, "O enemy of Indra, flourish to kill your enemy
without delay."

PURPORT

There was some defect in Tvasta's chanting of the mantra because he chanted it long instead of
short, and therefore the meaning changed. Tvasta intended to chant the word indra-satro,
meaning, "O enemy of Indra." In this mantra, the word indra is in the possessive case (sasthi),
and the word indra-satro is called a tat-purusa compound (tatpurusa-samasa) . Unfortunately,
instead of chanting the mantra short, Tvasta chanted it long, and its meaning changed from "the
enemy of Indra" to "Indra, who is an enemy." Consequently instead of an enemy of Indra's, there
emerged the body of Vrtrasura, of whom Indra was the enemy.

Bhag. 6.9.11

In the compound word indra-satro, the ending of the word satro is uttered short when it is in the
possessive case (sasthi) and long when it is in the vocative case (sambodhana) . Tvasta
mistakenly uttered it long. He expected "Indra's killer" to be born from the sacrifice, but the
mantra he uttered meant "Indra is the killer of the person to be born."

In the above scenario, "long" and "short" do not denote dirgha and hrasva (see section 2.4.2 on
vowels), but long (udatta) and short (anudatta) pitch accents on vowels (also in 2.4.2). Tvasta
spoke Vedic Sanskrit (vaidika bhasa or vaidika samskrta), in which the word meaning can
change depending on the pitch in which a vowel is accented. Vedic Sanskrit occurs only in the
sruti-sastra, the four Vedas, and it is also called srauta bhasa. The rest of Sanskrit literature is
written in classical Sanskrit (laukika bhasa or laukika samskrta), which is not altered by vowel
pitch accents.

The commentaries by Sridhara Svami and Varhsidhara on Bhagavatam 6.9.11 explain this
incident in more detail. They say that the version of the mantra given in 6.9.11 is different from
the mantra used by Tvasta. The mantra given in the Vedas and described by Sridhara Svami and
Vamsidhar was indra-satrur vardhasva, and their explanations of the mistake are based on this. It
was customary to change a Vedic mantra a bit when mentioning sruti texts in writing because the
audience did not necessarily have qualifications (adhikara) in sruti. Hence the mantra from the
Veda was changed in 6.9.11. Or it was changed owing to considerations of the verse meter.
Hence we see that there is no actual vocative in the Vedic mantra. Sridhara Svami mentions that
the mistake was in the svaras, vowel pitch accents. As far as the letters were concerned, they
were accurately chanted. The mistake in the svaras (vowel pitch accents) was that he chanted
"indra" with the udatta accent, which changed it from what was intended (a tatpurusa meaning

6
"Indra's enemy") to something else (a bahuvrihi) meaning Tndra is the killer of the person to be
born." [unquote]

https://archive.org/stream/Samskrtoccharanam.LS/samskrtoccharanam.%20LS_djvu.txt
Vritra is also mentioned in the Rig Veda, where he is the demon of drought, who imprisons all
the strom clouds and causes drought. Indra slays him with his thunder-bolt (Vajra) and frees the
strom-clouds, bring bountiful rain to end the famine.

Slaying of Vritra

This story is taken from B.P. and Bhagavata Purana (Canto 6, Chapter 7-13).
Brihaspati was the Guru of the Devas. He was very learned and was first among the Brahmanas.
Everyone used to respect him. It so happened, that when he visited the court of Indra, the King of
the Gods was busy watching his beautiful Apsaras sing and dance, saw his Guru arrive.
However, in his arrogance, he did not rise from his throne, nor did he utter the customary words
of welcome and worship.

The sage felt insulted. He resolved that he will no longer grace the councils of the Devas, and
went away to perform penance. Too late, Indra realized his mistake. H searched high and low for
his perceptor, but could not find him. Without their Guru to guide them, the Devas could not
survive for long. Besides, their traditional foes, the Asuras, will seek to exploit this opportunity
to and cash in on their weakened state.

Acting on the advice of Lord Brahma, the Devas installed Vishwarupa, the son of the
God Tvashta as their new Guru. He was also a Brahmana renowned for his learning and yogic
power. As time progressed, Vishwarupa started to notice that Indra and the Devas spent an
inordinate amount of time in pursuit of pleasure. Besides, his mother was aAsura woman, and his
loyalty was divided. Secretly, he started giving a portion of the sacrificial oblations (Havis) to
the Asuras. As a result, their strength increased.

When Indra came to know of this treachery, he became very angry. Without pausing to think the
consequences of his actions, he struck off the three heads of Vishwarupa. The first head, that was
used for drinking Soma, became a francolin partridge, the second head, used for drinking wine
turned into a sparrow and the third, used for eating, turned into a partridge. the head of his
teacher with his sword. Since he had killed a Brahmana, that too his Guru, he became guilty of
the sin of Brahma-Hatya. However, he escaped his punishment by distributing the sin among the
land, water, and women. (Other accounts say that his lusture diminished and he had to regain it
by doing penance, during which time he was exiled from heaven.) In return for ridding Indra of
the sin, earth got water to fill its empty holes, trees got re-growth of cut branches, waters became
purifying, and women obtained undiminished sexual desire. As a result of their share of the sin,
earth has wastelands, trees have sap, waters have froth, and women have menstruation.

Now, Tvashta wanted revenge for the murder of his son. He began arrangements for a sacrifice
that would give him a son who could slay Indra. The sacrifice was duly performed, but there was
a small problem. When it was time for the final incantations, Tvashta ought to have said, "May

7
this son of mine be the slayer of Indra", but he stressed the wrong syllables in the Mantra, and
the meaning changed to "May Indra be the slayer of this son of mine."
From the sacrificial fire, there rose a terrible Asura. He was named Vritra, 'the encloser'. He
immediately grew immensely big and was as large as the largest mountain. His hair was like
molten copper, he had a mustache and beard of the same color and had eyes blazing like the
midday sun. He was armed with a magical trident. He derived his immense strength from the
incantations chanted at the sacrifice. His father then ordered him to go and slayIndra. Obedient to
the command, the demon began to seek the slayer of his elder brother.

Some time before this, the Asuras had been thoroughly defeated by the Devas in battle. Peace
reigned for a while. The Devas needed a place to store their weapons safely, for they feared
treachery. They then remembered that the Asuras dared not approach the hermitage of the
sage Dadhichi, such was the yogic power of the hermit. They entrusted all their weapons to his
safekeeping.

When Dadhichi's wife Lopamudra came to know about this, she was not pleased. She said to her
husband, "An ascetic should not take sides in a war. Now the Asuras will think that you are their
enemy and seek to harm you. Besides, the Gods have not mentioned how long you are to take
care of their weapons. If something were to happen to them in your custody, will they not blame
you. We have renounced all worldly possessions and attachments, you were wrong to have taken
this responsibility."

Dadhichi saw the force of her arguments. He said, "What you say certainly makes sense.
However, I have given my word. It is important to stand by ones promise. Besides, the Asuras
were always the enemies of us sages, so the question of neutrality does not arise. What is fated
will happen, and no one prevent it."

Years passed, and Dadhichi was alarmed to note that the lusture of the divine weapons was
beginning to diminish. Their power was slowly dissolving in air. The sage then used his yogic
power to dissolve all the weapons in water and then he drank it all up. Their power was then
lodged in his bones.

Now, with Vritra threatening at their doorsteps, the Devas wanted their weapons
back. Dadhichi said, "I have bad news for you. Your weapons are no longer there. Their power
now resides in my bones. I shall give up my life. You can then have new weapons made from my
bones."

The Gods naturally balked at the thought of the Rishi's death. However, no other choice was
available, for they needed the weapons to battle Vritra. Dadhichi gave up his
life. Vishwakarma made Indra the weapon Vajra from the back bone of the hermit. This weapon
was the most powerful weapon of all.

The armies of the Devas and Asuras met in the battlefield. From the furious onslaught of
the Asura army, theDevas were initially driven back, but they redoubled their efforts and slowly
gained the upper hand.

8
Seeing his forces retreating, Vritra was extremely angry. He charged ahead and stopped the
advance of the Devas single-handedly. He let out a mighty roar, which caused many of the Devas
to faint. Under his purposeful tread, the heavens began to shake. He picked up his immense mace
and struck Iyravata with it. Indra revived his mount with a touch of Amrit.

At this point, angry words were exchanged between Vritra and Indra.

The Asura taunted Indra for having slain his brother, a defenseless Brahmana.

Angered, Indra struck off one hand of Vritra with his sword. In retaliation, theAsura made his
mouth immensely huge and swallowed Indra whole.

Though he was swallowed by the Asura, Indra did not die, for he was protected by the grace
of Vishnu. He judged it to be time to use his Vajra. He used the great weapon and sliced open the
abdomen of the demon, and emerged victorious.

However, having slain the creature emerged from a holy sacrifice, he was once again weighed
down with sin. Unlike before, he could not get rid of it easily. He retired to the banks of
Manasarovar and performed a penance for thousand years to expiate his sins and to regain his
lusture.

http://web.archive.org/web/20070105054802/http://members.cox.net/apamnapat/articles/Slaying
OfVritra.html

S. Kalyanaraman
Sarasvati Research Center
September 20, 2015