Estudio Comparativo Fábulas de Esopo

Chapter: V
Comparative Genre Study of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s

Fables
5.1 Introduction
There are four basic human races that exist on earth: Australoid, Caucasoid,
Mongoloid and Negroid. They differ from each other biologically as well as mentally.
The very first difference can be observed among them is physical differences, which is
external diversity. These types of differences are based on colour of skin, height, hair,
structure of face, nose, eyes, jaw etc. The variation in physique is because of
geographical variation. According to the doctrine of Charles Darwin mentioned in
„Origin of Species‟ they have changed to suite their environment. Besides this physical
variety, psychological distinction is an important feature.
The Greeks and the Indian belong to the same group of people, they belong to
Caucasoid group. The development of such races is beautifully depicted in the book of
H.G. Wells, in chapter-20, „The Aryan-Speaking People in Prehistoric Time‟ in his book,
The Outline of History:
The Caucasoid people were usually divided in three groups on

linguistic groups, termed Aryan (Indo-European) Semitic (Semitic
languages) and Hamitic ( Himitic languages i.e. Berber – Cushitic-
Egyptian)….in the 18th century, the most ancient known Indo-
European languages were those of the ancient Indo-Iranians. The word
Aryan was therefore adopted to refer not only to the Indo-Iranian
people but also to native Indo-European speakers as a whole, including
the Romans, Greeks, and the Germans. It was soon recognized that
Balts, Celts and Slaves also belonged to the same group. It was argued
that all of these languages originated from a common root now known
as Proto-Indo-European spoken by an ancient people who were
thought of as ancestors of the European, Iranian and Indo-Aryan
PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

people. The ethnic group composed of the Proto-Indo-Europeans and
their modern descendents was termed the „Aryans‟. ( p-236 -251)
Greek and Indian people belong to the same root and that is why they have
generated similar archetypes. In the primitive period, the most influential elements of
human life were natural elements like water, fire, air, sun, moon, trees, mountains, rain,
rivers etc. The need of such elements creates deep impact on human life. The basic
archetypes were derived from such elements, as essentiality of water developed a sense
of gratitude, which is converted into its personification as a God. This is the same case
with other elements also. Greek and Indian are polytheistic and religion is very huge
factor in building of culture. Because of being polytheisms there are thousands of myths
and these myths are raw-materials for their literature. As they have similarity in their
archetypes they have similar images and symbols, they both have personified natural
elements as their Gods. These are the basic factors of similarity in their literature. For
example writing of an epic is not an easy task. The genre of epic involves many social,
political, religious, historical and geographical elements as background there are
similarities in the Greek and Indian culture. In a same way, interest and mood of
audience should be similar. Moreover driving force of the literature should be same like
in epic the Rāmāyana and the Iliad. Images are also same i.e. Mulberry tree passing
judgment on a murderer in Aesop’s Fable same as Çamī tree in Pañcatantra.
Method of teaching is same in both the cultures. Both the cultures follow
discipline of master-disciple hierarchy and discourse system to acquire knowledge.
Teaching the same ideals in same method generates the same taste in the minds of the
people.
The difference in culture and literature is seen is because of social and

geographical change during different periods. The different social and psychological
changes create different kinds of idealism, which result in multiple interpretations of
thoughts. The same archetypes and myths are interpreted in different ways.
The similarity in both the texts leads to a question regarding, which country
possessed oldest roots of fables or whether both texts are translation of each other or
whether element of influence is responsible. Many scholars have given their views on the
issue that Aesop's Fables and the Pañcatantra share several quite similar tales and there

is also a debate over whether the Greeks learned these fables from Indian storytellers or
the other way round or if the influences were mutual.
Ben E. Perry argued in the Introduction to his book Babrius and Phaedrus, for
the possibility that the oldest roots of fables lie in the Greek literature, making the
statement:
In the entire Greek tradition there is not, so far as I can see, a single
fable that can be said to come either directly or indirectly from an
Indian source; but many fables or fable-motifs that first appear in
Greek or Near Eastern literature are found later in the Pañcatantra and
other Indian story-books, including the Buddhist Jatakas. (p-9)
On the other hand there are many scholars who advocate that the oldest roots of
fables had been found in India. The Encyclopedia Britannica, one of the standard
references firmly states;
The East, the land of myth and legend, is the natural home of the fable,
and Hindustan was the birth place, if not of original of these tales, at
least oldest shape in which they still exist.
(11th edition, Article on fable)
On the same ground of argument the famous scholar and Indo-logiest Max
Mueller also stated favoring India as an oldest home of fables; “It is extremely likely that
fables, in particular animal fables, had their principal origin in India”( Mueller Max,
Chips from a German workshop, Vol.IV,p-412). In a same way supporting the above
arguments a renowned scholar T.W. Rhys Davids observes in his work Buddhist Birth
Stories:
What is at present known, then, with respect to the so-called Aesop’s

Fables, amounts to this – that none of them are really Aesopean at all;
that the collection was first formed in the middle ages; that a large
number of them has been traced back, in various ways, to our Buddhist
Jataka Book; and almost the whole of them are probably derived in
one way or another from Indian sources. (p-32-33)

Ernest Rhys, firmly supports this opinion and gives his final judgment in the Introduction
of Fables, Aesop and Others:
We have to admit that the beast-fable did not begin with Aesop or in
Greece at all. We have, in fact, or go East and to look to India and
borrow in the „tales within tales‟ of Hitopadesa to get an idea how old
the antiquity of the fable actually is. ( p-3)
Apart from issue of authenticity and initiatives, A.B. Keith ingeniously solves this
mystery by stating in History of Sanskrit Literature that:
We have accordingly a great field of possibilities; borrowing of India

from Greece, of Greece from India, of both from a common source in
Egypt or Asia Minor and Syria; common inheritance from Indo-
European times and from even further back if it is deemed worthwhile
seeking to penetrate further into that past; and independent
development due to the similar constitution of the human mind. (p-
354.)
A.B. Keith‟s idea of common inheritance of both the culture and independent
development due to the similar constitution of human mind is ultimate culmination; it
leads us to genre study of both the texts, because genre study encompasses many
elements that help us outline new dimensions. For example, S.S. Prawer stated in
Comparative Literary Studies: An Introduction:
Studies of literary tradition involve genre-study too, as well as

investigation of topoi, common places and a common stock of images
and rhetorical devices. (p-58.)
The similarity in the texts and genre leads us to the study of issue of influence that
is ingeniously discussed in Comparative Literature: Matter and Method by A. Owen
Aldridge. A. Owen Aldridge, in a useful anthology, explains the problems of „analogy‟,
„affinity‟ and „tradition‟; it is therefore important, before assessing the role of „influence‟
studies in comparative literature, to survey, briefly the related fields just mentioned.
Aldridge defined „analogy‟ or „affinity‟ as „resemblances in style, structure, mood or idea
between works which have no other connection‟. ( p-3)

Study of analogy involves many aspects as it is mentioned in Comparative Literary
Studies: An Introduction by S.S. Prawer:
Many of the striking analogies that appear in studies may, of course,

be traced to common human experience, and to the consequences that
flow from any attempt to mould the raw material of life into the formal
perfection of the Art. There is interplay, here, between the three main
factors that make for typological analogies: Social ( two societies may
have reached a similar stage of development or find themselves faced
with similar problems); Literary (at certain stages of their development
a given genre may develop a dynamic of its own and lead to similar
development which then may, or may not, have been strengthened by
direct contact with foreign models); and Psychlogical (the human mind
has common ways of responding to common experiences; two authors
may have a similar cast of mind). (p-56.)
5.2 The Authors and the Texts
There is no doubt about antiquity of both these texts. It is confirmed by many

quotes of scholars that the birth date of Aesop was around 620B.C and the Western
Indian version of Pañcatantra was created before sixth century. The original
Pañcatantra had been destroyed before centuries and later the western Indian version
was created. Both the original works Aesop’s Fables and Pañcatantra were destroyed
and later they were recreated. So it is difficult to point out the exact date of creation for
both of these works.
In addition there are many assumptions about the author of both these texts. For
example, the modern view is that, Aesop probably did not solely compose all those
fables attributed to him, even if he existed at all. Modern scholarship reveals fables and
proverbs of „Aesopic‟ existed in both ancient Sumer and Akkad, as early as the third
millennium B.C. Jack Zipes also opines in The Norton Anthology Of Children's
Literature; “There was never a written text of his stories and many critics believe that his
tales are a patchwork of different authors”. (p-387)

The same case uncertainty of the authorship prevails regarding the fables of
Pañcatantra too. Many scholars believe that, the name of author which has been depicted
in the „Preface‟ of the text Pañcatantra is as imaginary as other characters of
Pañcatantra. If we consider Viṣṇuçarman as the author of Pañcatantra, there is no
authoritative proof to give any further information and details regarding him. There is no
information available in any other contemporary literature about him. There is also
another misconception about him that the author Viṣṇuçarman is none other than
Viçnugupta the author of Arathçāstra. Nevertheless theses arguments have no basis.
What we can assume by the study of text is Viṣṇuçarman was not Jain or Buddhist but a
Hindu-Brahmin because the ethics and principles that have been depicted are not the
tenets of Jainism or Buddhism. Moreover suffix in the name Viṣṇuçarman – „çarman‟
refers to Hindu-Brahmin.
In the same way, there are also some assumptions about the place where the
books were written. According to an assumption, Aesop served as a slave of a certain
Xanthus, then served as the slave of a certain Iadmon who later freed him and then went
on to gain a strong reputation among the Samians by telling them fables; then Aesop was
sent to the court of Croesus in Sardis by Samians in order to persuade Samians, not to
subjugate the Samian people. Croesus was so impressed with Aesop that he put aside his
plans of conquest for Samos and gave Aesop a position at his court, which gave Aesop
some leisure to write down his fable. Then as a part of Aesop‟s continuing service to
Croesus, according to the biographer and essayist Plutarch, Aesop went on a diplomatic
mission to Delphi, where his life was brought to an end. Therefore, it is supposed that in
the court of Croesus he might have composed these fables.
The same is true of Pañcatantra also. The scholars are not unanimous in their
opinions regarding the place where Pañcatantra was composed. In the „Preface‟ of the
book, it is mentioned that Pañcatantra has been written to teach moral conduct to three
sons of Amaraçakti, the king of Mahilāropya. The name of city is mentioned in the
„Preface‟. Moreover the locale of the first and the second Tantra is also the city
Mahilāropya. Considering these references scholars have come to the conclusion that
Pañcatantra might have been created in Sothern region of India. But, this argument has
no satisfactory evidence. German critic Dr. Johannes Hertel mentioned that the original

Pañcatantra was created in Kashmir due to description of nature and natural object
mentioned in the text.
5.3 Purpose of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
Fable is a very short genre of literature having not many purposes to fulfill, yet it
fulfills most of the purposes that any other literary genre does. The purposes of fables
can be classified as follows;
 To entertain
 To convey a moral lesson
 To make a cautionary point
The very first purpose of fables is to entertain the audience. Fables were written
in comic fashion in light mood and in day to day languages of contemporary time having
animals, human and other objects as its characters. The idea that animals speak like
human creates an element of wonder for all age group audience. The second and the
most important purpose of the fables is to teach moral lessons and codes of conduct. It is
possible that sometimes we find some fables without morals. But most of the fables serve
this purpose. Fable is a genre that mingles „Art for Art‟s sake‟ and „Art for Morality‟.
The third purpose is to give a voice to the problems of the society. Fables are
often the satires on society. In a comic fashion, highlight social issues to the public. As
the characters of fables are animals, no class or race or group of people feel resentment
for the mockery and yet fables succeed in their purpose of exposing their weaknesses.
In all the above mentioned purposes both the texts have succeeded marvelously.
Both the texts have similar purpose as to entertain their audience, to teach moral lessons
and to give a voice to social issues.
For centuries, both texts have been entertaining their audience; it is the proof that
both the texts have hundreds of translations in almost all the languages of the world.
Moreover, nowadays both the texts are available in animation forms. Children now can
watch the animated series of both the texts. There is not a single cartoon channel which
has no Pañcatantra and Aesop's Fables as their cartoon series. Children also learn these
fables as text books in their curriculum due to simplicity of diction and action.

The elderly audience considers these texts as the books of knowledge. They
compare these books with books of Nītiçāstra, political and diplomatic books. In present
times there are many authors who have taken these books to elaborate the management
fundamentals in corporate world. The ethics and the morals which is depicted in these
books are eternal. It is beyond the limits of time so the ethics and morals depicted
centuries ago are quite fresh and relevant in present scenario.
The scholars and serious audience consider these books as the solution of social
issues. The condition of poor and underprivileged have been beautifully depicted and
discussed in both these books. Benefits of unity, equality, and harmony continue to
inspire people for the well-being of mankind.
Besides these general purposes, there are some purposes that have been
mentioned in the „Preface‟ of Pañcatantra. For example, the princes of King Amaraçakti
- Vasuçakti, Ugraçakti and Anekçakti were too immature and stupid to inherit their
father‟s kinghood. King Amaraçakti wanted to make them wise. He wanted to teach
principles of conduct to them. He asked in his court to teach principle of conducts to his
princes. A minister among the court named Suman elaborated the way of learning and
suggested the name of Viṣṇuçarman - a Brahmin from his state. Suman advocated his
scholarship, knowledge and wisdom and advised king to entrust his princes to him.
Princes were sent to Viṣṇuçarman and they learnt principles of conduct within six
months with the help of the stories of Pañcatantra. It clearly shows that purpose behind
writing Pañcatantra was to teach principle of conduct to the young princes of king
Amaraçakti.
There is also similar anecdote related to Aesop’s Fables. According to the

anecdote; Aesop was a captive slave. According to Aristotle in The Constitution of the
Samians, Aesop served as a slave for certain Xanthus. Xanthus had three sons but stupid
enough to bring shame on the name of his father. But Xanthus was among the
manipulative people of his time. Xanthus wanted his sons to be wise and have some
social reputation. Xanthus was pleased by the witty remarks of his slave Aesop. One day
he put a condition to Aesop that if succeeded in making his sons wise, he would set him
free from his slavery. Aesop enthusiastically fulfilled this task by telling them his fables
and teaching them practical wisdom and good social conduct.

Moreover, Pañcatantra being the book of Nītiçāstra and politics, it is very
helpful in practicing diplomatic ways. The whole third Tantra Kākolūkīyam (Of Crows
and Owls) is discussing the consequences of war and peace. It discusses the types of
enemy and modes to face them. The Author himself advocates the importance of the
book in the „Preface‟:
(Whoever learns the work by heart, or through the story-teller's art, becomes acquainted,
his life by sad defeat although the king of heaven be his foe „is never tainted.)
On the other hand Aesop’s Fables have mixed reception. Mostly Aesop’s Fables
were not considered as sheer political and diplomatic as Pañcatantra. On the contrary
classical rhetorical educator Quintilian advised children at the beginning of their
education to practice, translate, paraphrase, abbreviate and elaborate the Aesop’s Fables.
In rhetorical theory and practice, the fables seem to have been a rhetorical device for
enhancing persuasiveness in public speaking. Demetrius‟ collection of Aesop's Fables
seems to have been made as a reference work listing fables for use in rhetorical exercise
and public speaking.
By and large contemporary society is the target audience for both there texts.
Their purpose is to work for the betterment of the people. The texts are realistic in tone
yet Pañcatantra is somewhat idealistic but the dominant tone of both these texts is
realistic. Pañcatantra advocates the doctrine of " " (shrewdness
should be faced by being shrewd). Aesop's Fables advocate the doctrine of „Might is
Right‟. Both the texts do not want to make their audience cunning or bully. But they
want to show the reality of society. Both the texts want to teach the acceptance of the
evil, the cunning and the wicked. If society is cruel and shrewd and if one has to be
shrewd to cope up with it, one must it is not objectionable. If „Might is Right‟ is the
attitude of the society then accept the reality. If you could not get justice or could not
fight with powerful ones, accept it because the society believes in „Might is Right‟. Both

these texts not just guide but also teach to accept the reality of the world and provide
courage to face them. Both the texts draw attention of the society towards some
drawbacks and teach how to tackle them. In addition, the most important thing is both
the texts elaborate and propagate eternal values.
5.4 Themes in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
In comparative study of literature, theme is a very important aspect of the study.

It encompasses large fields of study, involving many sociological, geographical,
mythical, religious aspects. The wide range of thematic study has been explained in the
book Comparative Literary Studies, by S.S. Prawer, in the Chapter- XI, Theme and
Prefigurations.
...comparatists have always felt very much at home, despite repeated

efforts to drive them out of it: that of „thematics‟, „thematology‟,or
Satoffgeschichte…(a) The literary representation, in different
languages and at different times of natural phenomena and man‟s
reaction to them: mountains, the oceans, the forest; or of eternal facts
of human existence: dream, or death; or of perennial human problems
and patterns of behavior: conflict between illusion and reality, the
power of destiny, the crossing of true love, libertinage…(e) The
literary representation of named personages from mythology, legend,
earlier literature or history… Raymond Trousson, who knows the field
as thoroughly as anyone, has argued, persuasively, that the most
fruitful subject for comparative literary studies will, in fact, be found
under (a) and (e). (p-99,100.)
On a broad level, themes of fables can be classified in to two major sections such as:
 Instructive messages about human follies

 Explicit moral based upon cultural approach
The target audience of fable is individual as well as society on the whole so the
themes of fables should be based on day to day behavior and cultural beliefs of the
people. Both the texts Pañcatantra and the Aesop‟s Fable haves fulfilled this task
ingeniously. In the first section of theme that deals with individuals, both the texts have

done marvelous job. In Pañcatantra the title of Tantras suggest the theme that they deal
with. All of them are examples of theme that deal with individual issues. The first Tantra
is entitled as Mitra-bheda meaning „Splitting of Friendship‟ as the title implies, chief
theme of this Tantra is the determent of separation of friends. Friendship has been
developed between the Lion king and the bullock. Two jackals were former advisers of
the Lion king. They created a rift and created a breach in the friendship of the Lion king
and the bullock. The first Tantra emphasizes on the consequences of break-up of
friendship. The most enchanting relation of men with men is friendship, if one fails to
maintain it, there would be a great loss in one‟s life. The immediate theme of
Pañcatantra is „Gaining Friendship‟ entitled as Mitra-samprāpti. Here the author
intentionally juxtaposes both the themes before readers coming out of the impression of
theme about consequences of loss of a friend. The author narrates the importance of
gaining friendship. In this way the impact of second theme is magnified. The author
could have placed the positive theme „Gaining Friendship‟ in the first place but
intentionally he wanted to magnify the importance of friendship so, he placed it in
second place. As the second Tantra entitled as Mitra-samprāpti the Tantra opens with
the tale of a clever dove king, who saves his retinue from the hunter‟s trap by making
them fly cohesively with its net and then has the net cut by his old friend- a mouse. It
demonstrates the power of unity and importance of friendship. The consequent parts
discuss the benefits of friendship portraying crow, mouse, turtle, and fawn. They
cooperate with each other to save the fawn, when it was trapped and later they work
together to save the turtle.
Most of the themes of the third Tantra, Kākolūkīyam falls into second type of
classification that deal with explicit moral based on cultural point of view. So it would be
discussed while elaborating the second section.
The fourth and fifth Tantra deals with the first classification- the instructive
messages about human faults. The title of both the Tantras suggest that Labdhapraṇāśam
– „Loss of the Gained‟ and Aparīkṣitakārakaṃ – „Hasty Action‟, are the faults of human
behavior. The fourth Tantra deals with the theme of loss of what is gained; it has the
central story of monkey and crocodile. The whole Tantra is based on the concept of how
a stupid person loses everything that is gained and how a wise fellow protects himself
from impending dangers.

The fifth Tantra deals with the theme of hasty action without thought. It has the
central story of the Barber who strikes a stick on monk‟s head in order to have treasure.
There are many sub-stories in each Tantras that advocate the main doctrine of
Tantra. Sub-stories are in support of the arguments and examples of main themes.
In the same way, Aesop has also dealt with the themes that discuss human faults.
Aesop has huge collection of fables, of about 313 stories on different subjects. Aesop‟s
stories are fragmented; they are not interlinked like the stories of Pañcatantra. In
Pañcatantra a thread of theme can be felt that bounds each story like a necklace. While
here each story has individual subject. Yet there is something unique in Aesop's Fables
that we can classify Aesop‟s themes in three major sections. First theme can be summed
up as, „Man cannot hide his or her true nature.‟ Whatever human beings have developed
in terms of intellect, logic, observation, emotion and however cultured they may look or
put on the mask of harmony, unity, pity and love, they cannot hide their true nature.
There are many fables here that reveal this reality of mankind. Second important theme
is the „Brutality of the day-to-day life‟. There have been always clashes between the
powerful and the weak; these clashes were more heinous in ancient time. In the ancient
times people were generally concerned with their basic needs. Ancient people were
nearer to nature also to the brutality of the nature. There is famous quote of Adolf Hitler;
“If nature can be cruel, why not men?” Moreover greed for land and wealth made them
blind towards tenderness of life. The third theme of Aesop’s Fables can be outlined as,
„One cannot escape from his destiny‟. Destiny is an overwhelming theme of the fables.
No human, object or animal can escape from the destiny.
When we compare first classification that deals with individuals in both the texts,
it is clearly felt that the author of Pañcatantra endeavoring to amplifying the idealism.
That is because of cultural and religious values of the author. The author of Pañcatantra
as stated earlier was, Hindu-Brahmin. The Hindu culture and religion are more
concerned with inner life and development of an individual. It encompasses the ideology
of purity, piousness, truth, life after death, salvation etc. All these ideas lead men to live
an ideal life, a life that everybody wants to imitate. So, the ideal life is the main spotlight
of the author of Pañcatantra. On the other, hand it is also true that „ideal life‟ is also an
„idea‟. It is never completely possible in the practical world. It is the only way to lead
people to live in ideal way, to the maximum extent possible. The author was aware of

reality and practical world but deliberately he wanted to create a standard of excellence
of life. This argument can be encountered by saying that the author advocates the
doctrine of " " (shrewdness should be faced by being shrewd). But

these words are the way of dealing in practical life. It is not the ultimate goal of the
author. He suggests that to attain an ideal life. Sometimes, one has to be shrewd in
practical life. Here shrewdness is not against ideal life, but a way to tackle the evil
cleverly. Sometimes, one has to be shrewd to face shrewdness.
In the first Tantra, the author shows what happens when lion king and bullock
could not be shrewd against the cunning jackal. Here shrewdness is not the theme of the
Tantra, but loss of friendship is the theme. In second Tantra crow, mouse, turtle and
fawn use a trick to save themselves. Here gaining friendship is the theme. The focus of
author is on idealism behind the actions. The same is the case with themes of fourth and
fifth Tantras.
On the other hand, Aesop does not claim to be an idealist. He wants to teach
moral on the factual bases. He wants to sketch the life with the instruments of reality.
Later, Plato advocated importance of idealism in the Greece. Aristotle was more in tune
with Aesop than Plato. Aesop believed that one could not escape from the reality to teach
morals. As he demonstrates in his first theme that men cannot hide his or her true nature,
therefore one should not expect a miracle of change. One must therefore accept the fact
that human nature is unchangeable. This is the pragmatic moral of Aesop’s Fables. In the
same situation Pañcatantra may say: it is after all human nature and it could be changed.
One should be ready to accept this change. Pañcatantra depicts this ideology portraying
friendship between the lion king and the bullock. One is predator and the other is prey.
Friendship could not be possible between these two, but here it does. They both became
intimate friends. In the same way, in one of the fables of Aesop there was treaty between
hounds and the sheep. But when hounds get chance, they eat them up. This is the
fundamental level difference in the themes of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables.
Aesop believes that, life is a brutal. One should accept the brutality and be
cautioned to avoid it. On the other hand Pañcatantra says that life is beautiful, if you
learn the art of living. The very first fable in Aesop's Fables is The Wolf and the Lamb.
In the fable The Wolf and the Lamb, once a lamb goes ashtray from the fold, and meets a
wolf. The wolf resolves not to lay violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify

to the lamb the wolf‟s right to eat him. So he addressed the lamb that previous year he
had insulted him. The lamb replied in mournful tone that he was not then born. The wolf
told him again that he had fed himself in his pasture. The lamb replied that he had never
tasted the grass. The wolf again asked, if he drank from his well, the lamb replied his
mother‟s milk is food and water for him. He never drank water. Upon which the wolf
seized him and ate him up saying that he did not want to remain superless, even though
he refuted every one of his imputation. The moral of this fable is “The tyrant will always
find a pretext for his tyranny”. On the other hand, in Pañcatantra, the victims of tyranny
get freedom from tyrants due to unity and friendship. Tyrants can be defeated with the
unity of the oppressed, says Pañcatantra the king of dove sets all his friends free as they
fly cohesively and the mouse, his friend cuts the net setting all free. The fawn too was
caught by the hunter but due to the efforts of the friends, they all are set free.
Aesop emphasizes the role of destiny over men while Pañcatantra supports
human effort to create his or her destiny. Destiny is an irresistible theme of the fables.
No inanimate object nor animal nor human being can escape from the destiny. In the
fable, An Oak and Zeus, an oak tree appeals to Zeus to stop men from chopping him
down. Zeus responds that it is the oak‟s own fault for being so useful to carpenters. It is
his destiny to be chopped down because of his useful nature.
In the fable The Father and His Dream, an old man dreams that his son will be
killed by a lion. He does everything he could do to prevent this. He builds a house for his
son, and makes him stay there. He decorates the house with paintings of game. The
man's son approaches a painting of a lion, and he is so frustrated with being kept indoors
that he strikes out at it. The painting falls on him and kills him. His fate is fulfilled. The
lion kills him (the painted lion if not real)
Both the texts, Aesop's Fables and Pañcatantra, have travelled through a long
passage of time. Both the texts are translated in many languages. Many authors have re-
created them. What is available today is the re-creation of original ones. It is the same
case with both the texts that they had been destroyed before the first re-creation and there
are many versions available of both the texts which is due to its multiple interpretations.
Moreover the translators have not just translated; they have trans-created according to
their milieu and locale. In Aesop's Fables around 300 B.C. the four significant collections
of Aesop’s Fables came into existence by Demetrius of Phalerum, especially as the

reference book of fables and for writers and speakers to quote. The major issue of
multiple interpretations came when Phaedrus in 55 A.D. composed his „Latin Verse‟
version of the fables. His version was based on Demetrius‟s collection. “Phaedrus
expanded Aesop’s Fables and added some stories from other sources and his own”.
(Perry B. E., „Introduction‟, in Babrius and Phaedrus, p-12) This „Latin verse‟ derivation
of Phaedrus becomes the base for three medieval Latin prose referred to respectively as
Aesop of Ademar, Aesop ad Rufum and Romulus. Each version was modified by means of
expansion, deletions and additions. Pañcatantra too has many versions; these versions
are named according the geographical areas, on which they supposed to be written. For
example West Indian version, Kashmirian version, South Indian version etc. All these
versions differ from one another in interpretations of the stories. In the West Indian
version in the fifth Tantra, Aparīkṣitakārakaṃ story of The Barber is the central story
while in South Indian version Brahmin’s wife and Mongoose is the central story. Both
these stories are in the fifth Tantra of both of the version but the interpretation of stories
have changed, and as interpretation changed, importance of stories have changed and that
is how in one version, which is a sub-story, shifted to a central story in another.
In the Aesop’s Fables, some scholars focus on the changes that individual
authors make in their editions of the Aesop's Fables. Samuel Richardson, in addition to
explaining his own changes, discusses those of Sir Roger L'Estrange and Samuel Croxall
in their editions, especially in regard to the morals, in order to advance their own
political viewpoint. Barbara Mirel discovers three methods of interpreting Aesop in
various modern editions and shows how The Fox and the Crow is presented differently
according to each one. Mary-Agnes Taylor examines the changes made by various poets
in favour of the ant in The Ant and the Grasshopper. George Clark compares the fables
of The Cock and the Jewel and The Swallow and the Other Birds in the versions of
Aesop and Robert Henryson. Aesop’s Fables are „ready to use‟ examples perfect to
create deep impact on audience so different authors have edited, deleted and added some
stories as per their local need and milieu.
Abdullh Ibn al Muqaffa translated Pañcatantra from Pahelvi to Arabic in

750A.D. Here he modified two jackals' names into the Kalila and Dimna, perhaps
because of the immensity of the first Tantra, or because the Sanskrit word Pañcatantra as
a Hindu concept could find no easy equivalent in Zoroastrian Pahlavi, their names the
Kalila and Dimna became the generic, classical names for the whole work. Here whole

focus lies on the first Tantra. The frequent appearance of two jackals in the first Tantra
catches the whole attention of translator from other Tantra. Moreover, Abdullah Ibn al
Muqaffa has also added some stories from Arabic literature and names of some characters
have also been changed. The crocodile has been changed to „Alghlim‟. The mongoose has
been changed in to weasel and Brahmin becomes Hermit.
In translating any work, it is hard to retain original concept especially when the
work moves from one civilization to another. It the case of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s
Fables there is less translation and more „trans-creation‟. It is naturally possible because
Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables moved not only from one language to another, but it
moved from one country to another, from one culture to another, from one civilization to
another. As perception changes interpretation also change.
Comparison of themes resolves many aspects. S.S. Prawer mentions in his book
Comparative Literary Studies: An Introduction that;
Such study of theme and motif may be seen as the literary

equivalent of what art-historians know as iconography; and its
interest seems to me assured by least three considerations.
First: the comparative study of themes and motifs enables us to
see what type of writer chooses what type of material, and how
the material is dealt with at various times… second: „Thematic‟
studies enable us, in fact to examine and contrast the sprite of
different societies and epochs as well as those of individuals
talents…lastly: thematic study must not be divorced from study
of literary style. ( p-102,103.)
5.5 Plot Construction in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
Fables are intended to teach and preach therefore usually they contain one incident,
and make their message explicit and remain accessible for all types of audience.
Basically plot of fables can be characterized by the following characteristics:
 Usually one incident or happening.

 Characters in conflict.
 Trickery is usually the turning point.

 Problem resolution is accomplished through one or two events leading to
a life lesson at the of the stories end.
 Moral explicitly conveyed through a few words.
 Sometimes there are complex and abstract concepts.
Both the texts Pañcatantra and Aesop's Fables follow the genre of fable yet there is
difference in their plot. Pañcatantra follow „Dramatic plot pattern‟ while Aesop’s Fables
follows 'story arc plot pattern '. Plot is the sequence of events in a story and their relation
to one another and as they develop and the conflict is resolved at the end. The plot
usually involves a conflict or struggle between opposing force. The discerning reader can
see its development in a pattern during the course of the narration. Whether its events
proceed chronologically or are rearranged with the flash-back method returning to past
from present and back.
Pañcatantra has been divided into five sections. Each section has been designed
as „Tantra‟, and the junction of five Tantras has rightly been called Pañcatantra. As, it is
mentioned in the preface, Pañcatantra was composed for, teaching rules of conduct to
young princes so its sections are presented in such a way that it would become easy for
young beginners to acquire lessons in wisdom. All the five Tantras have been composed
as Viṣṇuçarman tells the story to the young princes of king Amaraçakti .
Aesop‟s fable contains very simple plot construction. His stories are more like
small anecdotes rather than long sequence stories. It includes only one incident at a time,
with a few characters, mostly two characters to carry on the dialogue. All the fables are
individual. They have no interlinking elements. Each stands on its own so, it has very
simple plot pattern of the Beginning, the Middle and the End.
Besides being a book of political science and Nītiçāstra, Pañcatantra is also a

storybook. Moral is conveyed through stories so each Tantra contains one main story
which is followed by other sub stories. The plot of each Tantra is the „Frame Story‟
which is a unique identity of ancient India. The oldest roots of „Frame Story‟ are found
in Indian literature mostly in the first millennium B.C. as in the Mahābhārata,
Kathāsaritsāgara, Hitopadeça, Vetalpañchvinçti etc. On the other hand, Aesop's Fables
are created for different audience. Its purpose is different. It intends to give on the spot
examples and preaching in day to day conversation so it has to be very simple it cannot

bear the burden of long description and complexity of events. It should be handy and
easy to remember.
(C.5)
(Plot Pattern in Pañcatantra) (Plot Pattern in Aesop’s Fables)
(Dramatic Plot Pattern) (Story Arc Plot Pattern)
Middle
Beginning End
In the 'Story Arc Plot Pattern ', there is no room like 'Dramatic Plot Pattern' to
introduce the settings and characters in details. It starts directly introducing the situation.
In the 'Story Arc Plot Pattern', the Beginning hooks the audience by introducing the main
characters. Their goals and the main conflict are presented in a few words. The mood
and the tone are set at the beginning and should be consistent throughout the story. In
Pañcatantra story begins with the Exposition. Exposition is a part where the author
introduces the characters, settings and basic situation. In the first Tantra exposition
begins with the appreciation of wealth and to narrate a story of Vardhamāna to create the
situation so that King Piṅgalaka and Bullock Saṁjīvaka can meet. If the same story were
to be narrated in Aesop‟s Fables, it would begin as, “in a certain jungle, a king lion and
bullock meet”.
In 'Dramatic Plot Pattern' after Exposition, there is an element of conflict. From

here, the story goes up and holds the attention of the audience. Conflict is depicted as the
struggle between opposing forces in the story. Soon after conflict the story gets rise,
which is called Rising action that leads a story to the climax. In the 'Story Arc Plot
Pattern' there is sudden element after introduction of situation. Sometimes in 'Story Arc
Plot Pattern ', a sudden introduction of situation and conflict may fail to provide logical
acceptance. In the same way in the first Tantra of Pañcatantra, the King lion Piṅgalaka
and bullock Saṁjīvaka meet. If an author starts his story from this point, it would be

difficult for the audience to accept their meeting amicably as the Lion is a predator and
the Bullock a prey they. But the incidents of Exposition provide the reason for their
meeting. The conflict may become more profound if audience is familiar with characters.
The Rising action becomes more interesting. What Exposition, Conflict and Rising
action serve in 'Dramatic Plot Pattern ' is sometimes neglected in 'Story Arc Plot Pattern'
therefore the beginning of 'Dramatic Plot Pattern' effectively holds the attention of the
audience while 'Story Arc Plot Pattern' gives abrupt start to its story. Moreover, narration
of setting creates deep impact on the minds of the readers.
What is „Climax‟ in 'Dramatic Plot Pattern' is the „Middle‟ in 'Story Arc Plot
Pattern'. The climax is; the point of greatest emotional intensity, interest or suspense in
the plot of a narrative. The climax typically comes at the turning point in a story. While
the Middles are series of events or complicated occurrence, leading to an increase in the
tension. This is also where the characters change and grow as they deal with the conflicts
they face.
Aesop’s Fables are very short in length so there are not much elaborated Middles.
In a very few words they explain the conditions of characters. On the other hand
Pañcatantra is comparatively detailed narrative and longer in description. So the
conditions of characters are more artistically developed. Aesop's Fables are easy to
remember as they are like handy examples of day-to-day life while Pañcatantra is often
difficult to remember because of stories within stories.
5.6 Characters in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
Characters are very important part of fables. They are anthropomorphism of

human nature. In the matter of characters fables differ from short stories. In fables
animals, trees and objects are endowed with human characteristics. Their affairs are
akin to human beings. Characters of fables are characterized by the following
impotent features;
 Animals, plants and objects are assigned with human characteristics

 Presented stereotypically
 Each character exhibits one dominant trait of human nature
 Characters are in conflict
 Main character is an animal or inanimate object

 Usually two or three characters ( Not many characters)
 Tricksters alternate between cleverness and stupidity or kindness or
cruelty
 Have impersonal names
 Flat characters that lack depth and gradual development.
In above mentioned parameters both the texts have made benchmark in

portraying characters in their fields. If characters of both the texts are studied, they can
be distinguished on the bases of the different style of depicting characters. Aesop's
Fables have more variety of characters than in Pañcatantra. On the other hand,
Pañcatantra has more versatile characters in comparison to the Aesop’s Fables.
As it has been mentioned earlier, Aesop was born in Samos, an island of Greece.
This means he might have seen marine animals frequently, yet in his stories very few
stories talk about marine animals. To create general understanding, Aesop might have
used domestic animals. Another reason may be that more number of people were
familiar with such animals. They may be their livestock and some of them were
predators like lion, wolf and fox, etc. The variety of birds and insects and these two types
of animals can be found almost everywhere. In a way it is clearly seen that with majority
of mammals, Aesop has used birds, insects including a wide variety of each type and the
minority of fish, reptiles and amphibians. In Pañcatantra, there is less variety of
characters than in the Aesop’s Fables. In Aesop's Fables the author has used many
domestic animals while Pañcatantra has used them rarely. Pañcatantra has mostly
focused on wild animals. The reason may be sensed that in Indian culture some domestic
animals like Cows are considered holy. People may resent any comment regarding them.
Cow is very common animal in India but people consider it as holy animal. So
Pañcatantra has not used it even once. The same is the case with horse. Horses are
common almost all over the world. Horse has also not been used for a single time
because it is by kings and princes. The dog is very common Indian animal which is
regarded as loyal. In Pañcatantra it has been used once.
Both the authors have created simulated reality of characters and places, but it
comes out more artistically in Pañcatantra. There are fictional kingdoms and fictional
hierarchy of positions. In Pañcatantra even names of characters are prearranged
according to their characteristics. This is the most eye-catching difference in

Pañcatantra and the Aesop’s Fables. In Aesop's Fables general names are given to
characters like; the Lion, the Fox, The Jackdaw etc. while in Pañcatantra each character
has been given a own particular name, matching his or her characteristics. This is very
important point in studying characters comparatively. Aesop‟s characters that represent
general name have general characteristics possessed by a particular animal for example,
a Lion. Here the Lion represents quality of all lions. But in the same way when
Pañcatantra portrays the character of a Lion, the author who has given them names like;
Piŉgalaka, Madotkata, Vajradançta, Kharankhar, Karālakesari etc. Besides having
quality of a Lion, they have some shades of nature suggested by these names. As the
name Piŉgalaka suggests that the Lion is yellowish and pale and he does not have much
energy. He is old and sick. When this character is portrayed, all above mentioned
characteristics are there. In the same way, Madotkata means dandy and arrogant. The
hierarchy of animals is more profoundly depicted in Pañcatantra, as they are kings or
king‟s advisers or even slaves. While in Aesop's Fables mostly king‟s characters are
referred.
Aesop's Fables have been used as handy examples so, their plots are very simple,
mostly containing single incident. Naturally simple plot has simple characterization.
Most of the Aesop‟s characters are flat or static characters. In Aesop’s Fables element of
story is not in the characters but in incidents. Simplicity of plot does not give much space
to develop characters. There is not much detail description given to the characters. E.M
Forster, in his book, Aspects of the Novels remarks regarding flat characters that,
Flat characters are very useful to writers, since they never need
reintroduction, never runaway, have not to be watched for
development and provide their atmosphere. A second advantage is that
they are easily remembered by the readers afterwards. (p- 76 , 77)
On the other hand Pañcatantra has a number of round and complex characters
along with some flat characters. Even in portraying animals as characters the author of
Pañcatantra does not stop after portraying only characteristics of any particular animal.
His characters are not only types but they have flavor of its own.
The characters that are associated with real human characteristics can appeal to
human beings more. The characters in stories should be like the characters in the society.
They should be grounded with each fuss of day-to-day life affairs of human beings, so

audience can identify with. If a character is extraordinary or too heroic, audience cannot
connect themselves with the characters. Even in tragedies, an element of „Hamartia‟ is
added to create the emotion of pity and fear. The audience can relate themselves with the
characters. In Pañcatantra there are long stories as their plot pattern is like story within
stories, so the characters of main stories have enough time to develop. They are real life
characters. As in the story of The Lion the Fox and the Donkey; the fox befooled the
donkey twice. In the story, the lion was weak unable to hunt but he caught a fox, the Fox
advised him, he would get only a single day meal, but if the lion spared him, he would
fetch him a week‟s meal. The fox approached the donkey pasturing nearby and said there
were three she-donkeys who intended to marry him. Moreover the fox described the
beauty of She-donkeys to him, saying that they were young and well fed. Both
approached the weak lion, and as the donkey came nearer, the lion jumped upon him to
kill, but the lion was very weak and the donkey was swift, so he galloped from there. As
the lion could not catch him, he approached the fox and told him that there was no other
option but to kill the fox. Then the fox again asked for another chance to trap the donkey.
Promoted by the greed of a week‟s meal the lion allowed him for another attempt. The
donkey was not much far from the place. The fox again approached him and asked why
he ran away from the place. The donkey said that someone jumped upon him heavily.
The fox replied that it was none other than she-donkey. She jumped upon him due to
eagerness of love. She could not control herself after watching such a handsome donkey.
The donkey was befooled again he showed readiness to approach the spot. Now the lion
was ready to kill, jumped upon him cruelly and killed him at once. The donkey was
fooled twice by the fox and ultimately killed. Such incidents happen in real society as
well. In society there is not always action and reaction. There are many irrational
incidents that take place in the society. Men can be fooled more than once often by love
and attraction for women. But the story does not end here. It moves further. The lion
being the king of Jungle should follow certain rituals before ending fast of some days. He
goes for a bath before having his meal. On the other side the fox was very hungry and
could not wait for the lion to spare some portion of meat for him. The fox ate up the soft
parts of donkey‟s body like heart and ears. When the Lion arrived from his bath started to
eat first the soft parts of donkey‟s body. He was surprised to find that the heart and ears
were missing. He then asked the Fox about them. The fox ingeniously replied that the
donkey had no heart and ears. That was there reason why he came there for the second
time because he was full of lust otherwise he would not have came there again. It appears

that characters of Pañcatantra are not just „type‟ characters. They have flavor of their
own. On the other hand the characters of Aesop’s Fables are mostly type characters. Due
to the brevity of the stories, characters have no space to develop. There in Aesop’s Fables
the characters are types with preconceived attributes.
Aesop‟s animal characters have superficial human attributes, having no depth and
complexity. They act according to their basic instincts. They are static and flat, there is no
growth or development in them. The animals which are portrayed here are common
animals of domestic and wild life and a few marine animals. On the other hand,
characters of Pañcatantra have depth and depict verity of emotions. The major characters
of main story develop various shades with the passage of by time. Most of the animals in
Pañcatantra are from wild life and very few from domestic and marine world.
Aesop‟s has portrayed a lion as the king of jungle, while in Pañcatantra; the
King‟s character has been presented by lion, crow, owl, and dove. In the first Tantra and
in the entire Pañcatantra, the lion has been considered as the king of the jungle. In
Aesop’s Fables overall impression of the lion does not create the great image of king.
The lion has been described as royal and just. He is the king who brings all the animals
together to seek mutual agreements but here the lion‟s kinghood is not so admirable. In
Pañcatantra the lion represents bravery, honesty, trustfulness, and might. The author
wants to show here that those who are kings should have all these characteristics in
them. Yet only this is not enough to portray kinghood so he has introduced other
characters as kings that cannot be represented by lion alone. In Aesop's Fables, lion is a
contradictory character. The lion, on one hand, having grown too old to hunt, tricks
animals into his cave by feigning illness. He is outwitted by a fox in the same fable. On
the other hand, the lion, having fallen in love with a ploughman's daughter, agrees to get
rid of his teeth and claws. After upholding his end of the agreement, he is no longer a
threat, and the ploughman reneges on the deal. The lion also loses out to his own greed.
In another fable: the Lion who Comes Across a Sleeping Hare, instead of eating the
hare, the lion chases a deer. He loses the deer and goes back to find the hare but the hare
has run off. Aesop's lion is at times just and kingly, and at other times, easily outwitted
and greedy. On the other hand the lion in Pañcatantra is more dynamic. On the whole
what the author wants to show in Pañcatantra the dutifulness, bravery and honesty of
the king he also shows that one should become diplomatic in ruling. Another very good
example of depth in characters in Pañcatantra is characters of advisers. In the first

Tantra two foxes are advisers and in third Tantra crows are advisers. In both these
characters of adviser of the king, the author has put worldly wisdom and all kinds of
complexity of human behavior. Here advisers are not just simple human beings but
supremely wise and well versed in Nītiçāstra. In the third Tantra advisers discuss the
way and diplomacy of war, the way of dealing with enemy, and conducts of crime and
punishment. They also discuss elements of poetics such as Prayojana, Hetu, Çeilī,
Dhvani, Rasa, Alankār, Guna, Dosha, Vakratā, Ramanīyatā, Auichītya etc. In the
dialogues of such characters, we can elucidate the art of writing. These characteristics
make Pañcatantra differ from other ordinary fable collections. In the characters of
advisers of first and third Tantra, we can classify the motive of the author that he had
mentioned in the preface that Pañcatantra was created to teach the rules of conduct to
young princes of king Amaraçakti. Here characters of advisers fulfill the motive of the
author quite artistically.
Aesop has used many human beings as his characters. They are not from any high
position of society. His human characters are rustic people who were associated with
labor. Aesop intentionally does not use any courteous or religious characters in his fables.
His recurrent human character is shepherd. The shepherd represents an everyman. He,
however, is a constant victim of fate. He rarely comes out on top. He tends to be foolish
in his endeavors. Another important human character is the ploughman. He also
represents a simple layman in the fables. He is a man who is at times kind and at times
vengeful.
Apart from these two representative characters there are some other
human characters that have flashed only once or twice. Most of the human characters are
type characters, as there is not much space for any character to develop or to be
introduced in detail. Most of them have their typical characteristics. This is the best way
for author to create any character without much detail. Yet it is besaid that Aesop has
given more space to human characters in comparison to animal characters. On the other
hand, third and fourth Tantra of Pañcatantra are full of with human characters. The
central story of the Tantras is driven by human characters. In Pañcatantra stories are bit
longer in comparison with Aesop’s Fables. Human characters have enough space to
develop and therefore we can see some complex human characters in Pañcatantra.
Aesop‟s characters behave in accordance with action and reaction. As in one

fable, a shepherd takes in a wolf cub and brings it up it with his dogs. The shepherd
thinks that the wolf will help guard his flock. The wolf, however, ends up killing most of
his sheep, and at the end the shepherd has to kill him. The shepherd also wears out the
patience of the people of town in one fable. He calls out that a wolf is attacking his sheep
just to see them come running. When a wolf really does attack, the people of town do not
believe his cries, and he has to watch the wolf carry off his sheep. In one fable, the
ploughman sees an eagle caught in a net. He is so fascinated by the eagle's beauty that he
frees it. The eagle, being so grateful, saves the ploughman from being crushed to death.
The ploughman shows his vengeful side when a snake kills his child in one fable. He lies
in wait for the snake, and when he sees it, he strikes out at it with an axe with all his
strength.
In Pañcatantra there are some characters that play intrigues like the fable of
„Merchant Dantil‟ of the first Tantra. Dantil was very rich merchant of the city named
Vrdhamānpura. Once on the occasion of his daughter's marriage he invited all the
courteous officials, along with the king and queen then enters Gorambha, who used to
sweep the king‟s personal rooms. He was uninvited. He set down on a seat meant for
someone else. Dantil caught him by his neck and turned him out. On this he felt insulted
and could not sleep all night and was thinking only that how he could take revenge of his
insult. After some days in the morning while king was half asleep he spoke aloud, "How
Dantil has become so daredevil nowadays that he actually embraces the queen". The
king could not digest the words and out of jealousy he did every wrong that he could to
Dantil and ruined him. Later on by one incident Dantil came to know that it was because
of Gorambha that the king misbehaved with him. One day Dantil invited Gorambha to
his home and tried to please him with gifts and bagged pardon for insulting him. Seeing
precious gifts Gorambha forgave Dantil and the next morning he spoke aloud some
sentences when the king was half awake regarding king‟s behavior which was
completely incorrect when king was half awake. The king realized that Gorambha‟s
words were not trustworthy all the time and so, his respect for Dantil was regained. Soon
the situation became normal as before.
The revenge of Aesop‟s character and the character of Pañcatantra are also
different in nature. Pañcatantra has round human characters and the characters of
Pañcatantra have multi-dimensional and complex.

In Aesop's Fables very few female characters are portrayed while in Pañcatantra
female characters are more dynamic than even male characters. Somehow Pañcatantra
has elaborated gray shade in some female characters. They have been depicted with full
of the lust, gluttony, suspicion, treacherousness and deceitfulness. Moreover, there are
many sayings that go against the self-esteem of woman.
In comparison with Pañcatantra, Aesop’s Fables has more number of

supernatural characters. Both the texts involve Gods, Deities, Devils and Sages etc. In
Aesop's Fables Gods and Deities directly appear as a character while in Pañcatantra, in
most of the fables, they do not appear directly. They come as referential characters. And
there are some personified characters also appear in both texts. Supernatural characters
have a typical image which is broadly accepted in society. It is difficult to present them
with new approach and dimension. It requires much elaboration and explanation which is
not possible while using genre of fable. Another important thing is that it might be risky
on the part of the author of 'acceptance' of his idea or image which they have made of the
particular supernatural element. So both the authors have used noncontroversial method
of accepting the preconceived characteristics of the supernatural elements. They have not
tried to change or even modify it. The way of narrating fables is witty. It is possible that
sometimes some supernatural characters are worshipped by the people and they may feel
insulted if they are depicted in a different manner. It is indeed a wise step to avoid any
personal interpretation of supernatural characters. Most of the supernatural characters are
derived from myths of their own country. Some eternal values and eternal virtues need to
be elaborated, which have been done ingeniously by personifying them like Truth, Lies,
Goods, Evils, and Trees etc. There are many objects from day-to-day life that have been
personified specially in Aesop's Fables like charcoal Burner, fuller, caves and statues etc.
There are a number of trees as characters, which are depicted in both the texts. However,
the use of trees as characters is more profound in Aesop’s Fables than in Pañcatantra.
The main difference in depicting human characters in Aesop's Fables and

Pañcatantra lies on the expression of emotions. Most of the Aesop‟s human characters
are indulged into exterior level of emotions. They are busy in action of earning their
bread, saving lives of their own and their belongings. They were often cheated and
exploited. They have losses and revenges. In Pañcatantra major issues of human
characters are regarding wealth and sexuality. Most of them are driven by these forces
otherwise they would not suffer such consequences. Human characters are from different

walks of life and many of them are from working class and some of them are connected
with court and religion. The author of Pañcatantra has portrayed many customs,
festivals, and traditions of the contemporary period. All the human characters that have
been depicted in Pañcatantra are always in search of happiness, wealth or power. Most
of the male characters are static characters, that do not change by time, while most of the
female characters are round characters, who possess complex and contradictory
temperaments.
5.7 Settings in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
Setting is a backdrop in which the story is set. It is an environment that provides,

scope for effective actions, and helps the development of the story. Setting is the place
and time of the story to set the scene. The author attempts to create the visual
imaginations, the illusion of a realistic world in which the story takes place. When the
writer locates the narrative in a physical setting, the reader is moved a step towards
acceptance of the fiction. The setting of a story furnishes the location for its world of
feeling and different emotional associations awakened in reader‟s mind. Generally in
fables, settings are characterized as:
 Time and setting are vague

 Setting exist as background
Both the texts are pastoral in setting. There are many places like fields, pastures,
farms and jungle. Some fables take place in city. In the Aesop’s Fables settings are not so
important. Very few words are used to describe the settings while in Pañcatantra there is
some description allotted to settings. As per the rooted tradition of Indian literature a
story begins with the description of location or sometimes with the adoration of the
locale. The typical pastoral atmosphere provides a kind of environment that the
characters tend to be more moral and ethical because of their closeness to nature.
In the Aesop’s Fables, most of the fables are set in a natural environment. Most
of the animal-based fables take place either in pastures or rivers. The fables dealing with
mules, foxes, wolves and sheep usually take place in pastures. Others are set in
barnyards, caves or mangers. The fables relating to humans generally take place on
journeys, in fields or sometimes, in their homes. Many of the fables dealing with humans

are set on the road. Some characters are usually travelers who meet with their
comeuppance along the way, typically at the hands of animals.
In Pañcatantra, the author has created simulated reality of places and characters.
There are fictional cities, locations, and kingdoms. A Mahilāropya is such a type of
empire of fictional king Amaraçakti, in southern region of India, where the story starts.
History has no such evidence of this type of king and kingdom. It is self-constructed and
envisaged world of author.
In the „Preface‟ it is mentioned that the events of Pañcatantra occur in the

southern region of India, city named Mahilāropya. A king Amaraçakti ruled over there.
Each Tantra has its own setting. The first Tantra has setting of a jungle on the way to
Mathurā from the city Mahilāropya. Sub stories have two settings, one is the city named
Vardhamāna and the second is in a certain jungle, on the tree, Tamālvrukṣā‟. The setting
of the second Tantra is a banyan tree near the city Mahilāropya. The third Tantra has the
same description of a banyan tree. The fourth Tantra starts with the description of
seashore as; "on a sea beach there was a big Jamun tree, which bore fruit throughout the
year". The fifth Tantra starts with the description of a city; “in the South India, where
there was a town called Pātaliputra”.
It appears that the difference in the depiction of setting in Aesop's Fables and
Pañcatantra is because of the difference in the medium of their development. Another
important reason is in the habit of people of both countries. Indian scholars have
tradition of memorizing their study materials. They put emphasis on the memorizing the
Çlokas of their texts. Pañcatantra has been written in both the forms; in prose and
verses. Students of Pañcatantra might have memorized them. They have passed it on
from generation to generation of students. When Pañcatantra was re-composed, the
verses that had been memorized could be the chief sources of description. On the other
hand Aesop himself has travelled in several places telling stories. So there is less
possibility of memorizing them and another very important reason is Aesop's Fables are
quite short in length. Moreover they are used as handy examples for an orator for his
speech, and therefore, the thought of fable is more important than narration, so the
descriptions of settings have been largely omitted.

5.8 Myths in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
The geography and locale of both the texts are similar (if we consider the previous
stated arguments of the scholars that, the northern region of India is the place of creation
of Pañcatantra.) Both the countries have huge mountains, rivers, sea, and thick forest etc.
Both the cultures have similarity in their basic archetypes. That is the reason why both the
cultures worship natural elements; both have personified and mythologized them. Both
are Polytheistic; and idol worshipers. Both consider king as a representative of God. Both
cultures have fighting spirit, huge kingdoms, and cremation after death. Both are
worshipers of beauty and art – aesthete.
As it has been previously mentioned, the famous anthropologist of nineteenth

century James Frazer believed that the symbols, image, rituals and myths have been
developed since primitive times. He has argued this logic in his book The Golden Bough.
He shows a general development of modes of thought from magical to the religious and
finally to the scientific or the trace of human consciousness from the primitive to the
civilized. In simpler way we could understand that, the primitive people observed some
natural phenomena again and again. They were astonished and they tried to find reason
behind them. When they failed to understand them, they feared them and named them
magic. When the fear subsided and they became somewhat social, they named them
religion. When they came closer and became civilized, they named them science. On a
larger it can be said that the roots of myths are as deep as human history.
Regarding the similarity in geography of both the countries, there are the same
natural elements, same type of utilization and need, same types of challenges etc. Since
the primitive period of both the cultures, the most affecting elements of human life were
water, fire, air, sun, moon, trees, mountains, rain, rivers etc. The need of such elements
created deep impact on human life. The basic archetypes were derived from such
elements. As it has been mentioned earlier that essentiality of water developed a sense of
gratitude, which is converted into its personification and mythologized as a God. This is
the case with other elements also. Both the cultures believed that fire has power to
annihilate and purify. So both the culture has rituals of cremation after death.
In primitive time, muscle power had greater importance. So both the cultures have
image of supremely powerful legendary characters like, Hanumāna and Bhima in India,

or Heracles in Greece. They are not only similar in the matter of assigned power but the
related myths are almost the same. All of them are demi-Gods; Their mother or father
were human beings but all of them were born from the person other than their own
fathers. The real fathers of three of them were Gods. It is really interesting that not only
the legends and their quality match but the myths of their birth are also quite similar.
There is also another archetype that, the stars can affect human life. So both the countries
have myths of astrology that can be seen in both the texts. Moreover the distinction is that
Greek follows zodiac system as per the rotation of the sun while Indian follows the
rotation of the moon. Apart from image and idea depicted in myth, there is a very good
example of transformation of archetypes into myth. It is personification of eternal values
like: the Truth, the Untruth, the Good, and the Evil. Some other elements like the God of
Wealth, the Tree God, the God of Pond, etc are also important aspects of myths.
Both the texts have used mythical characters. The use of such characters adds the
flavor of wonder and curiosity to the story. Mythical characters have a typical image in
the mind of audience that helps them to connect with the story. Besides the audience
needs no further information about such characters. Otherwise it is a difficult task to
portray a character with the element of wonder, because it requires detailed elaboration to
set them in audience‟s mind. The use of mythical characters also helps to reduce „why‟
element. The question „why‟ arises in the mind of audience, as „Why does somebody
behave so?‟ „Why did they do this?‟ or „Why they don‟t do this‟? All these things need
much longer explanation. While here an author has not much scope to deal with this
„why‟ element. So, they use mythical characters. They are familiar to all, audience are
aware of their magical powers, nature and characteristics. They take them for granted
without questioning.
Both texts have many mythical characters. Pañcatantra starts with offering the
prayer to mythical Gods of learning and wisdom and many other personified Gods as
Brhmā, Kārtikey (son of Çiva), Viṣṇu, Vaṛṇa (water), Yamarāj (God of Death) , Indra
(King of Deities), Kubera (God of wealth), Chandramā (the moon), Surya (the sun),
Sarasvati (Goddess of Learning), four Oceans, Mountains or four Ages (Satyuga, Tretā,
Dwāpar and Kaliyuga),Vāyu (wind), Prithavi (earth), Nāga (snakes), Nadi (Rivers)
Açvinikumāra, Mahālakṣmi, Diti and Aditi and their sons, Matṛgana(goddesses) Four
Vedas, all the religious Places, Yagna, Ganapatī, Eight Vasus and Munis (Saints). Out of
these, following are Natural Elements like: Vaṛṇa (Water), Kubera (deity of Wealth),

Prithavi (Earth), Nāga (Snakes), Nadi (Rivers) four Oceans, Mountains or four Ages
(Satyuga, Tretā, Dwāpar, Kaliyuga) Chandramā (Moon), Surya (Sun) etc. Myth of
Nārada Muni is derived from Purāṇas. Nārada is a curious saint and a great Bhakta of
Lord Viṣṇu. The myth of deity of Fate is used in Pañcatantra, in the story of weaver
Somalīka. It is a myth that deity of Fate writes people‟s destiny according to their deeds.
In the same story, personification of meritorious deed and sin are portrayed. There is a
myth of God of wealth „Nīdhī‟. This myth represents the personification of wealth. In the
myth of Kubera, he has nine servants in a form of treasure. Here treasure is called
„Padmanīdhī‟. In the story of a Barber, he hits the Jain monks with a stick on his head to
get wealth. Here wealth is personified in the form of deity. Indian mythology accepts the
supremacy of three Gods, Brhmā, Viṣṇu and Çiva. It is a myth that this trinity is a creator,
preserver and destroyer. Brhmā is a creator, Viṣṇu is a preserver and Çiva is a destroyer.
There are also myths about incarnation of lord Viṣṇu. These types of myths are frequently
used in Pañcatantra.
In Aesop's Fables, Zeus, he is the supreme deity of all and the father of many
other Gods and Goddesses. According to ancient Roman and Greek religion and myth,
Zeus or Jove is the king of the Gods, and the God of sky and thunder. As the patron deity
of ancient Greek, commanded over laws and social order. He was one of three Gods of
the Capitoline Triad, along with Hera and Athena. Another important Goddess is Hera,
the protector and special counselor of the state. She is the daughter of Saturn and sister
(but also the wife) of the chief God Zeus and the mother of Mars and Vulcan. Another
important Goddess is Athena. She was the virgin Goddess of poetry, medicine, wisdom,
commerce, weaving, crafts, magic, and the inventor of music. She is often depicted with
her sacred creature, an owl, which symbolizes her ties to wisdom. Heracles is the God of
power and strength. He represents masculine strength which is extremely important in
those days. Another important God is Hermes the messenger of God and the God of trade
the son of Maia Maiestas and Zeus. Hermes has influenced the names of many things in a
variety of scientific fields, such as the planet Hermes, and the element Hermes with his
Roman name Mercury. A Poseidon is an important Greek deity. He is the brother of Zeus
and Pluto, each of them presiding over one of the three realms of the universe, Heaven,
Earth and the Netherworld. Poseidon was associated with fresh water. Poseidon was
worshipped by the Romans also as a God of horses, the creator of the first bull. Another
important Greek God is Momus, the God of satire, mockery, censure, writers and poets.

He symbolizes the spirit of sarcasm and criticism. Goddess Aphrodite is one of the most
widely referred deities of Greek mythology. Her functions encompass love, beauty, sex,
fertility and prosperity. According to Roman mythology, she was the mother of the
Roman people through her son Aeneas. Apollo is one of the important Greek deities. He
has been variously recognized as a God of light and the sun, truth and prophecy, healing,
plague, music and poetry. Apollo is the son of Zeus and Leto who has twin sister called
the chaste huntress Artemis. Frazer terms myth as “the experience of the world by the
primitive people”.
Both the texts have used many mythical characters but there are some differences
in use of these characters. In Pañcatantra, most of the mythical characters appear as
referential character or sub-ordinate characters. The very few fables have mythical
characters as protagonist or one of the main characters. On the contrary in Aesop's Fables
most of the mythical characters appear as the protagonist or main character of the story.
The use of mythical characters in Aesop’s Fables is really commendable. Here the author
accepts the pre-conceived characteristics of the characters and creates some wonderful
stories. But there is also a condition that the direct uses of such mythical characters make
them more human-like. The author has put all virtues and vices of human nature.
Northrop Frye, in 1950s; developed his theory based on the theories Frazer and
Jung. He has established whole system of literary archetypal criticism. He depicts his
theory as portraying rhythms in the world; there is natural cycle, the rhythms of the world
of the nature. In nature we have the seasonal rhythms like, spring, summer, autumn and
winter and durinal rhythms as dawn, noon and night and in human life like birth,
marriage, death, dissolution. In the organic cycle of human life, there is a single pattern of
significance, out of which myth constructs a central narrative around a figure which is
partly the sun, partly vegetative fertility and partly a God or archetypal human beings. As
per the tone of both the texts and its motif, it can be concluded that, texts fall in the genre
of satire. According to Northrop Fyre, satire represents the darkness, winter and
dissolution phase, myth of the triumph of these powers, myth of floods and the return of
chaos and of the defeat of hero and subordinate characters.
Freud and Jung both believed that the collective unconscious was the instinctual
expression. There are some basic instincts that create archetypes which are elaborated in
myths, symbols, images and rituals. Primitive people have created rituals to please their

Gods. They offer them their favorite things, they sacrifice men and animals, they sing for
them, dance for them, they have created festivals for them. With all these means they
believe that their Gods will be pleased and grant them whatever they want. With all these
rituals they mythologize the idea of pleasing their Gods. There is whole set of ritual
myths. Primitive people have mythologized specific ways to please specific Gods like
cremation after death. Greek people used to put coins on the eyes of dead body in order to
give it to ferryman who takes them across the river from earth to heaven. Indian people
also have rituals of „Pindadān‟. According to Hindu belief, the soul of the dead wanders
after death until „Pindadān‟ is performed. It frees the dead from the cycle of birth and
death.
Both the texts have used same types of image and symbols. Both the texts have
similar hierarchy of animal kingdom. Aesop has used his characters not as mere
characters but they are mythical symbols also. His characters are representatives of
particular type. Aesop used them as common noun like; a lion, a wolf, an ass etc. Aesop‟s
characters represent the whole race and behind his character there lies mythical symbols
which are rooted in public mindset very deeply. While in Pañcatantra each character has
been given his own particular name matching his or her characteristics. In both the texts
lion is the king of jungle, in both the texts jackal is shrewd and clever. Now at the very
first stage, there is no logic behind any wild animal‟s appearance as a king, yet something
is still there. When the author portrays a lion as the king of jungle, everybody is easily
convinced that lion is a king of jungle. Not only Greek people but all over the world it is
accepted that lion is a king of jungle because a lion represents kinghood. So behind this
rationale logic there is still something which is wide-spread belief that connects the
accepted symbols and that is what we call Archetypes. In the same way all the characters
that represent their characteristics are symbols which have largely been accepted by the
whole race. These types of symbols also contain geographical elements as in those days.
For example it was quite impossible for people to live on high of mountains so they
believed their Gods were very powerful and they lived on mountains like mount Olympus
for the Greek people and Mt. Kailāsa for the Indian people. They both believed that
deities lived on them. Almost all the mythologies have myths of Heaven and Hell. These
myths inspire human beings to follow righteous deeds. In Greek mythology Pluto is the
commanding God of Hell while in India Yamarāj is commanding God of Hell. Astrology
is the unique myth in Indian and Greek culture. In India it is a specific branch in the Vedic

scriptures. There is a calculative method of position and movement of zodiac signs for
forecasting. Both the texts have used this myth in their stories. There are also many image
regarding birds. Greek people consider an owl as a knowledgeable and solitary bird. In
Pañcatantra the third Tantra refers to the crow as a knowledgeable bird. There is a myth
of speaking tree and the tree emerges as a witness and it gives justice. There are many
myths in the Indian mythology regarding trees, for example, the „Çamī‟ tree is portrayed
as a witness and a judge in the story of credulous friend while the „mulberry‟ tree passes
judgment on a murderer in Aesop’s Fables. Primitive people have mythologized specific
ways to please specific Gods. Thus there are many myths in both the texts which indicate
such acts. The rituals may be established with specific idea but later it they transformed
into customs and traditions. It is also a mode of Collective Unconsciousness. In many
fables Zeus is introduced and many characters try to please him. Zeus is the king of the
Gods and most powerful among celestial beings. He has the authority to choose a king
among worldly beings. Once, Zeus made proclamation to offer him in order to obtain
something. It is also elaborated in Aesop's Fables that whatever you may offer, with true
heart, it will please God. In Pañcatantra there is the myth of Mantras. Indian Holy
Scriptures like the Vedas and Purāṇas are in verse form. When these verses are chanted
in specific manner they are called Mantras. It is the myth that by regular practice of
chanting such Mantras, one can please certain Gods, and in return, can achieve some
supernatural powers.
In the same way there are lots of resemblances in both the mythologies. The
similarity in their archetypes is the main reason of it. Along with some similarities, there
are some discrepancies also. They are because of local and milieu of particular time. The
study of myths encompasses many aspects in them; it is more connected with cultural and
religious matter. As religion and culture change, certain concepts of myths also change or
it can be said that out of archetypes, myths generate and from myth religions get shape.
There is a myth in Indian religion that the earth is situated on the hood of python named
Sheshanāga; similarly, in Greece there is a myth that Heracles holds earth on his
shoulders. The myth in both the cultures is different but the basic archetype behind the
myth that earth is safe in some powerful hands has similarity. Both cultures feel safe in
being in the hands of their powerful deities. As both the cultures have myth of
personification of elements, they both are Idol worshiper. The people of both the cultures

are idol-worshipers. Personified many natural elements into deities and they believe in
multiple deities. Both the peoples-Greeks and the Indians (Hindu) are polytheistic.
5.9 Craftsmanship in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables
The language of fables is satirical, simple and colloquial with lots of sayings and
proverbs. Fable is the genre, where there a free play of imagination on author‟s part.
Similarly, there are no serious discussions or philosophical arguments, no pedantic
treatment required. In that case, Aesop’s Fables have enriched literature with great
amount of proverbs and sayings. Many of his characters have become iconic, the titles
have become references and morals have become proverbs. Critics commended the fables
for their simplicity, humour, sharpness, and wisdom, and for the literary quality of
particular productions. On the other hand, Sanskrit literature has generally been
segmented into three style of writing, Vaidarbhī, Gaudī and Pañchalī. Pañcatantra has
been written in Vaidarbhī style. There can be no doubt that the work is the creation of an
artist. Language of Pañcatantra is effortless but efficient and intermingling of
epigrammatic verses and prose. Verses have largely been written in Anuçtup Chhaṅda
(Gnomic Stanza). In addition, some are in Vasantalatīkā, Çārdūlvikridīt and Stragadhara.
Verses have been frequently used but they are simple and mostly to present the doctrine
or philosophy of the author. Sometimes it indicates moral or essence of the tale. The use
of verse makes preaching more interesting and easy to remember.
In general, the author‟s craft can be appraised by following parameters.
 Point of view
 Patterned responses (repeated for effect)
 Assigning human characteristics to animal, plants and objects
 Personification (a figure of speech in which animals, ideas, or things are
represented with human qualities)
 Dialogues
 Abstract truths conveyed concisely (in few words)
 Instructive voice (providing direction or useful information)
 Evidence of human insight

In Aesop’s Fables, each fable is told from the point of view of an
omniscient narrator. The narrator, presumed to be Aesop, tells the fables the way one
would tell a joke at a party. Each tale shows wit and insight into the nature of its
characters, the most interesting thing about the point of view in the collection is the
moralist approach. The morals provided with the fables were never a part of the original
tales. Orators who used the fables to drive home their point usually attached the morals at
a later date, while the point of view of Pañcatantra is realistic. It is narrated through the
main characters of chief story of the Tantras. There are stories within story; in such
panorama the frame story is one more creditable aspect of author‟s writing. Stories are
connected with each other in each Tantra. There is a main story and its characters that tell
main story, tell many other sub-stories, sometimes it becomes difficult to follow main
story because of such digression, but apart from this Pañcatantra has very interesting
story line.
In assigning human qualities to their characters both the texts have made a
benchmark, both the texts are identical in the genre of fables. What make a story a fable is
their characters and morals. Both the texts have huge variety of characters. They are from
each corner of their regions. The animals which are portrayed in Aesop's Fables are
common animals of domestic live stock and wild life while in Pañcatantra mostly the
characters of wild life are used because most of the animals in the fables have forest as
their back ground. Both the texts have very little use of marine animals. However, it can
be understood for Pañcatantra that it was written in northern part of India, which is far
from costal area but Aesop was born in Samos, one of the islands of Greece. This means
he has seen marine animals frequently yet in his stories very few stories refer to about
marine animals. In comparison with Pañcatantra, Aesop‟s Fables have more number of
animal characters but as his characters are static and flat, there is no development in them.
They are on portrayed exterior level. They behave according to their basic instincts,
having no depth and complexity. On the other hand, in Pañcatantra characters are more
dynamic and more humanlike having each complexity and variety of human nature.
The personification of characters seems large in the Aesop‟s Fables than that of
Pañcatantra. Besides some natural elements and eternal values, there are some domestic
common objects that have been personified in the Aesop’s Fables. In Pañcatantra there
are some natural elements and eternal values that are personified. There is no physical
object that has been personified and used as a character in Pañcatantra.

The characters of Pañcatantra are dynamic like their dialogues. There is some
difference in style of narration in both the texts. Pañcatantra has a larger scope of
dialogue because the stories are narrated through the mouths of characters while Aesop's
Fables have been narrated through description and so there is little scope of effective
dialogues. In Pañcatantra there are many sayings, proverbs and morals which have been
articulated through the mouths of characters. Especially in the third Tantra the council of
king of crows, there are some interesting discussions about politics and diplomacy. There
characters of Pañcatantra are frequently found sharing Çubhāçit (wise sayings) with one
other.
Both the texts are equally successful in conveying abstract truths concisely. As the
stories of Pañcatantra are longer in length, there is more elaboration. The
personifications and use of myths are very good examples of detailed elaboration.
Both the texts have instructive voice. In Aesop's Fables at the end of each fable, a
message or an instruction appears, while in Pañcatantra instructive voice is frequent. At
each phase of the story an instruction appears in verse form. Verses are frequently used
but they are simple and mostly to express some philosophical doctrine or message by the
author. Sometimes it indicates moral or essence of the tale. The use of verses makes
preaching more interesting and easy to remember. The tone of both the texts is witty and
satirical as the use of animals and birds as characters creates humour. In both the works,
there is a brilliant patchwork of interesting story telling, mild humour, symbolism and
pragmatic moral message and diplomacy.

References
Aldridge A. O., Comparative Literature: Matter and Method, University of Illinois press,
1969
Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
Davids T. W. Buddhist Birth Stories (Jataka Tales), London G. Routledge1880
Foster E.M. Aspects of the Novel. Pelican Books, 1970
Jack Zipes, et, al, The Norton Anthology Of Children's Literature, New York: 2005
Keith A.B. The Development and History of Sanskrit Literature. Sanjay Prakashan New
Delhi, 2002
Perry, B. E. (translator), Babrius and Phaedrus. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

1965
Prawer S.S. Comparative Literary Studies: An Introduction. Duckworth, 1973
Rhys Ernest, Introduction of Fables, Aesop and Others London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd. :
E.P. Dutton & Co. Inc., 1953
Wells H.G. The Outline of History (Ch.-20, ‘The Aryan-Speaking People in

Prehistoric Time) 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1921

Estudio Comparativo Fábulas de Esopo

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Estudio Comparativo Fábulas de Esopo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter: V

Comparative Genre Study of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s

The Caucasoid people were usually divided in three groups on

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

The difference in culture and literature is seen is because of social and

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

(11th edition, Article on fable)

What is at present known, then, with respect to the so-called Aesop’s

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

We have accordingly a great field of possibilities; borrowing of India

Studies of literary tradition involve genre-study too, as well as

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

Many of the striking analogies that appear in studies may, of course,

5.2 The Authors and the Texts

There is no doubt about antiquity of both these texts. It is confirmed by many

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

5.3 Purpose of Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

There is also similar anecdote related to Aesop’s Fables. According to the

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

realistic. Pañcatantra advocates the doctrine of " " (shrewdness

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

5.4 Themes in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables

In comparative study of literature, theme is a very important aspect of the study.

...comparatists have always felt very much at home, despite repeated

 Instructive messages about human follies

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

doctrine of " " (shrewdness should be faced by being shrewd). But

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

Abdullh Ibn al Muqaffa translated Pañcatantra from Pahelvi to Arabic in

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

Such study of theme and motif may be seen as the literary

5.5 Plot Construction in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables

 Usually one incident or happening.

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

Besides being a book of political science and Nītiçāstra, Pañcatantra is also a

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

(Plot Pattern in Pañcatantra) (Plot Pattern in Aesop’s Fables)

(Dramatic Plot Pattern) (Story Arc Plot Pattern)

In 'Dramatic Plot Pattern' after Exposition, there is an element of conflict. From

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

5.6 Characters in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables

Characters are very important part of fables. They are anthropomorphism of

 Animals, plants and objects are assigned with human characteristics

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

In above mentioned parameters both the texts have made benchmark in

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

Aesop‟s characters behave in accordance with action and reaction. As in one

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

In comparison with Pañcatantra, Aesop’s Fables has more number of

The main difference in depicting human characters in Aesop's Fables and

PARASHAR VYAS. PhD. THESES2016. DOC

5.7 Settings in Pañcatantra and Aesop’s Fables

Setting is a backdrop in which the story is set. It is an environment that provides,

 Time and setting are vague