astronomy

[Koenraad Elst]

Dr. A. Karp, Dr.N. Ganesan et al.,

As I already wrote, so your quotation confirms: post-Alexandrine Indian
science is replete with Greek influence.  But not pre-Alexandrine Indian
science.  The names of the Zodiac signs semantically match the Babylonian
names but are pure Sanskrit, except that Mina,
"Pisces", is a Dravidian loan.  If it is correct that Dravidian influence
only appears in the mid-Rg-Vedic period (FBJ Kuiper), then we might deduce
that this one name, at least, is not older than that.  One can imagine that
for some
reason of fashion, Mina replaced an older Matsya or so, but that is pure
conjecture, and unlikely given the typical conservativeness of constellation
names.  So, perhaps this Dravidian input makes for a terminus postquem, but
it was at any rate centuries before Alexander and the influx of Greek ideas.

As for the ratio 3:2 between longest day and shortest night, this is equally
valid for places like Srinagar and Kabul, not just Babylon.  None other than
Rajesh Kochhar (The Vedic People, p.113) considers it "hard to believe" and
"unlikely" that such an observed value would have been transferred from
Babylon, overruling personal observation in India (or Afghanistan, as he
prefers) itself.  Moreover, measuring time with precision was more
difficult than measuring spatial degrees of arc in the sky even with the
naked eye, so we have to take this "18 muhurtas" (of a total of 30, hence
ratio 3:2) of the Vedanga Jyotisha with a pinch of salt, or rather with a
tolerance for serious inaccuracy, substantially widening the latitudinal
belt where this "measurement" might have been taken.  Note that
astrophysicist Kochhar confirms "about 1400 BC" (p.112) as the date of the
Vedanga Jyotisha.

The question about archaeo or literary evidence of astro observation is
important, and I join you in inviting more information about it.  But my
impression is that Vedic astronomy largely predated the technical stage.
Thus, the lunar asterisms are chosen for plain conspicuousness, even when
that means preferring a clear star pattern removed by ten degrees from the
ecliptic to an inconspicuous one lying right on the ecliptic; preferring
clear pictures in the sky over drab mathematically useful data (this in
contrast with the Chinese system).  Just my impression, for Subhash Kak's
work, by contrast, suggests a pre-existing advanced tradition of
observational astronomy.

Yours sincerely,
Koenraad Elst

http://members.xoom.com/KoenraadElst/