Nalanda University

[J.B. Sharma]

Swaminathan,
 I have no problem with what 'reputed scholars' or you think of HT
magazine or any other theory, as I believe that you (or 'they') have
good reasons for it. I  This was not the point of my post. I wished
to comment on the process and methodology of 'historical science'; no
more and no less.
  As for citations, your question seeking them is unclear as to
citations for what ? Furthermore I dont want to be drawn into a
debate where I have not made up my mind on the propositions involved.
As energetic young scholars do more work and there is more input from
areas like the Human Genome Project (to establish movement of people
in ancient times), Archeology,  Geology, Linguistics etc to create a
coherent model, the propositions in question are undecideable and we
can only ascribe likelihoods to each possibility (as yet). I really
have no more to add to that.
Regards,
J.B. Sharma


 > ---"J.B. Sharma" <jsharma at HERMES.GC.PEACHNET.EDU> wrote:
> > The magazine "Hinduism Today" has a timeline of
> > ancient Indian history which I doubt is contributed by the above
> > mentioned folks.
>
> HT is highly populist in nature. Reputed scholars say
> "HT butters its bread on both sides" and HT "characteristically
> long on self-promotion, and SHORT on research and facts".
>
> Leonard Reuter does not ring a bell. Please give me the URL.
> As far as I can find, Frawley and Kak are the forerunners
> of the so called "competent theory on ancient India". Give me some
> citations from University publications.
>
> Swaminathan Madhuresan
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> DO YOU YAHOO!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>