Book review: Indus Age- the Writing System by Gregory L.Possehl.

[Vishal Agarwal]

----Original Message Follows----
From: Lars Martin Fosse <lmfosse at ONLINE.NO>
Subject: Re: Book review: Indus Age- the Writing System by Gregory
    L.Possehl.
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 18:00:59 +0200

Lars wrote:
I am
now trying to work out an epistemological argument related to these matters
for
a paper which I am preparing, and I am afraid that you will have to wait for
my
paper for a more detailed answer.

Vishal writes:
I really look foreward to your publication. Please post the reference when
it is published.

Lars wrote:
It is an argument if you explain why you dismiss the Pauranic accounts.
Since
you obviously distrust the invasionists, let me suggest that you read Dilip
K.
Chakrabarti on the Puranas in his book Colonial Indology. Ch. is not an
invasionist.

Vishal Writes:
Thanks for the reference. I did read the book in the last few days. The
author does admit that the Pauranic geneologies played a vital role in
constructing the history of Mauryas and Guptas. This should add to the
credibility of its accounts of other dynasties also. However, he discounts
Pauranic testimony for Pre-Buddhistic Indian history on the grounds that no
parallel sources (read Buddhist.) are available for verification. Besides,
archeological findings to date have not shown anything older than 7 Cent.
B.C.E.
However, he subsequently weakens this argument by pointing out later himself
that archeology in India is still in a very nascent state and for this, he
blames the eminent Historians Romila Thapar et al. As an example, he states
that modern Patna sits on top of Pataliputra, making excavations difficult.
Unfortunately, Dr. Chakrabarti has not alluded to Sri Talegiri's work (or
works of Frawley et al) in his text. To discount the astronomical data
quoted by Kak et al, he has merely quoted a generalized statement of
Winternitz (which has also been quoted ny his bete noire- Romila Thapar ad
nauseum) but the quotation cannot constitute an anti-proof by itself. The
book does make very interesting reading (and I would recommend it to all)
but does not have much bearing on the subject matter of the book by Talegiri
etc. because its treatment of Pauranik testimony is very tangential, to say
the least.
As for your comment- "Since you OBVIOUSLY distrust the Invasionists", let me
clarify that my only stance is that the AIT is not alluded to in the Vedic
literature, from whatever little I know of it as of now. And I do not accept
the works of Kak, Talegiri et al in toto.

Thanks for providing the reference.

Regards,

Vishal


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com