Mnemonics in Ancient India - AitAar

[Arlo Griffiths]

Dear Steve,

I second Dominik's words entirely.

    As I also wrote in a personal email, I think that --- valuable as the
discussion you have started is --- it would be appropriate for you to
present arguments/evidence, instead of continuing to make bold statements
against Falk's work in the discussion (also at
http://www.safarmer.com/pico/abstract.html "recent claims that writing did
not enter India until the mid-third century BCE  are rejected on strong
evidential grounds"), without actually presenting the 'strong' evidence
which you claim to have. This is unfair to Falk.

-- Arlo Griffiths

CNWS / Instituut Kern
Universiteit Leiden
Postbus 9515
2300 RA  Leiden
the Netherlands

tel.: +31-71-5272979


----------
>From: Dominik Wujastyk <ucgadkw at UCL.AC.UK>
>To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK
>Subject: Re: Mnemonics in Ancient India - AitAar
>Date: din, 23 mei 2000 1:24 PM
>

> On Sun, 21 May 2000, Steve Farmer wrote:
>
>> Proof is tough, but that's true in every scientific discipline. All
>> you can do when an historical issue is ambiguous is weigh the evidence
>> on both sides and make a tentative judgment.
>
> But this is exactly what Falk has been doing, surely.  Falk has looked
> longer and harder at the issue of ancient Indian writing than any other
> living scholar I can think of, except perhaps Richard Salomon.  He has
> personally walked to all the known Asokan inscription sites.  He has
> developed very interesting arguments based on graphic variablility in the
> Asokan inscriptions, etc. etc.
>
> Patrick is a much respected colleague and friend, and I'm sure he would be
> the first to agree that you can't present his informal conversational
> musings on this topic at the same level as Falk's extensive and sustained
> scholarly enquiry.
>
>> especially when some of the most important adherents of non-mainsteam
>> views are no longer on this list?
>
> To whom are you referring?  The people I have had to unsubscribe for rude
> behaviour number no more than about four people, and none of them -- if I
> recall -- contributed to the present topic in past discussions.  The
> INDOLOGY membership still stands at over 600 people.  I don't think you
> can really sustain a view that this list is somehow lacking in people with
> diverse views and a willingness to discuss scholarly issues energetically,
> even in sharp disagreement.  My policy about rudeness is exactly that; it
> has nothing to do with supressing views of one or other faction.
>
> --
> Dominik Wujastyk
> Founder, INDOLOGY list.