Porunthal: dating of paddy in the 5th century B.C. and possible consequences on the evaluation of the history of writing in India

[rajam]

Dear Colleagues,

I am NOT an archeologist, nor an expert on paleography or  
whatever ... . However, the statement, "Archaeologists, particularly  
in Tamilnadu, seem to be under a constant kind of pressure (or is it  
a mindset?) to "push back" so far established dates. They regularly  
come up with various attempts." needs some attention and  
substantiation. I wish genuine and serious scholars would stop making  
such flippant remarks! :-)

Tamils, as being one myself, have to go through a long way to prove  
ourselves to be worthy of something in a heavily non-Tamil oriented  
culture, anywhere in the world! That being the case, it is also worth  
demanding precise statements about our culture, I think.

Thanks and regards,
V.S. Rajam
(www.letsgrammar.org)

On Oct 15, 2011, at 12:00 PM, Corinna Wessels-Mevissen wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
> What I have seen in the circulated picture is just typical  
> "graffiti" we are getting on Iron Age to Early Historical Period  
> pottery in graves (urn burial and/or "Megalithic"). It has been  
> known since the 19th century. Sometimes it comes like a "code" or  
> intentional sequence. One should, of course, analyse it further,  
> but I fail to see a breakthrough in this one. (I had studied such  
> ceramics for my M.A. thesis back in the 80ies and have seen scores  
> of the typical pottery items, all without Brahmi writing.)
> Sorry to say this, but I would be always very careful, even  
> suspicious, believing this kind of "news" without looking into the  
> matter very closely. Actually, the original article should have  
> illustrated the example for everyone to see. Archaeologists,  
> particularly in Tamilnadu, seem to be under a constant kind of  
> pressure (or is it a mindset?) to "push back" so far established  
> dates. They regularly come up with various attempts.
> With best wishes,
> Corinna Wessels-Mevissen
>
> Von: Dipak Bhattacharya <dbhattacharya200498 at YAHOO.COM>
> An: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
> Gesendet: 18:06 Samstag, 15.Oktober 2011
> Betreff: Re: [INDOLOGY] Porunthal: dating of paddy in the 5th  
> century B.C. and possible consequences on the evaluation of the  
> history of writing in India
>
> Dear Colleagues,
> My apology that this is no additional light but the most common and  
> inevitable queries. Will the Porunthal discovery shorten the dark  
> gap between Asokan Brahmi and its supposed origin in the 800  
> century BCE phɶnician script? The claim of the Piprawa vase legend  
> as representing a pre-Asokan stage of Brahmi has not got universal  
> acceptance. The Porunthal relic too may offer and open up new  
> problems. If the claimed date is true it should represent an  
> intermediate stage which cannot be without visible signs.  
> Apparently it is ancient Tamil.  But unless it is proved to be  
> intermediate between Asokan Brahmi and the 800 century BCE  
> phɶnician script, the mostly accepted theory shall not be proved. I  
> tried but could not be sure that it could be regarded as  
> intermediate. I paste below the original legend and the modern  
> Tamil vayara. I would have been glad to paste an image of the same  
> word in ancient Tamil. In spite of my inability, it can be said  
> with confidence that Raja Raja Chola's va is not like the inital  
> diamond. I have no idea about RRC's ba of which I have no specimen.  
> The basic problem may be attempted from this meagre evidence, I think.
> “Evidences” and views on pre-Asokan Brahmi are a legion –  
> starting with at least K.P. Jayaswal and stretching up to at least  
> the late twentieth century. Going by previous experience I keep my  
> fingers crossed.  I wish I am proved wrong.
> Best wishes
> DB
> வயர (or வய்ர).



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20111015/a56ab796/attachment.htm>