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

[rajam]

I add ...

Dear Ms. Wessels-Mevissen,

AND .... You should have the courage to challenge that "well known  
archeologist" ... if you felt that his belief in your support of his  
research was fake/unfair. :-)

++++++++++++++++++++++

Respected Colleagues,

Yes, please ... whether you are an old timer or a "new kid on the  
block" ... kindly avoid making sweeping, flippant, unsubstantiated  
remarks about any culture/language you study, especially when it is  
not pertinent to the topic under focus.

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


On Oct 15, 2011, at 12:41 PM, Corinna Wessels-Mevissen wrote:

> Respected Colleagues,
> I had apologized beforehand ("sorry to say...") and will do this  
> once more. This was a general statement not immediately connected  
> with the decipherment of "va-y(a)-ra", but drawn from my own -  
> quite recent - experience, when a well-known archaeologist (not to  
> name here) had even given my name in support of an - in my view -  
> untenable new dating attempt. (In this case, Brahmi was not involved.)
> But please excuse me, I should better not have conflated these  
> matters!
> Best wishes,
> Corinna
>
> Von: rajam <rajam at EARTHLINK.NET>
> An: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
> Gesendet: 21:25 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
>
> More than that ... Dear JLC,
>
> 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! :-)
>
> Best wishes,
> V.S. Rajam
> (www.letsgrammar.org)
>
> On Oct 15, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Jean-Luc CHEVILLARD wrote:
>
>> Dear Corinna Wessels-Mevissen,
>>
>> can you explain more in details
>> why you are sceptical with the decipherment
>> "va-y(a)-ra".
>>
>> Every comment is important, at this stage, ...
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> -- jlc
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16/10/2011 00:30, 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 ac-ra"ceptance. 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/20111015/172fb412/attachment.htm>