ELDER SANSKRIT AND TAMIL LITERATURE
Friends,
Indus Archeology and Dravida or Aryan Contrversy.
As per Linguists and Indologists, Both Aryan And Dravidian Language speakers came to India from Out of India, and Caldwell went on to say
Dravidam- Dramizham-thramizam-Tamilam –Tamil is the Development.
Indus and now other much more Ancient Sites have been found, dating upto BCE7,000. And No Outside visitors help for Civilisation development is found to Indigenous. All sites found as later than Indus- does not show the City type as Harappa or Mohanjadaro; whether Aadhichanallur or others; hence to call a section of people as Aryan or Dravidian is not relay supported by Archeology.
I am reading much more on Dechipherment and my Much Detailed Posting would follow shortly.
Aravindanji- I am awaiting your links on Horse Domestication. Aravindanji can You please enlighten us the Scholarly views on the Alleged Dechiphetrment by the Tamilnadu Govt. Tamil Akaramudali Project Director- R.Mathivanan.
Aravindanji wanted my views on Sankrit Influence on Tamil Sangam Lit. and that my view on Pro.Hart’s books, Friends- Prof. Vaiapuri Pillai’s Research Articles still valued highly, and I will put the views of Communist writers over ThaniTamil Researchers, whose books are completely rejected by Scholars, where as VaiapuriPillai’s are still valued Highly.
Prof.Kamil Zevilabil has dated Tamil Sangam Lit (Pavanar prefers Pandaya instead of Sangam as Sangam is Sanskrit), and the article is already put in this thread, and Zevilabil’s dates go almost close to VaiapuriPillai- such as Tirukural to 575CE, etc.,
It would be ideal for All Tamils to know Sangam Lit., most of them are available in net at
www.chennainetwork.com
www.tamil.net/projectmadurai and can see how much of Vedas and Sanskrit Lit. has influenced them, my earlier posting I have given with reference to Vedas, being referred, I had given only less than 10%, the name SamaVeda is referred by name etc., my detailed postings would follow shortly.
Mahadevan wanted Tamil words in Bible, and Aravindanji was against my use of word Deception by Church; Mahadevan-Please read my all posts in this thread- Tirukural thread, Tamil roots for Sanskrit Thread etc., But again a detailed posting would follow shortly.
Aravindanji’s postings are of very high Scholarly; but still represents the Meaningless Political claims said by Un-objective Scholars, here and there.
Aravindanji I Look for Your Posting on Mathivanan’s Dechipherment.
MosesSolomon
Dating Tamil, and other things
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Caldwell went on to say
Dravidam- Dramizham-thramizam-Tamilam –Tamil is the Development.
People like Caldwell were revolutionary for their day, but there is really little point in clinging on to the views of scholars of centuries past, when we now have so much more linguistic data to work on. Much of what Caldwell said has been superseded by newer research. For example, most scholars now believe that "Dravida" was simply a Sanskritisation of "Tamil".
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
hence to call a section of people as Aryan or Dravidian is not relay supported by Archeology.
It is pretty clear that the Indo-Aryan languages and the Dravidian languages represent two entirely different language families. It is also pretty clear that there have been several rounds of migration into India, separated by vastly different periods of time. The linguistic evidence points to a lack of contact between speakers of Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages before they each entered India. The archaelogical evidence points to a progressively increasing degree of contact and mingling between these peoples after both were established in India. There is, unfortunately, the famous "South Asian archaelogical black hole" - a period of a few centuries in relation to which we have almost no significant archaelogical evidence - which severly limits our ability to use only archaelogy to understand what was going on in India. The literary evidence, however, points to a period when the mutual influence was pretty minimal and the cultures diverged fairly significantly.
There are a range of conclusions one can draw from these individual pieces of evidence as to the contexts in which it makes sense to speak of "Aryan" and "Dravidian" in India. For a range of scholarly writings (and some different opinions) on this point, I recommend Aryan and Non-Aryan in India, edited by M.M. Deshpande and P.E. Hook. The book was published in 1979, but much of the scholarship in it is still fresh and not out-dated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Aravindanji- I am awaiting your links on Horse Domestication.
I will do so in a while - I have a very demanding full-time job and family commitments, and that doesn't give me as much time to spend here as I would like. Digging through my notes for the Hub is unfortunately fairly low down on my list of priorities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Aravindanji can You please enlighten us the Scholarly views on the Alleged Dechiphetrment by the Tamilnadu Govt. Tamil Akaramudali Project Director- R.Mathivanan.
I'm not sure why you're bringing up Mathivanan's work, since it's not something I've ever adverted to. As I understand it, linguists have raised two objections to Mathivanan's decipherment. The first is that he reads the script from left to right, although most scholars believe it was written from right to left, on the basis of the the form of the marks on seals showing the direction in which the signs on them were cut. The second is his methodology of assigning phonetic values to signs, which is said to lack rigour - the syllable he chooses to represent the phonetic value of each pictogram is not always obvious, it is said, and the system results in a large number of signs representing identical values, which is said to be counter-intuitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Aravindanji wanted my views on Sankrit Influence on Tamil Sangam Lit. and that my view on Pro.Hart’s books, Friends- Prof. Vaiapuri Pillai’s Research Articles still valued highly, and I will put the views of Communist writers over ThaniTamil Researchers, whose books are completely rejected by Scholars, where as VaiapuriPillai’s are still valued Highly.
As Prof. Hart points out, there are a number of problems in Vaiyappuri Pillai's work and particularly his dating, which are largely a consequence of Pillai's rather outdated world-view, assigning priority to Sanskrit. It is also worth noting that Vaiyappuri Pillai did not use scientific methods in dating Tamil literature - it was his student M. Shanmugan who first started trying to see how they could be applied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Prof.Kamil Zevilabil has dated Tamil Sangam Lit (Pavanar prefers Pandaya instead of Sangam as Sangam is Sanskrit), and the article is already put in this thread, and Zevilabil’s dates go almost close to VaiapuriPillai- such as Tirukural to 575CE, etc.
Prof. Zvelebil's datings are consistently several centuries later than those of other Dravidologists, such as Prof. Hart. There is a reason for this, having to do with their methodologies - Prof. Zvelebil places much weight on the relationship between the themes of Tamil and Prakrit poetry and argues that they must be close in date. Prof. Hart, on the other hand, argues that this need not be so, and quite convincingly that the Prakrit poetry is a later manifestation of the same tradition as the Tamil poetry. Prof. Hart places more weight on early Tamil epigraphy and historical references in later Tamil literature to date Sangam literature. His methodology strikes me as being superior, although it assigns significantly later dates to Sangam works than I would like to believe. As I keep saying, though, the Adichanallur excavations have thrown open the entire question, and until we have a final dating of those, all discussions are hypothetical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Mahadevan wanted Tamil words in Bible, and Aravindanji was against my use of word Deception by Church;
I am aware of some Hebrew words thought to be of Tamil origin (such as "tukki" for peacock), which is hardly surprising, given that potshards with Tamil inscriptions have been found in sites on the Red Sea. As far as the rest of it goes - in a separate thread, please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solomon
Aravindanji’s postings are of very high Scholarly; but still represents the Meaningless Political claims said by Un-objective Scholars, here and there.
Could you please point to which "meaningless claims" I reiterate? Rejecting the unproven (and in my view, ridiculous) thesis that Sanskrit is the pure, unsullied root of all Indian civilisation, on the basis that it is unproven and contradicts what we know of ancient India, is hardly political.
INDUS PICTOGRAMS-MATHIWANAN'S FORGERY
Friends,
Mr.FSG had given excessive importance to R.Mathivanan’s alleged Deciphering of Indus Pictogram Symobls as Clear Tamil.
I had then explained it was false reading wrongly the script is Originally from Right to Left [like Arabi and Hebrew] by reading it from Left to right, total Upsurd. Let Us Thank Mr.Aravindan for Confirming it.
Friends, FSG also in another post said Mathivanan finding a BiLingual Seal of dated to 1600BCE, having both Indus and Brami inscriptions from Srilanka. THIRD RATE FORGERY and details are as follows.
Srilankan Seal was found by archaeological team led by K.Indrapala of the University of Jaffna excavated a megalithic burial complex at Anaikoddai in Jaffna District, SriLanka. In one of the burials, a metal seal was found assigned by the excavators to ca.3rd century B.C.
The Seal’s Brahmi portion is dechiphered as ko ve ta. Mathivanan, twisted this as tivu-ko, King of Island, again not in the Seal. By dating meaninglessly 300BCE Seal and Misreading to get a meaning are the Techiniques, Mathivanan further forgery continues.
A Metal Coin found near Alur in Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh. The circular thick coin (probably in lead) features a horse on the obverse and some illegible symbols on the reverse. Numismatic experts date it 200CE, Sathavana coin. Mathivanan’s Forgery- Drawing it reads it as Nanda from actually illegible as Nanda, calling it as Pre Mauryan period, i.e. the 300BCE Srilanka Seal as 1600 BCE and 200CE as somewhere close to 700BCE, claiming a Continuity. Third Rate Forgery Continues.
Forgery-3. Indus Script found in a Tribal Santhal village in Bihar
A Legendery claim was made 1993, by One Verma, that in Bihar Santhal Village, Indus Script is still alive and Deciphered words in Sanskrit, Hebrew, Persian-Arabic and English. Mr.Mathivanan took Verma and visited Santhal Village and Met the Temple Priest who was regularly wrinting with Indus Scripts. The Colour Photos in the Book of Mathiwanan were drawn on Recently Whitewashed Walls by learned man and not a Tribal, mostsly by seeing Published Seals. Another Worst Forgery.
Again earlier Verma read- so many Language words; now all are Tamil ofcourse with few IndoEuropean Loan words Tamilised also. MATHIWANAN also read it as LEFT TO RIGHT the Symbols actually written in opposite Direction.
Further Tamil has only 30 Letters; i.e., Vuyir 12 + Mei 18, But Indus has 419 Pictograms- Mathivanan has almost assigned 40 Symbols with single Tamil Letter. FORGERY TO the Core.
Friends- the method of Mathivanan was so sad for the Entire Indian Scholarship, and also as in his earlier book he has expressed all meaningless Linguistic Claims held by Pavanar (KumariKandam Legends & Natural Language), all this made his book as a laughing Stock in International Scholarship.
I shall explain on Potters Graffiti Techniques in my next posting and later Why Indus Deciphering claims of Parpola and I.MAhadevan are all Speculations, and for the present it be looked as Undeciphered and not Dravidian or Sanskrit.
Friends, The Political Cliamate in Tamilnadu helps these forgeries and I am Putting a detailed forgery In HIstorical Distorters Thread.
Friends, I regard Tamil And Sanskrit both have been developed in India, and as Rig Veda has close to 500 Tamil words, both are of equal Antiquity, but Tamil Literature available from 200BCE only whereas Sanskrit Vedas are from 2000BCE.
MosesSolomon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mod
You have been BANNED..!