Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

[shiv]

Here is a post made by ManishH many months ago that exposes some of the conclusions and assumptions made in phonetics. This post was in reply to my asking how on earth the Greek word "Kleos" could be "Sravas" in Sanskrit

2. Phonetic similarity : rhotacism in Indo-Iranian. The Sanskrit 'r' sound appears like 'l' sound in Greek
3. Palatalization with front vowels: a front vowel like 'e' can influence a velar like 'k' to be articulated near the palate to make it 'ś'

Manish said "r" can sound like "l". That is fine. And well known

Highly suspect is the assertion that a front vowel like "e" can affect "k" to make is "ś". You see folks, all these explanations are an exercise needed to make up a PIE word in which l and r can be interchanged and where an e can be associated with a k to say that Greeks kept the K, he RigVedadudes converted the e+k into sh.

So kleos allegedly becomes shreos/shravas
equus allegedly becomes ashwas

If you want to convert kleos to sravas, or equus into ashwa this is the way to do it. But I think this is rubbish and will provide a far more credible route of sound change

I can see no way "ek" or "ke" or "kh" can become "sh" or "s". There is no "natural human vocal tendency" to do that. "k" and "s" are so distinct and phono-mechanically separate that human languages have many words with "ks"(k+s) or "sk" (s+k). Skill, school, skull, skanda, ask, axe, akshay, score, accident, accept, kshatriya - the list is endless.

"ks" (k+s) is more difficult to pronounce at the beginning of a word - eg "kshitij", "kshatriya". That is why it might get simplified to "kh" as in "khatri". "ks" (k+s as in Xanadu) can become sanadu or zhanadu. But ka sound will not become sa sound by itself.

But the opposite is possible. sa can become ka. And here is how that can happen via normal vocal mechanisms.

There are many circumstances in which "sa can become "ha". Slurring of speech from intoxication (drunkenness) or a stroke (old age), painful injuries on the tongue, food in the mouth can all convert a "sa" sound into "ha". Put some water in your mouth and say "Saptasindhu" without spraying the water. What you get will be closer to Haptahindu.

If you listen to Tamil or even if you listen carefully to MS Subbalakshmi, you find that on occasion "ha" is pronounced as "ga" or "ka". The sound "ka" comes from the back of the mouth as does "ha" and one can become the other. For example the expression "hack thoo" is an exact description of taking spit from the back of your throat with a "ha" (expulsion of air), then your tongue does a "kh" to catch it an move it forward, The the "th" ejects the spit and "oo" is a forceful exhalation to send the spit flying.

So you can have an evolution of the "sa" sound to "ha" and then "ha" becomes "ka" using the natural motor mechanism in the mouth and voice. But ka cannot evolve into sa by the same natural mechanisms.

Kleos cannot become sravas

Sravas can become Kleos by the route sravas > hravas > hlavas > klavas/kleos

So while I acceet Manish's connection between kleos and sravas. The Sanskrit word can conceivably degenerate to a later Greek form. The Greek form cannot degenerate to the Sanskrit word. If there was a PIE word for "kleos" it could be "sravas" itself.

[Satya_anveshi]

Great post Shivji.

Was wondering about how "Kourus" becomes Cyrus (and then pronounced as Syrus). Kourus is very similar to Kuru (or Kaurava vamsha).

Also, How does Kamboja becomes Cambessys (of Achamenid Empire)? (Achaemanid word itself seems derived from Haxamanisiya)?

Overall the nonsensical changes have created distances that might otherwise be more easier to traverse/reconcile, so we know the impact an unsound but deliberate attempt to infuse confusion can create.

If Bombay wasn't made to Mumbai, come millenia/centuries later there could be a theory that Indians developed throat infection and started pronouncing Mumbai as Bombay with no references to brutish influence behind it.

[shiv]

Folks, I had a thought and will put it down FWIW.

If Greek could credibly be shown to be the mother of Sanskrit, there would be no need to invent PIE. But if you look at "normal sound change" that Manishji is so fond of telling us about, Greek cognates with Sanskrit cannot be converted to Sanskrit words. That is why it is necessary to cook up an indirect route.It is necessary to postulate an earlier language called PIE that has unpronounceable words combining elements of Greek and Sanskrit which "just happened to degenerate" into Sanskrit in one part of the world and to Greek in another part of the world.

But it is beginning to strike me now that "normal sound change mechanisms" might easily be able to explain how Sanskrit words can become Greek words and along with that show a direct geographic route in which known attested languages have exactly that sound change.

Assume Sanskrit is the original PIE

Take the word for seven - sapta

The human voice can degenerate "sa" to "ha" under several circumstances. But "ha" will not become "sa" by natural means. "Sa" requires far more muscular coordination, efforts and training. The "sa" can be dropped to make it "apta" and apta can become "hapta"

Sapta has become "hapta" in Iran all the way to eastern Iran and into many Turkic languages. the country next door is Greece, with Hepta

Sanskrit and Greek have many "sa' and "ha" cognates. In every case the "sa" was likely to be the older, closer to original one. In the Greek it changes to "a" or "ha"

"Haxamanasiya" in the Behistun inscriptions become "Achaemenid" in Greek
Sarpa in Sanskrit is herpeton in Greek

However "sapta" is retained in Latin derived languages (eg September). To me it suggests that some Indo European language was widespread and layer upon layer of the same Indo-European and variations thereof may be the reason for random mixing. But if we look at the antiquity of Sanskrit and Greek, Sanskrit seems to have words that can become Greek words by simple sound change, but Greek does not have words than can become Sanskrit without postulating an artificial PIE construct. This is a hypothesis. I will be working on this in due course to see if it meets the requirements of falsifiability.

[shiv]

Great post Shivji.

Was wondering about how "Kourus" becomes Cyrus (and then pronounced as Syrus). Kourus is very similar to Kuru (or Kaurava vamsha).

Also, How does Kamboja becomes Cambessys (of Achamenid Empire)? (Achaemanid word itself seems derived from Haxamanisiya)?

Overall the nonsensical changes have created distances that might otherwise be more easier to traverse/reconcile, so we know the impact an unsound but deliberate attempt to infuse confusion can create.

If Bombay wasn't made to Mumbai, come millenia/centuries later there could be a theory that Indians developed throat infection and started pronouncing Mumbai as Bombay with no references to brutish influence behind it.

Satya_anveshi, "ka" can become "cha". "Cha" can become "sa". So Kuru to Kouros to Cyrus is possible.

Someone had mentioned Varuna, Uaranos and Uranus. This too is credible. "va", "wa" and "ua" are basically the same sound unless you are an Englishman who will say "va" and "wa" are different. Singular roof becomes plural "rooves" but the pronunciation is roofs. Wife becomes wives, but if you see a silent video of a native English speaker you will never see any difference in the mouth movements of the person saying wifes instead of wives.

[ManishH]

Sanskrit and Greek have many "sa' and "ha" cognates. In every case the "sa" was likely to be the older, closer to original one. In the Greek it changes to "a" or "ha"

It is very well understood that "sa" is the original sound. Nothing new in this - "sa" > "ha" is called debuccalization. If you had really studied the subject in a more than superficial way, you'd have found that even Sanskrit underwent debuccalization. Eg. अंगिरस् >‌ अंगिरः. So nothing here says Sanskrit is "the original".

Most superficial or motivated takes take one sound and try to prove their hypothesis. It's the overall picture taking not just debuccalization, but palatalization, satemization and many such key sound changes that gives one some understanding of how none of the attested Historical languages like Greek/Lithuanian/Slavic/Germanic/Iranian/Tocharian/Sanskrit etc are the original.

but Greek does not have words than can become Sanskrit without postulating an artificial PIE construct. This is a hypothesis. I will be working on this in due course to see if it meets the requirements of falsifiability.

I see you reinventing the wheel but claiming to launch a Mars mission. All your post reflects the immature understanding of phonetics like August Schleicher in late 19th century. Things have come a long way since then.

[ManishH]

His stand is not one in favor of academic impartiality or thoughtfulness ('let's weigh the arguments in favor of both sides'), this is not a stand that has any remote sense of understanding of what it means to this country- it is a stand that to my mind reeks of sheer, unmitigated bigotry and hatred.

If one fears the consequences of the truth so much, how can one seek truth ?

Seeking truth means giving up the fear of consequences. I'm aware of feared (not actual) social consequences of AIT - like separatism, a false sense of historical injustice, caste divisions and what not. Now AIT has been stated in Indian textbooks for so long - and none of these fears have been realized. That shows that the paranoia of AIT is sans understanding of the Indian social mindset of cultural unity.

The thing with post-enlightenment academics is that it will seek the truth no matter what the consequences. So no matter how shrill the calls for historical revisionism on this matter are, it is the evidence which will shape what is taught in classrooms.

PS: If you actually think I've got agendas to promote such divisions in Indian society, you are wrong. North-South cultural syncretism runs in my family. My immediate family is mostly bilingual and better half's case, quadri-lingual. So please keep this allegations of "bigotry" in the echo-chamber of your paranoid world-view.

[ManishH]

If you want to convert kleos to sravas, or equus into ashwa this is the way to do it. But I think this is rubbish and will provide a far more credible route of sound change

I can see no way "ek" or "ke" or "kh" can become "sh" or "s". There is no "natural human vocal tendency" to do that. "k" and "s" are so distinct and phono-mechanically separate that human languages have many words with "ks"(k+s) or "sk" (s+k). Skill, school, skull, skanda, ask, axe, akshay, score, accident, accept, kshatriya - the list is endless.

Yes there is and that tendency is called Palatalization. The effect of palatalization in the presence of front vowels is a very normal human tendency and found not just in Sanskrit or Indo-European family but also other, unrelated language families

An old survey paper "A General Study of Palatalization", D.N.S Bhat
Added later: Google books seems to have even this old paper in a book "Universals of Human Language"

A cross-linguistic study of palatalization has revealed that there are at least three distinc processes, namely tongue-fronting, tongue-raising, adn spirantization which, occurring either individually or in different combination, produce the effects that are generally denoted by the cover term, palatalization. The environments in which these processes occur are also distinct: for example, an unstressed front vowel (or a palatal semivowel, glide) is very effective in producing tongue-raising (for apical palatalization), whereas a stressed front vowel is more effective than an unstressed one in producing tongue-fronting, or velar palatalization.
...
4.4 The Velars
The effect of palatalization on velars is generally seen as tongue fronting. The consonant may remain as prevelar if the change is slight, but may change into a palatal one (or even an apical-alveolar or dental one) if the change is more marked. Stops generally become affricates, but may continue to remain as stops as well. That is, the raising and spirantization may or may not co-occur with fronting in velar palatalizations

This is followed by a survey of palatalization in various language families like Spanish, Latin, Romanian, Common Slavic, Amharic, Nupe, Burushaski, Keresan, Lisu, Marshallese, Yagua, Korean, Higi, East Slavic, Dravidian, Irish, North Chinese, Hausa, Ukrainian, Ayutla Mixtec, Kavineno, W. Popoloca

Sorry shiv, Palatalization is a natural human tendency found in a multitude of spoken and historically attested languages. Much as you try, this is not something you can brush under the carpet.

B-ji: you asked why only the first phoneme becomes palatalized in PIE kʷekʷlos > Skt cakra. That is exactly the effect of front vowel 'e'.

[ManishH]

But guess what? It is claimed that haptahindu is earlier and saptasindhu later.

Shiv: In your posts, you are trying to play two roles together:

1. You announce a Linguistics claim to public.
2. Then you proceed to "demolish" it

Unfortunately, since your demolition skills (#2) are so poor, you must falsify the claim (#1). Please quote any linguistic textbook which claims "haptahindu" or for that matter any debuccalized "ha" form as "earlier".

You did the same thing with 'aham'/'adam' of Behistun inscriptions. You are well aware that you are likely to be unchallenged in your falsifications and can carry your demagoguery most days.

[ManishH]

I have a rhetorical question.

What do you think is closer to Sanskrit 'áśva'?

a) Greek 'hippos', or

b) Latin 'equos', or

c) Old English 'eoh', or

d) Sumerian 'aśśa'?

You have totally missed the point that loan words follow odd phonetics. Whereas cognates of language families follow regular phonetics.

So the phonetic relation that exists between Latin equus and Skt aśva is the same phonetic relation that exists between Latin vīcus and Sanskrit viś and a plethora of other cognates as has been pointed out in an earlier post. This evidence indicates that Latin and Sanskrit are part of the same language family.

Whereas Sumerian just doesn't have a regular phonetic relationship. Which indicates that 'aśśa' is a loan word into Sumerian. The Loan comes most probably neighbouring IE speaking people who had domesticated the horse.

[RajeshA]

I have a rhetorical question.

What do you think is closer to Sanskrit 'áśva'?

a) Greek 'hippos', or

b) Latin 'equos', or

c) Old English 'eoh', or

d) Sumerian 'aśśa'?

You have totally missed the point that loan words follow odd phonetics. Whereas cognates of language families follow regular phonetics.

So the phonetic relation that exists between Latin equus and Skt aśva is the same phonetic relation that exists between Latin vīcus and Sanskrit viś and a plethora of other cognates as has been pointed out in an earlier post. This evidence indicates that Latin and Sanskrit are part of the same language family.

Whereas Sumerian just doesn't have a regular phonetic relationship. Which indicates that 'aśśa' is a loan word into Sumerian. The Loan comes most probably neighbouring IE speaking people who had domesticated the horse.

No I don't think I missed the point! It is the claim of PIE-charlatans that Sanskrit 'áśva', Greek 'hippos', Latin 'equos', and Old English 'eoh' are phonetic cognates, meaning there is an evolution of the word within a given population/group through sound changes over time usually going from more difficult sounds -> easier sounds!

I say that it is b*ekwas!

The word for horse simply was not there before the dissemination of the IE languages, and in each of the population speaking Indo-European language the horse was introduced later through different sources.

You can call Sumerian 'aśśa' a modified loan word or cognate of Arabian 'hasAn' as well as of Sanskrit 'áśva'. I can't say what was the direction of sound change in the word, but it seems that even though the animal was domesticated by the Arabs, the Indians may have given the name and passed it on through the Sumerians back to the Arabs, and the Arabs dropped their original name for horse or simply added another synonym.

The Central Asian horse here played no role whatsoever!

If there was only one IE source for word for horse, almost all IE languages would have had similar names. Germans call it Pferd allegedly from Proto-Celtic *woreidos. Equus, Hippos, Eoh, all are different words, and I don't see any reason for trying to squeeze all those words into a single etymology hierarchy.

We should simply admit that there is no PIE term for Horse! When the Indians started migrating Out-of-India, resulting in the spread of the Indo-European languages, they were not using horses or taking horses with them! The horse was introduced into the various IE communities much later from various different sources!

As far as domesticating the horse goes, I am not so certain it really was the Indo-Europeans who did that. Could have been the Arabs too!

You see, I am not an Aryan chauvinist who wishes to claim all glory for Aryans only!

[member_20317]

You have totally missed the point that loan words follow odd phonetics. Whereas cognates of language families follow regular phonetics.

So Linguists already know which words are loan words and then they test to see if these words have odd phonetics. Right? Kind of like if most terrorists in my statistical sample, exhibit Islamic leanings then I conclude that most terrorists in my statistical universe are of Islamic leanings.

or is it the other way round

Where odd phonetics signify loan words and linguists know of odd phonetics so they conclude a word is a loan word. Kind of like most terrorists in my statistical sample, exhibit Islamic leanings ergo everybody with Islamic leanings is a terrorist.

I think I have also totally missed the point.

[shiv]

Manishji the existence of palatization requires the construction of a non existent proto word which needs to undergo palatization for kleos to become sravas. I have shown a route by which sravas could become kleos with no non existent constructs. No PIE needed. PIE is a necessary bluff to explain incredible and unlikely sound changes.

Please don't given me that blather about what was done in the 19th century. A lot of the data use by linguists and historians was established in the 19th century and some of that stuff has never been rechecked for validity.

[RajeshA]

Paper presented in Tehran

Publication Date: May 02, 2010
By Chandra Kant Raju (C.K. Raju)
Ending Academic Imperialism: a Beginning



C.K. Raju of India speaking about decolonizing science education at the International Conference on Academic Imperialism held at Al-Zahra University in Tehran, Iran, on 1-2 May 2010.



Is Science Western in Origin? [Amazon]
क्या विज्ञान पश्चिम में शुरू हुआ?

Description
On stock Western history, science originated among the Greeks, and then developed in post-renaissance Europe. This story was fabricated in three phases.

First, during the Crusades, scientific knowledge from across the world, in captured Arabic books, was given a theologically-correct origin by claiming it was all transmitted from the Greeks. The key cases of Euclid (geometry) and Claudius Ptolemy (astronomy)— both concocted figures — are used to illustrate this process.

Second, during the Inquisition, world scientific knowledge was again assigned a theologically-correct origin by claiming it was not transmitted from others, but was “independently rediscovered” by Europeans. The cases of Copernicus and Newton (calculus) illustrate this process of “revolution by rediscovery”.

Third, the appropriated knowledge was reinterpreted and aligned to post-Crusade theology. Colonial and racist historians exploited this, arguing that the (theologically) “correct” version of scientific knowledge (geometry, calculus, etc.) existed only in Europe.

These processes of appropriation continue to this day.



Publication Date: 2007
Cultural Foundations of Mathematics [Google]

Description
Want to know more about the following?

• Did the calculus begin in India?
• Did the Indian infinite series really amount to the calculus?
• Was this connected to the work of Newton and Leibniz?
• What is the evidence for the transmission of the calculus from India to Europe?
• Did Western historians systematically falsify history over centuries?
• Why is math difficult to learn today? What can be done to remedy this?
• Is any of this relevant to present-day mathematics?
• Is multicultural mathematics really mathematics?

Part I: The Nature of Mathematical Proof

The Indian work on the infinite series has been known for nearly a couple of centuries. However, under the onslaught of the Western narrative of the history of science, this was regarded as somehow suspect. It has often been claimed that the Indian series lacked proof. Hence tis book begins with a re-examination of the history and philosophy of what constitutes mathematical proof. The results are surprising.

First, history was falsified at Toledo in the 12th c. CE. After burning books for some 750 years, the church turned towards books, to catch up with the Arabs, and financed the mass translations of Arabic books at the library of Toledo. However, during the Crusades it was galling for the church to admit learning from the hated Islamic enemy. So history was Hellenized by indiscriminately attributing all secular knowledge in those Arabic books to Greeks. (Euclid was one of the fictions constructed during this process.)

Secondly, the philosophy of mathematics too was changed. During the Inquisition anything (or person) to survive had to be theologically correct. Therefore, the philosophy of mathematics, and the understanding of mathematical proof was modified to bring it in line with the prevailing Christian theology (and especially the valuation of metaphysics over physics). A key idea here was the alleged universality and certainty of (a metaphysical notion of) mathematical proof.

However, formal mathematical proof depends upon logic, but there are an infinity of possible logics to choose from. If logic is decided culturally it is not universal, for Buddhists and Jains for instance have different logics. On the other hand, if the logic underlying proof is decided empirically, why shouldn't the empirical have a place in mathematical proof? (Incidentally, logic decided empirically need not be 2-valued, as natural language or quantum mechanics informs us.)

Part II: The Calculus in India

Next the book provides the first full account of the development of Indian infinite series over a thousand year period, without appealing to formalism but instead explaining the proofs as given by the people who used the series. The development of these series is related to the bases of wealth in India: agriculture and overseas trade requiring navigation. The successful practice of agriculture in India required a good calendar, which could determine the monsoon or rainy season. Recalibration of this calendar, and navigation both required knowledge of the shape and size of the earth, and means of determining latitude and longitude. A navigational instrument that has long been known is described---the new feature being the accuracy with which it can be used to measure of angles, thus providing also the instrumental basis of precise angle measurements.

Part III: The Transmission of the Calculus to Europe

Since the Indian infinite series precedes the appearance of the same series in Europe, and since the two were in contact, the onus of proof actually ought to be on those who claim that these identical series were independently rediscovered in Europe, when Europe had barely learnt to add and subtract without the abacus. This is especially the case since so must of post-Hellenic history, since Copernicus, depends upon this claim of independent rediscovery. Nevertheless, the third part of the book takes up (a) the rules of evidence by which one can discriminate between transmission and independent rediscovery, and (b) how these rules of evidence can be applied to the case of the calculus.

The key motivation was the European navigation problem which required accurate trigonometric values, and an accurate calendar, for its solution. The agency was that of the missionaries who were present in Cochin, since 1500, and patronised by the same Raja who patronised the then-most-active people working on the Indian infinite series. The Jesuits took over the Cochin college in 1550 and started translating local knowledge and sending back these translations to Europe on the Toledo model. They were strongly motivated to learn about trigonometry and the calendar given the great practical importance of the European navigational problem, for the solution of which huge prized had been declared by various European governments. (That problem arose because Europeans did not know enough trigonometry to determine the size of the globe.) The Jesuits had access to all literature they needed, because of their proximity to it, the support of the king, and also the full support of the local community of Syrian Christians until 1600.

There is ample circumstantial evidence that this very knowledge starts subsequently appearing in Europe, but its non-Christian origins could hardly be acknowledged in the days of the Inquisition, either by those high up in the hierarchy (like Clavius, Tycho Brahe, Kepler etc.) or by those who were threatened by it (like Mercator, Newton, etc.)

Part IV: The Contemporary Relevance of the Revised History

Why is math regarded as a difficult subject to learn? It is the theologification of mathematics that has made it hard to learn. It is impossible to teach numbers in a formally correct way without first teaching set theory, and this cannot be taught to children. Similarly, today it is taught that a point is not the dot that one sees on a paper, but something mysteriously different, leaving the child befuddled. So the way to make math teaching easy is to de-theologify math. According to sunyavada, it is the dot on the piece of paper that is real, and the abstraction of a point which is erroneous and empty. This would also be in line with the developments in computer technology, which demand a better account of what can and what cannot be represented, because computers simply cannot pretend to understand something that they don't.

The problem with infinities did not end with the formalisation of the real number system and limits, using sets, and the formalisation of set theory in the 1930's. The formulation of physics using differential equations assumes that physical quantities are differentiable, hence continuous on classical analysis. However, discontinuities and associated infinities continue to arise in physics, as in shock waves and the renormalization problem of quantum field theory. This shows that the calculus has not yet found a satisfactory formulation. How are these infinities to be handled? Either the number system must be changed further to allow infinities and infinitesimals, or the notion of non-representable must be accepted, as in computer arithmetic.

The Eleven Pictures of Time [Amazon]

Description
Time is a mystery that has perplexed humankind since time immemorial. Resolving this mystery is of significance not only to philosophers and physicists but is also a very practical concern. Our perception of time shapes our values and way of life; it also mediates the interaction between science and religion both of which rest fundamentally on assumptions about the nature of time.

C K Raju begins with a critical exposition of various time-beliefs, ranging from the earliest times through Augustine, Newton and Einstein to Stephen Hawking and current notions of chaos and time travel. He traces the role of organised religion in subverting time beliefs for its political ends. The book points out how this resulted in a facile dichotomy between 'linear' and 'cyclic' time, thereby inaugurating a confusion which, according to the author, has handicapped Western thought ever since, eventually influencing the content of science itself. Thus, this book daringly asserts that physical theory, traditionally regarded as amoral and objective, has depended on cultural beliefs about time.

The author points out that time beliefs are again being manipulated today as the credibility of science is being exploited to promote a picture of time and, hence, a pattern of human behaviour which is convenient to the agenda of globalisation of culture. The linkages between modern theology and this 'brave new physics' are traced against the wider context of the so-called 'clash of civilisations', and the attempts to remake the world order.

The conclusions point to the need to de-theologise time. The author challenges Einstein's understanding of relativity theory and suggests that a 'tilt in the arrow of time', or a small tendency towards cyclicity, will help repair the prevalent confusion about time. A 'tilt' also enables a physics that permits both memory and creativity, so that purpose and spontaneous growth of order are returned to human life. The book ends with a vision of Man as Creator, surprising God.

Extensive research in physics, the history of science, comparative religions, and sociology lend weight to the important and challenging conclusions reached by the author. Written as a rejoinder to Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time, this book goes much further and, unlike any previous book, it gives a critical exposition of various world religions-Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Jainism-while exploring their intricate links, through time beliefs, to current physics on the one hand, and to global political and economic trends, on the other. This book will appeal to scholars and laypersons equally. It will fascinate anyone who reads it and will teach its readers to question the unquestionable.

[ManishH]

Manishji the existence of palatization requires the construction of a non existent proto word which needs to undergo palatization for kleos to become sravas.

The velar (k) is present in an attested language - Greek, no one has imagined the velar (k) in an imaginary proto language.

I have shown a route by which sravas could become kleos with no non existent constructs. No PIE needed. PIE is a necessary bluff to explain incredible and unlikely sound changes.

The proposal of s > h > k is a purely irregular sound change. There is no explanation for why Sanskrit sapta became Greek hepta and not Kepta. A sound change of convenience, rather than rigorous understanding of phonetic principles.

[RajeshA]

The Stupid Sheet Anchor of Indian History


One of the biggest frauds committed on Indian history has been the calculated post-dating of Chandragupta Maurya, based on some scraps found from Megesthenes writings.

Sir William Jones made the equivalence Sandrocottus == Chandragupta Maurya! Max Müller declared it as the sheet anchor of Indian history!

So I am collecting a few links in this regard here!

1. Attempts of Jones to mutilate Bhartiya history @Encyclopedia of Authentic Hinduism by Swami Prakashanand Saraswati
2. Pages from Max Müller's 'History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature' by Kosla Vepa
3. Reconstruction of Indian History by Sistla Lakshmipati Shastry
4. Did Megasthenes Meet Chandragupta Maurya?
5. Arrian's Anabasis Alexandri by Tr. E. Iliff Robson @HinduWebSite
6. The Myth, Romance and Historicity of Alexander and His Influence on India by K.V. Ramakrishna Rao @HinduWebSite
7. The Pernicious Effects of the Misinterpreted Greek Synchronism in Ancient Indian History by Kosla Vepa

The Greek records mention Xandramas and Sandrocyptus as the kings immediately before and afterSandracottus. These names are not in any way phonetically similar to Mahapadma Nanda and Bindusara,who were the predecessor and successor of Chandragupta Maurya, respectively. However, if Sandracottus refers to Chandragupta "Gupta", Xandramas reckons to be his predecessor Chandrashree alias Chandramas(the last of the main dynasty of Andhra Satavahana Kings) and Sandrocyptus to be Samudragupta. The phonetic similarity becomes quite apparent and also, with the assistance of other evidence, confirms theidentity of Sandracottus to Chandragupta Gupta.

[Arjun]

If one fears the consequences of the truth so much, how can one seek truth ?

Seeking truth means giving up the fear of consequences. I'm aware of feared (not actual) social consequences of AIT - like separatism, a false sense of historical injustice, caste divisions and what not. Now AIT has been stated in Indian textbooks for so long - and none of these fears have been realized. That shows that the paranoia of AIT is sans understanding of the Indian social mindset of cultural unity.

The thing with post-enlightenment academics is that it will seek the truth no matter what the consequences. So no matter how shrill the calls for historical revisionism on this matter are, it is the evidence which will shape what is taught in classrooms.

PS: If you actually think I've got agendas to promote such divisions in Indian society, you are wrong. North-South cultural syncretism runs in my family. My immediate family is mostly bilingual and better half's case, quadri-lingual. So please keep this allegations of "bigotry" in the echo-chamber of your paranoid world-view.

You've failed to address the key reason for calling you out on your bigotry.

Please check back to my post you've responded to, and the one from me immediately following it (Bigotry Defined). If you believe that evidence for AIT or AMT is 100% conclusive - when the data behind it does not in any way support this stance, you are clearly guilty of bigotry. You may want to look up the definition of bigotry to educate yourself on the matter. Do you think the evidence is conclusive enough to warrant being in text books for school kids - why don't you clarify your stance on the matter? If you think AIT needs to be mentioned, why not mention that there is another competing theory out there (OIT)? Are you fool enough to think that mentioning AIT alone, to the exclusion of other theories, is 'more scientific'?

I personally think the evidence is 70:30 in favour of OIT (and with more research should tilt further towards the OIT case). But even if I were to be 98% sure of the OIT case, I would not want to impose my historical worldview on Greek school students - and force them to study some hypothetical Indic roots for their race. I would really want to be 100% sure before imposing any drastic historical view on them - I guess this is just quintessential, dare-I-say, Hindu humanistic principles I subscribe to of not wanting to impose unsubstantiated and unscientific dogma even on the opposing camp.

The issue of consequences is a secondary matter - but let me say, you've again misunderstood what consequences I am referring to. The consequences I am referring to are not the issue of social tensions created due to AIT, but that an Indian intellectual and scientific renaissance has failed to take shape despite the rediscovery of Sanskrit classical science - due to AIT preventing Indian academia from taking complete 'ownership' of Sanskrit. See my post here where I have expanded on this: Indian Intellectual Renaissance.

If you want to argue with my terminology - I suggest you address it holistically, and not just pick on the secondary arguments.

[Kaushal]

dear rajeshA, ehe following quote hasb een made by me i might have referred to goswami's bookn which describes the mamuscript projevt which lasted for 5 years but the quote is from me.. keep up the good work and keep the flame alive.
kaushal

Books for the Library



Publication Date: January 1, 2007
Author: Professor B.N. Goswamy
The Word is Sacred; Sacred is the Word: The Indian Manuscript Tradition [Amazon]

One quote from here:

The presumption that the Occidentalist makes that he has seen all the literature there is to see. There is considerable hubris in such an assertion primarily because the manuscript wealth of India is so staggering, amounting to over 5 million manuscripts, out of which only a million have been catalogued and the number that have been read and translated is far less. (It is estimated that the number of texts written in Sanskrit dealing with Jyotiṣa number around 100.000.)

Manishji the existence of palatization requires the construction of a non existent proto word which needs to undergo palatization for kleos to become sravas.

The velar (k) is present in an attested language - Greek, no one has imagined the velar (k) in an imaginary proto language.

I have shown a route by which sravas could become kleos with no non existent constructs. No PIE needed. PIE is a necessary bluff to explain incredible and unlikely sound changes.

The proposal of s > h > k is a purely irregular sound change. There is no explanation for why Sanskrit sapta became Greek hepta and not Kepta. A sound change of convenience, rather than rigorous understanding of phonetic principles.

[RajeshA]

Antiquity and Continuity of Indian History (From Swayambhuva Manu to Gupta Dynasty)

By Prasad Gokhale
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

1. Part 1
2. Part 2
3. Part 3
4. Part 4
5. Part 5
6. Part 6

Single Page

Modern history tends to put Buddha around 500 B.C. This date apparently comes from the assumption that Chandragupta Maurya, Sandrocottus of the Greek records, was the contemporary of Alexander, who is known to invade India in 325 B.C. However, the Greek chronicles are strangely silent on the names of Chanakya (Chandragupta's Guru) who managed to install the Maurya on the Magadha throne, Bindusar (his son) and even Ashoka (his grandson) whose empire extended far wider than that of Chandragupta. The empire of Chandragupta, also known as the Magadha empire, was very powerful and had a long history but is nowhere mentioned by the Greeks. Even Buddha bhikkus and the flourishing religion of the Buddha are not mentioned in their literature. This imbroglio has been challenged by various scholars and is precisely summarized by K. Rajaram (in "A Peep into the Past History, Seminar Papers", Madras, 1982), "There are difficulties in calculating the date of the coronation of Asoka .. In the first instance, the very identification of Sandrokotus with Chandragupta Maurya is questioned. In the second one, the date of the death of the Buddha has not been fixed accurately and therefore, the date of Asoka based on it cannot be accurate." Indeed, the Sandrocottus of the Greeks was not a Maurya.

The Greek records mention Xandramas and Sandrocyptus as the kings immediately before and after Sandrocottus. These names in any way are not phonetically similar to Mahapadma Nanda and Bindusar, who were the predecessor and successor of Chandragupta Maurya, respectively. However, if Sandrocottus refers to Chandragupta "Gupta", the Xandramas reckons to be his predecessor Chandrashree alias Chandramas and Sandrocyptus to be Samudragupta. The phonetic similarity becomes quite apparent and also, with the assistance of other evidence, confirms the identity of Sandrocottus to Chandragupta Gupta.

[RajeshA]

Kaushal ji,

I've corrected the false quote! Thank you!

[shiv]

The proposal of s > h > k is a purely irregular sound change. There is no explanation for why Sanskrit sapta became Greek hepta and not Kepta. A sound change of convenience, rather than rigorous understanding of phonetic principles.

We are talking of a special case where a "r" follows an initial consonant. In the case of sravas, it became kleos. For hrudaya it became kardio. After all "kardio" has no front vowel to cause palatalization.

[A_Gupta]

ManishH, since you have reappeared, what about Paul Thieme's paper that argues that the Varuna & dual Nasatyas in the Mitanni treaty makes it Vedic or post-Vedic? What does that do to the phonetics?

[RajeshA]

The proposal of s > h > k is a purely irregular sound change. There is no explanation for why Sanskrit sapta became Greek hepta and not Kepta. A sound change of convenience, rather than rigorous understanding of phonetic principles.

We are talking of a special case where a "r" follows an initial consonant. In the case of sravas, it became kleos. For hrudaya it became kardio. After all "kardio" has no front vowel to cause palatalization.

shiv saar,

I think you are on the right track!

In fact all evidence speaks in favor of this theory, after all Greek is a daughter of Sanskrit and the word hrudaya did change to kardio! So the sound changes must be right!

I think plane geometry was developed in India and we should use it! I am finding new love for the humble circle!

[Arjun]

Whereas Sumerian just doesn't have a regular phonetic relationship. Which indicates that 'aśśa' is a loan word into Sumerian. The Loan comes most probably neighbouring IE speaking people who had domesticated the horse.

Neighbouring IE speaking people ? ManishH clearly has no clue about the timeline of the Sumerian civilization nor where its precise location was within Mesopotamia.

[RajeshA]

Whereas Sumerian just doesn't have a regular phonetic relationship. Which indicates that 'aśśa' is a loan word into Sumerian. The Loan comes most probably neighbouring IE speaking people who had domesticated the horse.

Neighbouring IE speaking people ? ManishH clearly has no clue about the timeline of the Sumerian civilization nor where its precise location was within Mesopotamia.

Well not so fast!

There is a theory that Atlantis used to exist in the Persian Gulf and it was full of TFTA Aryans! Atlantis later sank! A dolphin confessed to all this upon water-boarding treatment!

[Nilesh Oak]

I think plane geometry was developed in India and we should use it! I am finding new love for the humble circle!

And spherical trignometry as well, if one is going to speculate Vyasa 'back calculating relative positions of Arundhati-Vasistha' with resepect to 'ever changing point of North Celestial pole'.

Still question remains, why he picked 5561 BC and not, say, 6000 BC when the 'simulated' separation between Arundhati and Vasistha was at its maximum. We can attribute this error due to older version of computer he must be using for his simulation. Smart chap. Knew not to fool around with 'probability'.

Using Witzel's favorite tool -Occum's razor, although he is incompetent to understand its meaning and proper usage, one would say that Vyasa observed the star configuration in the sky at the time of Mahabharata War in 5561 BC.

PS. Oh, RajeshA ji, talking of your love for humble circle, that is what North celestial pole does -tirelessly -completing one circle every ~26000 years, of course additing its own twists and variety during each next round.

[Arjun]

There is a theory that Atlantis used to exist in the Persian Gulf and it was full of TFTA Aryans! Atlantis later sank! A dolphin confessed to all this upon water-boarding treatment!

Ah, so the dolphins of the Persian Gulf were IE speaking ?....I must convey my apologies to ManishH for failing to appreciate this simple truth and slandering him.

Maybe the dophins composed the Rig Veda as well...? You never know

[RajeshA]

PS. Oh, RajeshA ji, talking of your love for humble circle, that is what North celestial pole does -tirelessly -completing one circle every ~26000 years, of course additing its own twists and variety during each next round.

Would that have anything to do with Skanda drinking too much Soma?!

[Nilesh Oak]

Joy of Irrefutable Theories (Linguistics, AIT, PIE but also "We will never understand true meanings of Rigveda Richas")

What is so great about 'Irrefutable theories'?

- They are not scientific so no onus to provide evidence
-Inductive fun (or nonsense.. depending on which side of the theory one is) can continue unabated
- No onus to show how this theory predicts anything
-No onus to show how this theory corroborates anything
-No onus to clearly state what would falsify such a theory
-The subject matter can be discussed (in the fashion 'Mr. Kramer goes to Washington') until opponent gives up or cows (go-gows-Crow-crows-cow-cows) come home
-Anytime someone disagrees with, one can always use ready 'defense' such as "you don't understand' or ' "Your knowledge is superficial" or come study Linguistics with me (Witzel made this offer to Shri. Shrikant Talgeri)
-Once in a while bring in another dubious discipline to bolster one's cocky position.
- The List is long, but I have no intention of giving out all secrets until I am ready to right my peer reviewed paper. Afterall I need my 'masala' 'fire power' in store.

Some other examples of irrrefutable theories...

(1) If you play (on instrument) or sing Raga 'Deep' the way Tansen did, the lamps would lit without visible evidence of someone doing it (no electric or solar lamps allowed, unless I am performing the trick).

(2) A certain part of SamaVeda, when sung properly produces unmitigated and 'undescribable' joy.

This may appear OT. However I consider it necessary for forum reader to have this background knowledge --as a potent tool -- to comprehend some of the postings on this thread.

[RajeshA]

There is a theory that Atlantis used to exist in the Persian Gulf and it was full of TFTA Aryans! Atlantis later sank! A dolphin confessed to all this upon water-boarding treatment!

Ah, so the dolphins of the Persian Gulf were IE speaking ?....I must convey my apologies to ManishH for failing to appreciate this simple truth and slandering him.

Maybe the dophins composed the Rig Veda as well...? You never know

Here you have it: What Dolphins Told Me!

Some people say Atlantians who used to have a highly developed civilization, were dolphins. Others say, Atlantians transformed themselves into dolphins when Atlantis sank into the sea. Other people claim dolphins are missionaries who came from a planet called Sirius to the earth to help its transformation.

Also please correlate to the new evidence:
Lost civilization may have been beneath Persian Gulf: MSNBC

The Gulf Oasis would have been a shallow inland basin exposed from about 75,000 years ago until 8,000 years ago, forming the southern tip of the Fertile Crescent, according to historical sea-level records.

And it would have been an ideal refuge from the harsh deserts surrounding it, with fresh water supplied by the Tigris, Euphrates, Karun and Wadi Baton Rivers, as well as by upwelling springs, Rose said. And during the last ice age when conditions were at their driest, this basin would've been at its largest.

Now all that is left to do is to find sound changes in PIE which would ultimately lead us to the new newly discovered member of the Indo-European family of languages - Dolphinian! Or was Dolphinian, the real PIE?

[Nilesh Oak]

Some people say Atlantians who used to have a highly developed civilization, were dolphins. Others say, Atlantians transformed themselves into dolphins when Atlantis sank into the sea. Other people claim dolphins are missionaries who came from a planet called Sirius to the earth to help its transformation.

Arjun ji,
Be careful - what you ask for? Because you may get it. Be it pumpkin 'PIE', 34 ribbed 'Assa' or 'Dolphins'

The Gulf Oasis would have been a shallow inland basin exposed from about 75,000 years ago until 8,000 years ago, forming the southern tip of the Fertile Crescent, according to historical sea-level records.

And it would have been an ideal refuge from the harsh deserts surrounding it, with fresh water supplied by the Tigris, Euphrates, Karun and Wadi Baton Rivers, as well as by upwelling springs, Rose said. And during the last ice age when conditions were at their driest, this basin would've been at its largest.

RajeshA ji,
Be careful - what you quote - another BRFite might come along and bring additional evidence.

Huge spike in sea level rise - Arabian sea/area of Iraq/Iran (sumerian/Akkadian) over the time period shown (BTW, Title says AD/BC, it should be read BC/AD -error, no probability). Imagine amount of land that would have gone under the sea and with it all existing civilizations. In fact one worthy excerise is to figure out how far sea woudl have reached inside western coast of India/Pakistan and its potential (not probable) consequences for SSVC - migration or otherwise.

Also notice spike beginning with 6000 BC and ending in 4500 BC. Recall flooding of Dwarka and my timing for it - 5525 BC.

[A_Gupta]

My point of view - e.g., AIT/OIT is inspiring Shiv to undertake an examination of phonetics; or another whole group to examine the Pauranic dynasty lists again, and so on - it is all to the good. I trust they will all confront their theories and speculations in time with all the evidence.

I also applaud the spirit that I know this because I looked at it myself, rather than because "teacher told me".

[member_20317]

Wow!!!
I had at one point posted something about a dedh foot here and there. This is 20 meters.

And the graph is based on data generated between 1971 and 1986. For this long Indian establishment has not even let out the implications of this thing.

I remember in a Hancock vedio the Indian Archeologists mentioning their exploration off Dwarka coast uptill around 2 km or perhaps even less. And they also mentioned the need to explore for something like 150 km out into the Arabian Sea.

This one graph is a sure collectors item.

Nilesh ji, be careful, you would want to keep something for the book too.

Wattle & daub

Added later:
5525 seems understandable. Sirji.

Also notice the strange way of mother nature. No water in Saraswati is trouble for some people. Too much water at Dwarka is also too much trouble.

The best laid schemes of Mice and Men
oft go awry,
And leave us nothing but grief and pain,
For promised joy!

[Nilesh Oak]

My point of view - e.g., AIT/OIT is inspiring Shiv to undertake an examination of phonetics; or another whole group to examine the Pauranic dynasty lists again, and so on - it is all to the good. I trust they will all confront their theories and speculations in time with all the evidence.

I also applaud the spirit that I know this because I looked at it myself, rather than because "teacher told me".

A Gupta ji,

AIT/OIT is inspiring Shiv ji and what Shiv ji is doing is inspiring me.

He has taken on a task of demolishing 'irrefutable theor(ies)', using the very tools employed by creators of these theories.

[ramana]

Folks, I like the spirit of open debate shown on this thread. in same maaner please don't make personal attacks on each other for eg. on ManishH. You can attack his arguments but not him. For example calling him a bigot is not called for.

Thanks, for keeping up the level of debate up.

ramana

[shiv]

We are talking of a special case where a "r" follows an initial consonant. In the case of sravas, it became kleos. For hrudaya it became kardio. After all "kardio" has no front vowel to cause palatalization.

shiv saar,

I think you are on the right track!

In fact all evidence speaks in favor of this theory, after all Greek is a daughter of Sanskrit and the word hrudaya did change to kardio! So the sound changes must be right!

I think plane geometry was developed in India and we should use it! I am finding new love for the humble circle!

Well other examples of words in Sanskrit that lost the S and became K or X or lost the initial consonant might be:

The prefix su- in Sanskrit is eu- in Greek
"Shoshah" meaning dry in sanskrit and Xeros in Greek
Churya (Sansk steal) - Klepto (Greek)

[Nilesh Oak]

Wow!!!
I had at one point posted something about a dedh foot here and there. This is 20 meters.

Thank you ravi-g. However don't expect everyone to be excited. Some won't because it demolishes their strong held beliefs, others because they can not comprehend multiple implications of this chart.

And the graph is based on data generated between 1971 and 1986. For this long Indian establishment has not even let out the implications of this thing.

And while Indian establishment may not have done anything, many BRFite have responded to me, to my appeal made on this thread. This will speed up the publication process.

Two weeks ago, I brainstormed for 30 min, created titles and cover pages for 11+ books (tentative of course), printed color cover pages and posted on my 'publication ambition' board that stands at the entrance of my study.

I remember in a Hancock vedio the Indian Archeologists mentioning their exploration off Dwarka coast uptill around 2 km or perhaps even less. And they also mentioned the need to explore for something like 150 km out into the Arabian Sea.

I have this graph in my collection for a while. I have also carried out original research of my own + my fellow alumni from Canada assisted me in my quest.

This one graph is a sure collectors item.

You said it. Some time ago, I wrote 35+ pages, in one sitting, on implications of this chart.

Nilesh ji, be careful, you would want to keep something for the book too.

Wattle & daub

Thank you for your friendly advice. I will keep this in mind before posting next collector's item.

[ramana]

RajeshA, BTW dolphins are supposed to be land based mammals (canine species) that went back to the sea from current day TSP Baluchistan area. That accounts for the ease of training them by humans.

[Nilesh Oak]

PS. Oh, RajeshA ji, talking of your love for humble circle, that is what North celestial pole does -tirelessly -completing one circle every ~26000 years, of course additing its own twists and variety during each next round.

Would that have anything to do with Skanda drinking too much Soma?!

Indeed, the path of North celestial pole (due to precession, but also Nutation, variation in the angle of earth's axis and proper motions of stars of this area) is not unilike Skanda drinking too much Soma...more likely the drink would be 'a-dhruva cocktail with Soma as its base'.

[Arjun]

Folks, I like the spirit of open debate shown on this thread. in same maaner please don't make personal attacks on each other for eg. on ManishH. You can attack his arguments but not him. For example calling him a bigot is not called for.

Thanks, for keeping up the level of debate up.

ramana

I was using the term 'bigot' as defined by Webster: "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices"

And this was on the basis of his belief that the data backing AIT is 100% conclusive enough to warrant being taught in schools to school-kids, while repeatedly ignoring all requests to provide backing for this extreme level of certainty. Please note that NONE of the OIT proponents here have said that OIT is conclusive enough to be taught in British & American schools.

I will certainly stop calling him a bigot in deference to your wishes -but in the spirit of scientific rationalism and correct usage of words, I will continue to term his views as bigotry unless he can clarify his viewpoint to the contrary.

[Nilesh Oak]

Added later:
5525 seems understandable. Sirji.

Also notice the strange way of mother nature. No water in Saraswati is trouble for some people. Too much water at Dwarka is also too much trouble.

More precise evidence for 5525 BC would be next collector's item! I will accept your friendly cuation and not post it here. I do need something for my book.