dating of Indian texts

Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#1
a very important expect of indian history are its texts. a lot of indian texts are dated to the second milennium BC, for instance the vedas and brahmanas.

in nineteenth century a german linguist max muller came up with a random date of 1500 BC for the Rigvedas but max muller himself noted that this date was the latest possible date for them and could actually be a lot older. Some scholars put them atleast a thousand years prior.

Issue with max muller's dating is, these datings are the ''latest possible dating'' for a text and according to some scholars doesnt take periodic evolution of the vedic sanskrit into account.

So my question is, since all the rest of indic texts have been dated in comparison to the point of reference of the rigvedas, what if the texts are placed a thousand years prior which is proposed by some other scholars, how will it effect the dating for those texts? how will it effect the dating of mahabharatha, ramayana, panini's text etc and subsequently all other indian texts?

regards
 
Last edited:
Likes: Bharata

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,571
New Delhi, India
#3
So my question is, since all the rest of indic texts have been dated in comparison to the point of reference of the rigvedas, what if the texts are placed a thousand years prior which is proposed by some other scholars, how will it effect the dating for those texts? how will it effect the dating of mahabharatha, ramayana, panini's text etc and subsequently all other indian texts?
RigVeda is perfectly dated by the astronomical references in it, and so are some of the other books.

1. Reference to Aditi finding the year (Ritual timing, Samvatsara) dates those richas to a period prior to 4,000 BC.
2. Reference to Mrigashiras as Prajapati dates those richas between 4-2,000 BC.
3. Reference to "Krittikas" being the mouth of the year dates those richas and wherever that occurs (Taittiriya Samhita, Brahmanas, Aranyakas) to be later than 2,000 BC.

Rmayana and Mahabharata are recounting of old indigenous traditions in Sanskrit. They are myths, it is wrong to try to date them.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,571
New Delhi, India
#5
Samhitas are later editions of the earlier oral transmissions. The change in languages was incorporated. If the Vedas were in their ancient form, probably we would not have understood even a word of them. The fixing (Pada-pathas) was done much later.
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,543
USA
#6
Samhitas are later editions of the earlier oral transmissions. The change in languages was incorporated. If the Vedas were in their ancient form, probably we would not have understood even a word of them. The fixing (Pada-pathas) was done much later.
Absolutely wrong. Pada pATAs are the tokenizing of the complex word forms that occur in any poetry. PampA's old Kannada poetry is not necessarily a retelling of an even older form. It was written originally in that form. Don't blow hot air.
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,543
USA
#7
RigVeda is perfectly dated by the astronomical references in it, and so are some of the other books.

1. Reference to Aditi finding the year (Ritual timing, Samvatsara) dates those richas to a period prior to 4,000 BC.
2. Reference to Mrigashiras as Prajapati dates those richas between 4-2,000 BC.
3. Reference to "Krittikas" being the mouth of the year dates those richas and wherever that occurs (Taittiriya Samhita, Brahmanas, Aranyakas) to be later than 2,000 BC.

Rmayana and Mahabharata are recounting of old indigenous traditions in Sanskrit. They are myths, it is wrong to try to date them.
It makes no sense. Most of the characters in those epics are Vedic characters. If recounting was such an obsession, we would have had several local heroes replacing Rama/Krishna in the stories in languages of those regions. Unfortunately that is not true. Kamba Ramayanam was from down South. Yet RAma remained RAma.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,571
New Delhi, India
#8
It makes no sense. Most of the characters in those epics are Vedic characters. If recounting was such an obsession, we would have had several local heroes replacing Rama/Krishna in the stories in languages of those regions. Unfortunately that is not true. Kamba Ramayanam was from down South. Yet RAma remained RAma.
Yes, Ramayana and Mahabharata are old indigenous folk tales with no connection to Vedas. The connections were inserted later.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,571
New Delhi, India
#10
That Rama and Krishna are not mentioned in RigVeda is proof enough. After assimilation they said Vishnu, Rama and Krishna are not different.
 

Similar History Discussions