Archaeology News Thread

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by Flint, Apr 14, 2009.

  1. Sandeep0159

    Sandeep0159 Senior Member Senior Member

    Feb 19, 2017
    Likes Received:
    Can't agree more! Yes, Witzel got his points but Talageri trying to build a chronology based on Sudas's exploits and his relation vis-a-vis Vishwamithra and Vasistha is somewhat interesting, unique and a first in d domain.
    Also,I didn't understand shit for a sec when he claimed Bhrigus an Iranian stock per se,who were later added to Vedic lineage.
    S.A.T.A likes this.
  2. S.A.T.A

    S.A.T.A Senior Member Senior Member

    Mar 28, 2009
    Likes Received:
    The main impetus behind Talageri's analysis of the Rgveda was to dispute Witzel's west to east movement of the early Indo-Aryans. As per Talageri's arrangement of the mandalas, the Indo-Aryans of the earliest mandalas were based in Punjab/Haryana region and then gradually moved westward in the later mandalas.

    Here he is trying to recruit a already extant scholarly view which postulates that the "Brghu" clan of rishis joined mainstream vedic clans, much later(perhaps even introduced the ritual of fire and soma worship). Remember "Sukracharya" the chief priest of the Asuras, was also of the Brghu clan. Scholars often associate the vedic /puranic Asuras to the Avestan tradition. Here Talageri contends that the introduction of Brghus into the Vedic system is consistent with his east to west movement of Indo-Aryans from eastern Punjab to western Punjab /south Afghanistan.
    Innocent and Sandeep0159 like this.

Share This Page