Re: Rao, Osborn, and Frawley

On Jul 14, 6:53 pm, Lisbeth Andersson <lis...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote innews:1184452212.165686.183410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
...
The article about early iron production was interesting, wikipedia
was, well wikipedia - a war that may have happened in any of
several millenia!, if it happened at all, the hindunet articles
gave "access denied" and the others - interesting, although I don't
really see what relevance they have to this thread.

Dr. Rao has a huge reputation in archaeology. I gave the quote from
his paper to date Kurukshetra War to 1700-1900 BC.

I am upset that the site now gives "access denied". However,
Webcrawler
would allow the diligent researcher to get at that 2002 conference
where
Dr. Rao gave his paper.

BTW, Indians, as opposed to Americans, would care about the
Kurukshetra War.
My background in Yoga since college explains where I am coming from.

The Osborn link gives date for Kurukshetra War, based on archaeology,
of 2800 BC.

Sci.archers are clearly not equipped, by temperament or background, to
get into
explaining the discrepancy. Yet, I care because I am studying the
Gita.

I already clued sci.arch what explains the discrepancy in this
thread.

I used Kurukshetra War as a lead-in to tracing vedic culture to
earliest
archaeological sites (Frawley's New Model - Mehrgarh etc.). In the
process
the vedas got thrown into the mix.

I would love for some sci.archer to start talking about Mehrgarh or
Dr. Rao
because that would be solid archaeology for sci.arch.

I did google Frawley and Han*** and found:http://www.grahamhan***.com/underworld/review2.php

It gave me a feeling of deja-vu. I could have sworn I have read
exactly the same text about Egypt and the pyramids.

Wrong move on your part; please stick with Han***'s book; get it and
study
in close detail; I already posted a list of archaeological sities from
his book
relevant for the Frawley/Han*** thesis; if sci.archers would get with
the
program, I would be obliged.

Ask me further questions as necessary.

Well, since I haven't got Hancocks book around and it will take
some time to get it, if I decide to get it on interlibrary loan -
is his argument for an older date, that the temples are aligned
with the stars in Orion? Or does he have any other arguments?

Don't throw it onto me, please. I wish you or some interested
sci.archer
to do a careful job of homework.

How long do you think it took from the Vedas were composed until
they were written down?

5000 years plus or minus (at least the oldest parts). This is
a question not easily resolved; highly controversial; not entirely
appropriate for sci.arch, yet Han*** and Frawley push it for all
it is worth.

And what parts of the Rigveda are supposed to be historical?

Lisbeth.
...

Tilak had a few ideas referenced in Han***'s book; please get the
book ASAP.

.

Loading