--- In cybalist@..., markodegard@... wrote:
> Unless I've misread this, this is an extreme (even absurd)
statement.
> Nothing of what I've read says he holds anything other than a
pretty
> conventional view of how Indic got to India, i.e., from Central
Asia
> via Afganistan.
Well, please read the 'conventional view' summary again. We
have 'Brahmical conquerors', who later lead an ideological campaign
to establish their hegemonies. And we have twofold Aryan invasions -
the older group with Asuras as their gods and the new with Devas as
their gods.
There is nothing brilliant about the conventional view, to put it
facetiously. Once it is decided that the IA languages came from
Central Asia, there is only one route - via Afghanistan. Certainly
the alternate route across Tibet or via Iran,Baluchistan to Sindh (or
via Iran and then oceanically) will not be countenanced by scholars.
As far as the 'mainstream' nature of Parpola's scheme is concerned,
it is rejected even by Mallory.
By the way, I have deep regard for Parpola's writings on Samavedic
matters, but as far as the decipherment goes, it nothing more than a
fantasy. If someone is hell bent on reading 'Meluhha' as 'Tamilakam'
and 'Himalaya' as Dravidian 'Himamalaya', there is really no end to
fantasy and speculation. Overall, the merit if his writings is that
there is a lot of information thrown in - literally a hallmark of his
publications, and these can be used profitably even if one does not
agree with his central thesis.
Per Parpola's description, the RV gets placed in Afghanistan and the
Kathaka Samhita is composed in W Punjab. Not many Vedicists will
agree to these things nowadays. Such views are plainly absurd.
Regards
Vishal