Re: [tied] Gulf of Khambat Cultural Complex 1

----- Original Message -----
From: <kalyan97@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Gulf of Khambat Cultural Complex 1



> You are jumping to conclusions, Piotr.
>
> I don't think editorials of journals are reviewed.

No, but if the editorial represents the views of the President of the Society that publishes the Journal, it may reveal something about its editorial policy.

> What about the ideological mission of those who do not want to concede Harmatta or Misra's view of east to west loans into Finno-Ugric?

East to west? Where do you locate Proto-Finno-Ugric, then, and on what grounds? I think everyone agrees that Finno-Ugric borrowed extensively from early Iranian and probably from Common Indo-Iranian, but if anything, this supports the traditional scenario of an Indo-Iranian homeland in the Eurasian steppe zone.

I used the words "ideological mission statement" because that's what the editorial makes clear. Ordinary historians, archaeologiasts and historical linguists are interested in UNDERSTANDING the past. Ideologues are interested in "altering the entrenched 'semi-colonial' perspective", which means MANIPULATING history for the greater glory of whatever they choose to identify with. It's sad to see a scientist write such balderdash.

A while ago Vishal tried to justify Joshi's meetings with Hancock (about the Khambat affair) by saying that some people's media popularity and its power to attract funds could be turned ito instruments of promoting a good cause, even if they themselves represent pseudoscience. Now, however, it seems that Graham Hancock's Ice Age Lost Civilisations are being taken seriously in the Geological Society of India. Congratulations.

Piotr