Re: Reclaiming the chronology of Bharatam: Narahari Achar

At 5:22:35 PM on Monday, June 16, 2008, koenraad_elst wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen"
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>> I don't understand this paragraph [by Narahari Achar]:

>> ' It is universally acknowledged that Bha_ratam has one
>> of the most ancient cultural traditions, which unlike the
>> other ancient cultural traditions has been preserved
>> continuously without a break even to the present day.[1]
>> Western Scholars, while grudgingly acknowledging this
>> unbroken tradition, have complained that Indians lack a
>> sense of history and do not have a historical tradition.
>> Therefore, they decided to write a history for Bha_ratam,
>> which is based on their own ideas of history.'>

>> How can something at the same time be 'universally
>> acknowledged' and disputed by Western Scholars?

> That's a clever point, but not very interesting. In
> reading Hindu AIT opponents, it is best to ignore the
> anti-Western tirades, their own adaptation of Edward
> Said's anti-"orientalism", and focus on the hard data.

Why should anyone trust even the data of someone who commits
such obvious lapses in logic? I certainly don't, and my
experience in other contexts has been that I'm right not to
do so.

[...]

> But the solstice always and by definition falls on ca. 21
> December.

The definition of the winter solstice has nothing to do with
the calendar. The date on which it falls, of course, does;
in 1550 (say), the northern hemisphere winter solstice was
around 11 December, give or take a day, owing to the
accumulated error in the Julian calendar.

Brian