From: george knysh
Message: 64807
Date: 2009-08-18
--- On Tue, 8/18/09, Francesco Brighenti <frabrig@...> wrote:
Dear members of the List,
I have a sort of poll to submit to your vote:
Shall I continue this debate with "Shivraj Khokra" (perhaps a nom de plume, as has been suggested on another List by one of his Hindutva ideological fellows -- your old acquaintance Vishal Agarwal, no less) on cybalist or, since the only aim of this correspondent seems to be that of "chasing" me on all the discussion forums I am member of, should I better give it up?
See how the correspondent in question describes the debate I have been engaged in with him on cybalist in the last weeks:
http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ IndiaArchaeology /message/ 9021
I am not interested in having a one-to-one debate with this correspondent, whose ideas are more a matter of religious faith inextricably entwined with religion-based nationaliem than of scolarship and/or science. If other members of the List are willing tojoin this debate, I will continue it; otherwise, I will pass to other occupations.
Thanks for a needed feedback, and best regards.
Francesco
****GK: It's not really a "debate". You (and others) have made points on which debate is no longer permissible (e.g. the source and shifting meaning of "yavana" in Sanskrit etc.) If your respondent does not accept this (or totally ignores it, per non est, as he seems to be doing) then one must ask whether he might have additional interesting contributions to make. Discussions with ideological kooks is difficult at best, but sometimes they do relent. We have such experiences on cybalist. If it was me I would "test him out" with other issues to see how profound his non-scientific attitudes are (if we are to believe K. Elst they are quite profound, perhaps irremediably so). And go on from there. I would shut him up on the "yavana" thing anyway. If he doesn't like it let him leave. His ilk have done so before. BTW thank you for your response to my last query. Generally my view now is that in the early centuries of their residence in the "Greater Punjab" the
old Indic-speakers roamed around with their flocks in that area, coexisting with more settled natives and slowly imposing their language and religious rituals. Riverbanks were useful to them (for their herds). As mentioned, nomadic pastoralism leaves little trace in the archaeological record, and those that settle have the tendency to adopt the material culture of the sedentaries.****