| Dear Rajaram ji. I had consulted R.D. Banerji's report published by Prithvi Prakashan, Banaras, (Dr.Prithvi Agrawal is son of Dr. Vasudevsharan Agrawal and custodian of his writings) as a photostat copy. He had published only limited number of copies. I have no knowledge if some one published it later on. The report was kept by Marshall and it was returned to Banerji retyped without the original photographs and drawings. There was some gap in Banerji's understanding. He did not recognise Indus cities as Vedic, but remains of Asura civilisation while he considered Saraswati culture as Vedic one. He visualised
Devasur conflict as a conflict between the two cultures as depicted in Brahmanas etc. S.K. Chatterji, Vasudevasharana Agrawal, Jayashankar Prasad etc. were carried
away by Banerji's opinion But Chatterji under the Western influence thought that Aryans might have some how sneaked into Saraswati Valley. Under this very impression, Agrawal suggested to Wheeler the meaning of Purandar after fortification wall was disclosed at Harappa which he carried away and claimed his own. Langdon and smith had suggested that Brahmi might have descended from Indus script. Marshall published their articles. in 1934 Hunter underlined this connection. I have written an article in four parts, the last of which deals with Indus to Brahmi via West Asia but that is in Hindi otherwise I could make it available to you. Marshall was definitely convinced of connection between Indus and Vedic and that is why he vehemently argued to deny it with some self-contradictory argument. I had aanalysedhis arguments in detail in my book in Hindi Harappa Sabhyata aur Vaidik Sahitya, part I,
iintroduction I am presently writing a book PIE: the problem and price in English and hope to finish it in three months. It examines the philological history and the concocted laws and theories. I am not fluent in English so it takes time. Bhagwan Singh --- On Fri, 27/1/12, Navaratna Rajaram <rajaramn...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Navaratna Rajaram <rajaramn...@gmail.com>
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: Request for information about R.D. Banerji's 'Forgotten Report'
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com, "bharatiyaexperts" <bharatiyae...@yahoogroups.com>, RajivMalhot...@yahoogroups.com
Cc: "indiamahesh" <India...@gmail.com>, "Ashok Krishnan"
<ash...@gmail.com>, "brijmohan" <brij...@bilt.com>
Date: Friday, 27 January, 2012, 7:08 AM
January 27, 2012
I have request for the scholars, especially for Dr Bhagwan Singh. Is R.D. Banerji's Mohenjo-Daro: A forgotten report still in print? I know that a reprint was issued in 1984 from Varanasi.
Rakhal Das Banerji was the true discoverer of Mohenjo-Daro but John Marshall stole both his discovery and his report and appropriated the credit in his articles in the Illustrated London News.
Also, my late colleague Natwar Jha told me something interesting-- that Marshall saw that Harappan archaeology was full of Vedic symbolism and the writing had similarities to Brahmi, but Marshall deliberately suppressed it. One can speculate that he did to preserve the Aryan Myth, which was by then the official British ideology-- that Indians and British were fellow Aryans long separated but "brought together by Providence" in the words the British PM Stanley Baldwin.
Everyone talks about the Nazis using the Aryan myth but scholars are reticent about the British version. Even Thomas Trautmann in his two books totally ignores it, indulging in various diversions to preserve Harappan-Vedic separation and the late chronology of the Vedas. This is so even in his latest book (2011) India: Brief history of a civilization.
It is full of red herrings avoiding recent findings. I want to counter it by exposing Trautmann's dishonesty.
Any help in this direction would be appreciated.
N.S. Rajaram
--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com
|
