Re: THE COLLAPSE OF THE ARYAN INVASION THEORY - NICHOLAS KAZANAS (Feb. 2011)
library101
Need 'One God on Earth' Realization by Writers of such articles and
the 'so-called' Researchers as well
- Counting to 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am waiting to hear / read at least 10 confirmations of God
Realization on this newsgroup before I can be confident that we are
headed in the right direction without the possibility of turning back.
That means recognizing who is the unquestioned One God on Earth.
As I said before, all the scriptures collected from anyone other than
the One God on Earth alone are of questionable value at best and of
negative value at worst. If you find one statement saying 'ABCD is
true' and another saying 'ABCD is false', the sum total information
you get out of it is garbage (a 'logical contradiction' is of garbage
value). That is the value of most of these religious garbage collected
over the Ages and Ages and Ages by a bunch of Drooling Bats of the
Middle East who obtained it from the Air anyways.
We do not see it in such so-called research work shown below nor in
most of the scriptures. You can even see mockery 'Simpleton' by the
kRishis.
Believe it or not !
It won't get any clearer than this.
Rishi or no rishi this God phenomenon thing ain't waiting for no man.
I have all the Time in the world. But you may not have it. You are
already running behind in my 'Time'. We might see disease, disability,
mental illness (Drooling Bats like the ones displayed prominently in
this newsgroup itself), 'freezing into stone', vaporization, etc.
happening 'automatically', without my direct orders, if the world runs
into the 'Defiance of God Problem'.
That means the 'Neanderthals' (Neander Valley, Germany),
'animals' (Germany to Pakistan region - they have 100% automation in
some regions like Pakistan, Serbia, etc., I believe, and they do not
seem to have any problems being called animals), 'automatons' (mostly
in my 'Heavens'), 'humans' (most Bharatiya, I think), etc. who defy
the authority of the One God on Earth and obstruct the forward
movement of God on Earth may come to some grief, if they live through
it, that is.
You never know with some of these stubborn types, half of the cases
have the 'Superiority Problem' and the other half have the
'Inferiority Problem'. Never the twain shall meet. And they ain't
believing what they're seeing, neither.
Then we need less of the technology and less of the power and less of
the money and so on until we have a better hold on these cookies.
So long !
I am waiting, but you can't afford to do that !
I need to get a lot of things done. Sorry, you cannot be holding up
the 'River of Life' or the threatening the 'One World at Gun Point'
any more !
- HSN
(Worst of the Worst of the Worst Animals)
On Mar 3, 1:37 pm, use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr.
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> Forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
>
> The collapse of the Aryan Invasion Theory: Nicholas Kazanas (Feb. 2011)
>
> Wednesday, March 2, 2011
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/kalyan97/collapseofait
>
> Prof. Nicholas Kazanas, Director, Omilos Meleton Cultural Institute,
> Greece, delivering a lecture on 'The Collapse of Aryan Invasion
> Theory and the prevalence of Indigenism' at IIT-Madras on 26th
> February 2011.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsqMWj0WFKc
>
> (Video)
>
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72587146/slides-for-AIR
>
> (23 slides): All inclusiveness of Rigveda
>
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72461396/collapseofaryaninvasiontheory
>
> (25 slides)
>
> In a series of six lectures, in Chennai, between February 26 to March
> 2, 2011, Prof. Nicholas Kazanas presented perspectives on Vedic
> civilization, indigenous evolution of vedic language and culture,
> spread of vedic culture in interaction areas and the all-
> inclusiveness of Vedic thought and language.
>
> With the collapse of the Aryan Theory so effectively marshalled by
> the linguist, Prof. Nicholas Kazanas, the 'linguistic doctrine' of
> Indo-European (IE) linguistics articulated by the late Prof. MB
> Emeneau also collapses. Together with this twin collapse, the
> corollary 'Dravidian' theories will also have to be revised.
>
> The significance of the emerging 'indigene' paradigm, from ca. 4th
> millennium BCE, is that further researches are needed on the Indus
> language, on the Sanskritization of Saptasindhu and on the formation
> and evolution of Indian languages.
>
> The axis of Vedic culture: 'divinization or self-realisation:
>
> aha? brahma-asmi (B?h Up 1.4.10) &
> yas tu sarva?i bhutany-atmany-eva-anupasyati /
> sarvabhute?u ca-atmanam (Isa Up 6).
>
> ino visvasya bh vanasya gopa??
> s ma dhi?rah pa?kam atra? vivesa (RV 1.164.25)
>
> Rshi Dirghatama Auchattya: The mighty Guardian of this entire
> world, He, the wise One has settled in me, the simpleton.
>
> ah m d dh pit s p ri medha?m
> rtasya jagr bha
> aham su?rya iva-ajani (RV 8.6.10)
>
> Rshi Ka?va says: 'Having received
> from my father/teacher the
> essential knowledge (medha?) of
> the Cosmic Order (rta) I was
> (re)born like the Sungod Soorya!
>
> It is very difficult to derive "the Vedic ritual application of the
> theorem [of Pythagoras] from Babylonia. (The reverse process is
> easy.)" The application involves geometric algebra and there is no
> evidence of geometric algebra from Babylonia. And the geometry of
> Babylonia is already secondary whereas in India it is primary. Hence
> we do not hesitate to place the Vedic altar rituals, or, more
> exactly, rituals exactly like them, far back of 1700 BCE. "The
> elements of ancient geometry found in Egypt and Babylonia stem from a
> ritual system of the kind observed in the Sulvasutras" (Seidenberg
> 1962: 515).
>
> Seidenberg reiterated his finds in another paper in 1978. Note that
> the Mesopotamian ziggurats (=temples with steps) and the Egyptian
> mastamba-tombs and the step pyramid of Djoser, all in the 3rd
> millennium BCE, are based on trapezoid figures which are found in the
> Sulbasutras and those figures are at the basis of Vedic altar brick-
> constructions like the smasana-cit.
>
> River Sarasvati pre-3600 BCE
>
> a) Sharma et al in Puratattva 2006 present photographs of the
> Sarasvati(-Hakra) down to the sea. Francfort (1992), Possehl (1998),
> Lal (2002) give 3600 and before!
>
> b) s ras-vati 'she who has swirls /ponds, currents . vs? gatau :
> flowing, leaping, rushing. (cf L sal, Gk hial-, Toch sal 'leap ): >
> sar , s ras, sara-?yu?, sar t, sa ra etc.
>
> Av Haraxvaiti a river in S.E.Iran. harax- only occurrence : isolated.
> vairi- 'lake .
>
> Vedic and Avestan
>
> In Avestan -a > ?/e/i/o (nar-?m against V nar-am); voiced aspirates
> like dh > d, (da against V dha); original *s > h (haoma against
> soma); ? > ar/?r (as in ar?sti- against ???i 'spear ); Periphrastic
> perfect: acc. fem. ptcpl + ah- ('to be ) V acc. fem. + k?, (AV); then
> in Brahma?as as- and bhu-. Germanic has only anaugmented aorist.
> Vedic has both -- Greek has generally augmented aorist. dhat and
> dha t ! Isoglosses are better accommodated by Out of India Movements.
>
> Foundations of linguistic studies:
>
> Yaska ( Nigha??u & Nirukta);
> Pa?ini ( A??adhyayi ).
> Bhart?hari : Vakyapadiya
>
> Concepts (of Vibhakti and) karaka in West only in 19th cent -- i.e.
> surface and deep structure grammar and meaning.
>
> Vedic Tradition in Near East
>
> a) c 3000 possible influence on Egypt: Affinities in religion :
> creation through Speech; Sungod s boat; Cow of plenty; Lotus-born
> one; Creator s eye running off and being brought back; etc, etc.
> (Kazanas 2009, ch8.)
>
> Also, the Sulbasutra geometry and trapezoids for mastaba tombs and
> step-pyramid, etc. (Rajaram and Frawley 1997)
>
> b) c2600 on Mesopotamia : Actual trade links. Affinities in religion:
> Seven ??is; flood legend; horse sacrifice; magical rituals; etc, etc.
> (Kazanas 2009, ch7)
>
> Also the Sulbasutra geometry and ziggurats. (Rajaram and Frawley
> 1997)
>
> c) Perhaps Judaic culture with monotheism. (Kazanas 2009, ch7)
>
> Dr S. Levitt (New York) a) Comparison of Indic and Mesopotamian
> religions. By this "RV would date back to the beginning of the 3rd
> millennium BC with some of the earliest hymns perhaps dating to the
> end of the 4th millennium" (2002:356). b) And in 2005: He agrees with
> Kazanas that "the early Vedic tradition is dated earlier than is
> generally done by Western scholars" (p25: square brackets added).
>
> See also,
>
> http://www.vifindia.org/sites/default/files/Abstract_22_11_10.pdf
>
> Abstracts of presentations in an International Seminar on "How Deep
> are the Roots of Indian Civilization? An Archaeological and
> Historical Perspective" -- Vivekananda Intl. Foundation, Nov. 25 -
> 27, 2010
>
> Dr. B. B. Lal 2
> Dr. J.R. Sharma, CAZRI 2 - 3
> Prof. Shiva Bajpai 4 - 5
> Dr. R.S. Bisht 5
> Dr. Michel Danino 5 - 6
> Prof. Maurizio Tosi 6
> Dr. Jitendra Nath 7
> Prof. N. Kazanas 7 - 9
> Prof. Jim G. Shaffer 9 - 10
> Dr. Bhagwan Singh 10 - 11
> Prof. Nilofar Shaikh 11
> Pro. V.H. Sonawane 12
> Dr. A.K. Sharma 12 - 13
> Dr. Nandini Sahu 13
> Dr. K.N. Dikshit 13 - 14
> Dr. B.R. Mani 14 - 15
> Prof. Purushottam Singh 15 - 19
> Dr. D.K. Chakraborty 20 - 21
> Prof. Nayanjot Lahiri 21
> Dr. S Kalyanraman 21
> Maj. Gen. G.D. Bakshi 22
> Dr. Veena Datta 22 - 23
> Dr. Bhuwan Vikram 23 - 29 2
>
> These insights of Prof. Kazanas and the discovery of Indus-Sarasvati
> civilization should result in scrapping of all historical
> reconstructions which should start again from scratch. (E. Leach,
> 1990).
>
> - S. Kalyanaraman
>
> The collapse of the Aryan Invasion Theory
>
> N. Kazanas, 26 Feb. 2011, IIT, Chennai
>
> The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) started in late 18th and early 19th
> centuries as an explanation of the caste system. Thus various
> European scholars postulated an invasion from non-Indic people
> (Egyptian or Mesopotamian) who conquered the natives: the invaders
> (with a strong priestly class) became the two upper castes and the
> natives the two lower ones (vaishyas and sh dras). This was refined
> and turned into a linguistic matter after Jones made his speech about
> the relation between Sanskrit, Greek, Latin etc. The invaders became
> IE and so was formed a general theory of Aryan or IE invasions to
> account for the Greek, Italic, Germanic people and so on, in their
> historical habitats.
>
> In mid-nineteenth cent. Max M ller turned the Theory into an entirely
> linguistic affair. He postulated certain dates for the composition of
> Indic literature and these became fixed in the minds of indologists.
> Thereafter, all linguistic refinements for the IE tongues (Hittite,
> Greek, Baltic, Slavic etc) were worked out on this model, namely that
> there was a PIE language which mainly through migrations and
> invasions spread from an unspecified centre (but not India)
> and developed into the present different IE language including Old
> Indic (=Vedic Sanskrit) and Iranian (=Avestan and Old Persian).
>
> At the turn of the 19th to the 20th centuries this view was turned by
> Europeans (later the Nazis) into a thoroughly racial affair
> ascribing to themselves superiority. This racial doctrine has now
> been abandoned and we have only the linguistic one.
>
> In the 1920s were made the first important discoveries of the ancient
> Indus Valley or Harappan civilisation. This should have alerted
> indologists to the possibility that a large part of the Vedic
> literature was composed by this civilisation which I shall call
> hereafter the Indus-Sarasvati Civilisation or ISC in short, since
> most settlements were unearthed on or along the old Sarasvati river.
> This did not happen. Instead, indologists (mainly sanskritists) found
> in the ruins of this civilisation evidence that Indo-Aryans invaded
> and destroyed these cities just as the Rgveda says, according to
> their own interpretation, that Indra, the chief god of the
> conquerors destroyed the enemy purs 'towns, forts . So a big paradox
> remained: on the one hand, there was Vedic Literature (a vast corpus)
> without any other cultural (=archaeological) remains to support
> it; on the other, a large culture unearthed by
> archaeologists but without literature despite its knowledge of
> writing!
>
> However, in the 1960 s it was established by archaeologists that
> there had been no invasion , no wars, no violence, and that those
> towns had fallen into ruination because of natural causes, such as
> earthquakes which diverted the waters of some rivers and thus caused
> desiccation on a large scale. But the linguists persisted in their
> doctrine and the invasion became now "immigration". But this produced
> now a second big paradox, i.e. the aryanisation of this vast area
> where toponymics (=names of rivers, mountains etc) are Aryan
> (=Sanskritic), not Dravidian or names from another language: small
> waves of immigrants, according to linguists, produced the SJ & IA C 2
> aryanisation of a country which only invasion, conquest and coercion
> could have effected!
>
> Any impartial study of the facts, archaeological and linguistic,
> shows that there is no evidence of any kind to support the so called
> "waves of immigrations".
>
> On their side, all archaeologists, Western and Indian, say
> emphatically that there is unbroken continuity in the
> development of the ISC from the seventh millennium to the sixth cent.
> BCE when the Persian incursions occur. There is no trace at all of
> any other culture intruding into the ISC.
>
> (a) Anthropological evidence (cranial and skeletal) shows that there
> was no demographic disruption down to c 600, except perhaps for the
> period 6000-4500.
>
> (b) Genetical studies now show that there was no inflow of genes into
> the Indian subcontinent prior to c 600. On the contrary there was
> flow of genes out of India and into the north-western regions.
>
> Max M ller s dating of the Vedic Literature is based on fictions and
> has no basis whatever in reality.
>
> The so-called linguistic evidence (i.e. isoglosses, loan-words
> etc) can be, and have been, shown to require no immigration.
> One eminent linguist at least demonstrated that the original homeland
> is Bactria which is adjacent to Saptasindhu, the Land of the Seven
> Rivers (=N-W India and Pakistan).
>
> Positing Saptasindhu as the original homeland not only does not
> create problems but, on the contrary, dissolves all difficulties. For
> instance: (a) Vedic alone has dh tus and on the whole invariable
> principles in generating verbs and their conjugations and nouns and
> their declensions etc. (b) Vedic has both augmented Aorist (=past
> tense) like -dh t and anaugmented dh t from vdh put . Germanic has
> only anaugmented and Greek only augmented.
>
> (c) Vedic poetry has both strict metre and alliteration whereas
> Greek and Latin have only metrical verses and Germanic
> poetry has alliterative lines only without strict metre. (d) No two
> IE cultures ( e.g. Baltic, Celtic, Germanic etc) have any IE theonyms
> (=names of deities) to the exclusion of Vedic. On the other hand,
> Vedic has 20 theonyms of which Greek has, Germanic 8, Italic (=Latin)
> and Celtic 6 and the others even less.
>
> It is agreed by all, including Western invasionists like Witzel, that
> the ? gveda hymns were composed around the Sarasvati area. But while
> they give a date of composition c 1200-1000, the available literary,
> anthropological and archaeological evidences indicate a date before
> 3500. Here I summarise broadly the most important points.
>
> 1. The Brhad ranyaka Upanisad has a list of 60 teachers. If we allow
> 15 years for each one, we obtain a period of 900 years. If the BU is
> of 600 BC, as the AIT scenario wants, the list takes as back to 1500.
> But none of the 60 teachers nor the doctrine 'Atman is Brahman or 'I
> am Brahman appear in the RV; the doctrine appears in the Atharva
> Veda in an approximate form. Given that the RV is linguistically many
> centuries earlier than the BU, the RV must be put at least 500-600
> earlier, i.e. before 2000!
>
> 2. Linguistically the RV is many centuries older than the
> Br hmanas and the Mah bh rata. Palaeoastronomy (astrophysicist N.
> Achar) has shown that astronomical references in the Shatapatha
> Br hmana are true for the date 3000-2950. Several astronomical
> references in the epic are true for 3100-3000!
>
> Thus the RV must be from about 3500 and before.
>
> 3. The Rgveda does not have many features that characterise the ISC
> and appear only later in post-rigvedic texts. Thus there are NOT --
>
> (a) istak the brick, mostly of raw mud, sometimes baked. This was
> one of the main construction materials in the Early ISC starting at
> about 3500. Prior to this houses were fashioned of wood with wattle-
> and-daub, as described in the RV;
>
> (b) larger urban settlements in the RV as we find them in the ISC;
>
> (c) fixed altars or hearths as described in the Yajur Veda and the
> Br hmanas;
>
> (d) ruins or ruined towns;
>
> (e) cotton karp sa;
>
> (f)silver rajata;(g) rice vr hi;
>
> (h) literacy 'lipi, lekha(-na) ;
>
> (i) artistic iconography (sculpture, relief, seals). Bricks are
> mentioned first in Yajur Veda and extensively in the Br hmanas.
> Silver appears as rajata-hiranya in the Yajur Veda; rice vr hi in the
> Atharva Veda; cotton karp sa, first in Baudh yana s S tras; and so
> on.
>
> 4. The river Sarasvat is praised as a mighty and all nourishing
> river in all the Books or the RV except the fourth. Even in late
> hymns such as 8.21 or 10.64 and 10.177 Sarasvat is said to give
> wealth and nourishment and the poets invoke her as great . In 6.52
> Sarasvat is swollen by other (three or more) rivers ; in 6.61 she
> is endless, swift-moving, most dear among her sisters and nourishing
> the five tribes of the Vedic people; in 2.41.16 Sarasvat is best
> river, best mother, best goddess ; in 7.95.2 this mighty river flows
> pure from the mountains to the ocean .
>
> The river dried up around 1900 BCE. So the RV is referring to a
> condition long before the end of the river. Archaeologists and
> palaeohydrologists say that Sarasvat flowed from the Himalayas to
> the ocean (in the Rann of Kutch) before 3800 BCE. Satellite photos
> and other analyses confirm now the route of the river from the
> mountain to the ocean. After this period some of the rivers feeding
> the Sarasvat were, due to tectonic shifts, captured by other rivers
> (eg the Indus and the Ganges) and so this once mighty river weakened
> and began to dry up reaching its final desiccation c 1900 BCE.
>
> Consequently the RV, or at least all those hymns that praise
> Sarasvat were composed before 3600 possibly before 4000. This date
> agrees with the building materials and techniques (the pre-brick
> phase) of the very early Harappan culture, as established by
> archaeologists and as described in RV.
>
> Conclusion: If the bulk of several hymns of the RV were composed c
> 4000-3600 the Indoaryans using the Vedic language were settled in
> Saptasindhu at that period.Whatever else might have happened
> before that period, the Indoaryans were by 1700 BCE thoroughly
> indigenous.
>
> About Prof. Nicholas Kazanas
>
> Nicholas Kazanas was born in Greece in 1939. He studied English
> Literature at University College, Economics and Philosophy at the
> School of Economic Science and Sanskrit at theSchool of Oriental and
> African studies -- all in London; also post-graduate at SOAS and at
> Deccan College in Pune. Prof. Kazanas taught in London and Athens and
> since 1980 has been Director of Omilos Meleton Cultural Institute. In
> Greece he has published treatises of social, economic and
> philosophical interest. He has many publications in Western and
> Indian Journals and some books. He is on the Editorial Board of Adyar
> Library Bulettin (Chennai). He has participated in international
> Conferences in London, in the USAand in India. From 1997 he has
> turned towards the Vedic Tradition and its place in the wider Indo-
> European culture. This research comprises thorough examination of
> Indo-European cultures, comparing their philosophical ideas and
> values, their languages, mythological issues and religions
>
> See also:
>
> 'Indo-Aryan indigenism and the Aryan Invasion Theory arguments'
> (refuted)
>
> By N. Kazanas
>
> This paper examines the general IndoEuropean issue and argues in
> favour of Indoaryan indigenism against the AIT (Aryan
> Invasion/Immigration Theory) which has been mainstream doctrine for
> more than a century. The extreme positions that there was no
> ProtoIndoEuropean (PIE) language or that this language is as
> currently reconstructed are refuted: the evidence suggests there was
> a PIE language but this cannot be reconstructed and all efforts and
> confidence in this reconstruction are misplaced. Indeed, all
> reconstructions of Proto-languages seem futile and, since they are in
> no way verifiable, should not be used as evidence for historical
> events. Indeed all the data used as evidence by the AIT are wholly
> conjectural and arbitrary and often consist of misrepresentations and
> distortions, as will be clearly demonstrated in detail. All the
> arguments used for the AIT have been analytically presented by E.
> Bryant (2001) and summed up in his concluding chapter. These will be
> examined one by one and shown to be fallacious. We shall also refer
> to some material not in Bryant - e.g. genetic studies after 2001CE
> and mythological motifs never examined in this connection.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 291kB)
>
> 'Indigenous Indoaryans and the Rigveda', by N. Kazanas In this paper
> I argue that the IndoAryans (IA hereafter) are indigenous from at
> least 4500 (all dates are BCE except when otherwise stated) and
> possibly 7000. In this effort are utilized the latest archaeological
> finds and data from Archaeoastronomy, Anthropology and Palaeontology.
> I use in addition neglected cultural and linguistic evidence. I find
> no evidence at all for an invasion. The new term "migration" is a
> misnomer since a migration could not have produced the results found
> in that area. The Rigveda (=RV) is neither post-Harappan nor
> contemporaneous with the ISC but much earlier, ie from the 4th
> millennium (with minor exceptions) and perhaps before.
>
> The bibliography of this study is available as a separate pdf file.
>
> This paper was published in the Journal of IndoEuropean Studies 2002.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 300kB)
>
> 'The RV Date - a Postscript', by N. Kazanas
>
> This examines some of Prof M Witzel's (erroneous) notions which
> perpetuate the AIT (=Aryan Invasion Theory) and which had not been
> discussed in 'The RV and IndoEuropeans'. It presents some new
> evidence and new ideas for a pre-3100 BC date of the RV and the
> indigenous origin of the IndoAryans and criticizes Prof Witzel's
> vicious attacks on some Indian and non-Indian scholars, who promote
> the indigenist point of view.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 78kB)
>
> 'AIT and Scholarship', by N. Kazanas
>
> N Kazanas wrote 'AIT and Scholarship' in May-June 2001. This was
> first posted here. It deals with some additional (erroneous) notions
> of Prof M Witzel and the major (but not all) aspects of his
> 'Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian
> Texts' (EJVS 7-3, pp 1-93, 2001). Apart from the AIT, this study
> examines other cases of corruption in academic disciplines like
> Egyptology, Anthropology etc, where evidence against maistream views
> is discarded, as well as the etymology of the terms 'academia' and
> 'academic' and the development from Plato's Academy in Athens to
> modern notions.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 233kB)
>
> 'Reply to prof. Witzel', by N. Kazanas
>
> Prof Witzel wrote a very superficial critique of 'AIT and
> Scholarship' ignoring the title, lampooning the presentation of the
> development of modern academia and making all kinds of irrelevant
> remarks (5/7/01). So N Kazanas wrote a reply selecting some of the
> mosts salient points in 'Addendum to "AIT and Scholarship"': reply to
> Prof Witzel and incorporating some (lengthy) remarks of V Agarwal.
> All this was completed and posted in sept 2001 here. The most
> significant point, apart from Prof Witzel's irrelevances, is N
> Achar's firm discovery that some astronomical dates in the
> Mahabharata indicate the date of 3067 BC for the Great War.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 138kB)
>
> 'Final Reply', by N. Kazanas.
>
> Reply to nine critics in the debate on Indoaryan ?rigins initiated by
> and published in theJournal of Indo-european Studies, 2002-2003.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 170kB)
>
> 'A Reply to Michael Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda'' by Vishal
> Agarwal, 11 August 2003.
>
> (Journal of Indo-European Studies, Vol. 31, No.1-2: pp.107-185,
> 2003).
>
> The "A Reply to Michael Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda'" was sent
> to us by V.Agarwal (Minesotta, USA). It was written in July 2003 as a
> reply to Prof M. Witzel's 'Ein Fremdling im Rgveda', 2003, Journal of
> Indo-European Studies, and was posted on the Journal's website. It
> provides supplementary material to N. Kazanas' 'Final Reply' covering
> various aspects not dealt with by, or unknown to the latter. One
> should note that when Kazanas mentions "black copper" (kRshNa-
> /karshaNa-ayas or Syama- 'swarthy metal') he nowhere means bronze as
> Witzel takes it (p 175) and Agarwal need not have elaborated the
> bronze-aspect.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 596kB)
>
> (Bibliography - Download the PDF file - 118kB)
>
> 'Sanskrit and Proto-Indo-European' by N. Kazanas
>
> This essay is published in 2004 Indian Linguistics. It challenges
> many generally accepted notions in IndoEuropean linguistics like the
> 5-grade ablaut, labio-velar sounds, roots etc. At the same time it
> discloses the great antiquity of Sanskrit (or Vedic) and argues that
> the Sanskrit retroflex sounds are ProtoIndoEuropean, but lost in the
> other IE stocks.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 159kB)
>
> 'Coherence and Preservation in Sanskrit'
>
> Published in VVRI 2006
>
> This paper examines more than 400 lexical items that have cognations
> in 3 or more IE branches (Vedic, Greek, Italic etc) and denote as far
> as possible invariable things, qualities and activities (bodily
> parts, relations and actions like breathing, dressing, rising etc).
> Sanskrit appears to have lost far fewer items and preserves much
> greater inner organic coherence than the other branches. This
> supports the general idea that Sanskrit is much closer to Proto-Indo-
> European and that, since this could happen only in sedentary
> conditions, the Indoaryan speakers of Sanskrit did not move (much)
> from the original homeland. Moreover, the criticism that this
> conclusion does not take into account the large literature in
> Sanskrit is shown to be fallacious. This collection of words is a
> good treasury for any comparisons.
>
> (Download the PDF file - 415kB)
>
> End of forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
>
> Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> Om Shanti
>
> o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
> purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
> have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
> poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
> fair use of copyrighted works.
> o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
> considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
> e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
> o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
> not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
>
> FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
> which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
> owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
> understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
> democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
> that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
> provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
> 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
> profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
> information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
> subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
> go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
> If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
> your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
> copyright owner.
>
> Since newsgroup posts are being removed
> by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
> this post may be reposted several times.