09-05-2006, 06:27 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Sep 4 2006, 06:50 AM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Sep 4 2006, 06:50 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
After W.Jones' suggestion that Sanskrit and the classical European tongues had a common origin in an <b>Indo-Germanic</b> language {Which later became Indo-European}, it was very well received, and many chairs of Indology were set up across nineteenth-century Germany. In Britain, which ruled India, had very few (not sure how mnay though).
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats why we need to psychoanalyze the 'scholars' from that time. Many things seem to have affected the nuts in vogue at the time. One nut gets overawed with yindoo lit and spins it so bible doesnt loose its primacy as the euro grand narrative. Another nut finds all these hegelian/communist thing too much to digest and wants to manufacture identity that can withstand such disturbing trends. Another hired gun says -> yeah these guys are cool and everything but they have got corrupted bible with them, so lets us euros spread word of god or something.
These nuts are still with us but I think we have not analyzed them properly. Our knowledge stops with muller when there are tonnes of other nutty bible-thumpers in these fields.
The more I read about it the more I find the present-day desi-AIT-believers amusing. I just found something very amusing --> one of the DalitVoice hero VT Rajshekhar (sp?) is pretty anti-semitic and yet this fellow claims to be a 'dalit' who per AIT must be the conquered one by the aryans.. Similarly the commies behavior is pretty amusing when you consider that the major AIT proponents have been anti-commie to the core..
Weird world, but lets address those when we get there, we still need to dig into late 18th early 19th century.
After W.Jones' suggestion that Sanskrit and the classical European tongues had a common origin in an <b>Indo-Germanic</b> language {Which later became Indo-European}, it was very well received, and many chairs of Indology were set up across nineteenth-century Germany. In Britain, which ruled India, had very few (not sure how mnay though).
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats why we need to psychoanalyze the 'scholars' from that time. Many things seem to have affected the nuts in vogue at the time. One nut gets overawed with yindoo lit and spins it so bible doesnt loose its primacy as the euro grand narrative. Another nut finds all these hegelian/communist thing too much to digest and wants to manufacture identity that can withstand such disturbing trends. Another hired gun says -> yeah these guys are cool and everything but they have got corrupted bible with them, so lets us euros spread word of god or something.
These nuts are still with us but I think we have not analyzed them properly. Our knowledge stops with muller when there are tonnes of other nutty bible-thumpers in these fields.
The more I read about it the more I find the present-day desi-AIT-believers amusing. I just found something very amusing --> one of the DalitVoice hero VT Rajshekhar (sp?) is pretty anti-semitic and yet this fellow claims to be a 'dalit' who per AIT must be the conquered one by the aryans.. Similarly the commies behavior is pretty amusing when you consider that the major AIT proponents have been anti-commie to the core..
Weird world, but lets address those when we get there, we still need to dig into late 18th early 19th century.