| Revision as of 02:50, 23 August 2006 editBakasuprman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,844 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:34, 23 August 2006 edit undo65.78.20.179 (talk) rvt vandqalism by Bose clone BakasupmanNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| At Kathmandu (1972-1978), he led the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project and the Nepal Research Centre. He has taught at Tübingen (1972), Leiden (1978-1986), and at Harvard (since 1986) and has held visiting appointments at Kyoto, Paris (twice), and Tokyo. | At Kathmandu (1972-1978), he led the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project and the Nepal Research Centre. He has taught at Tübingen (1972), Leiden (1978-1986), and at Harvard (since 1986) and has held visiting appointments at Kyoto, Paris (twice), and Tokyo. | ||
| He is noted for his studies of the ]s of ] , old ] , , the development of ] , , and the linguistic prehistory of South Asia . | He is noted for his studies of the ]s of ] , old ] , , the development of ] , , and the linguistic prehistory of South Asia . | ||
| He is editor-in-chief of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies (EJVS) , and the Harvard Oriental Series . | He is editor-in-chief of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies (EJVS) , and the Harvard Oriental Series . He has been president of the Association for the Study of Language in Prehistory (ASLIP) since 1999, and has been elected into the ] in 2003. | ||
| He has been elected into the ] in 2003. | |||
| == Work == | == Work == | ||
| Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
| The linguistic aspect of earliest Indian history has been explored in a number of papers (1993, 1999, 2000, 2001) dealing with the pre-Vedic substrate languages of Northern India. These result in a substantial amount of loan words from a prefixing language similar to ] (], ], etc.) as well as from other unidentified languages. In addition, a considerable number of Vedic and Old Iranian words are traced back to a Central Asian substrate language (1999, 2003, 2004, 2006). | The linguistic aspect of earliest Indian history has been explored in a number of papers (1993, 1999, 2000, 2001) dealing with the pre-Vedic substrate languages of Northern India. These result in a substantial amount of loan words from a prefixing language similar to ] (], ], etc.) as well as from other unidentified languages. In addition, a considerable number of Vedic and Old Iranian words are traced back to a Central Asian substrate language (1999, 2003, 2004, 2006). | ||
| In recent years, he has explored the links between old Indian, Eurasian and other mythologies (1990, 2001, 2004-6), resulting in a new scheme of historical comparative mythology that covers most of Eurasia and the Americas ("Laurasia", cf. the related Harvard, Kyoto and Beijing conferences, 1999-2006). | In recent years, he has explored the links between old Indian, Eurasian and other mythologies (1990, 2001, 2004-6), resulting in a new scheme of historical comparative mythology that covers most of Eurasia and the Americas ("Laurasia", cf. the related Harvard, Kyoto and Beijing conferences, 1999-2006). . | ||
| Recently, he has also published (2001-) some articles attacking what he calls "spurious interpretations" of Vedic texts and decipherments of Indus inscriptions such as that of N.S. Rajaram , pdf . He has co-authored a paper that questions the linguistic nature of the so-called ] (Farmer, Sproat, Witzel 2004) ]. | Recently, he has also published (2001-) some articles attacking what he calls "spurious interpretations" of Vedic texts and decipherments of Indus inscriptions such as that of N.S. Rajaram , pdf . He has co-authored a paper that questions the linguistic nature of the so-called ] (Farmer, Sproat, Witzel 2004) ]. | ||
| This paper has been criticized by Andrew Lawler and Gregory Possehl . | |||
| ⚫ | He has organized a number of international conferences at Harvard such as the first of the intermittent International Vedic Workshops (1989,1999,2004), the first of several annual International Conferences on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India (1995 sqq.), the yearly Round Tables on the Ethnogenesis of South and Central Asia (1999 sqq) , and the International Conference on Comparative Mythology (Beijing 2006) . | ||
| ⚫ | == Criticism == | ||
| ⚫ | {{NPOV-section}} | ||
| ⚫ | Several authors have criticized Witzel's approach to Vedic texts and history. Many of them reject the so-called ] and subscribe to a view of Indian history that stresses a purely Indian and autochthonous origin for the Vedas and Vedic civilization. Among them, David Frawley harshly criticizes Witzel in a 2002 essay.<ref></ref>. | ||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | Another author, ] asserts that Witzel's analyses are biased and defective. He also harshly criticizes Witzel for consistently misspelling his (Talageri's) name and mis-citing the title of his 1993 book. Since the misspelling and mis-citation follow the usage of a book review by Shri Girilal Jain, Talageri claims that Witzel has not read his book, but is criticizing it on the basis of hearsay. This criticism is contained in Chapter 9 of an online version of Talageri's book , which clearly postdates the original 1993 paper publication. The Witzel articles criticized by Talageri were published in 1995, suggesting that the online version is also later than 1995. | ||
| ⚫ | (Witzel's most extensive criticism of Talageri can be found in the April 2001 issue of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, at . Witzel describes Talageri's effort as "a long and confused ‘analysis' " and has criticized what he considers to be Talageri's wrong starting point, due to his neglect of well-known results dating back well over 100 years, e.g. in the analysis of the Rgveda by Hermann Oldenberg (Prolegomena, 1888, now available in English, Delhi: Motilal 2005). He also criticizes Talageri for lack of knowledge of Vedic Sanskrit and Western Vedic scholarship, citing page numbers. This suggests a close reading of the book. Whether or not Witzel had done such a close reading in 1995 is not clear.) | ||
| ⚫ | Witzel's approach to the so-called ] has also been controversial. Witzel has supported the view that Harrapan signs are just symbols (somewhat like modern highway signs) and not characters in a written language. This paper has been discussed by the journalist Andrew Lawler and criticized by the archeologist Gregory Possehl . | ||
| <ref> | <ref> | ||
| {{cite journal | {{cite journal | ||
| Line 28: | Line 39: | ||
| | publisher = American Association for the Advancement of Science}} | | publisher = American Association for the Advancement of Science}} | ||
| </ref> | </ref> | ||
| The paper has been opposed by those who argue that the Indus symbols are in fact a script, such as academics J. Mark Kenoyer, an archeologist of the University of Wisconsin, and Asko Parapola, an Indologist of the University of Helsinki. | |||
| ⚫ | He has organized a number of international conferences at Harvard such as the first of the intermittent International Vedic Workshops (1989,1999,2004), the first of several annual International Conferences on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India (1995 sqq.), the yearly Round Tables on the Ethnogenesis of South and Central Asia (1999 sqq) , and the International Conference on Comparative Mythology (Beijing 2006) . | ||
| ⚫ | == Criticism == | ||
| ⚫ | {{NPOV-section}} | ||
| ⚫ | Several |
||
| David Frawley harshly criticizes Witzel in a 2002 essay.<ref></ref>. | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | Another author, ] asserts that Witzel's analyses are biased and defective. He also harshly criticizes Witzel for consistently misspelling his (Talageri's) name and mis-citing the title of his 1993 book. Since the misspelling and mis-citation follow the usage of a book review by Shri Girilal Jain, Talageri claims that Witzel has not read his book, but is criticizing it on the basis of hearsay. This criticism is contained in Chapter 9 of an online version of Talageri's book , which clearly postdates the original 1993 paper publication. The Witzel articles criticized by Talageri were published in 1995, suggesting that the online version is also later than 1995. | ||
| ⚫ | (Witzel's most extensive criticism of Talageri can be found in the April 2001 issue of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, at . He criticizes Talageri for lack of knowledge of Vedic Sanskrit and Western Vedic scholarship, citing page numbers. This suggests a close reading of the book. Whether or not Witzel had done such a close reading in 1995 is not clear.) | ||
| ⚫ | Witzel's approach to the ] has also been controversial. Witzel has supported the view that Harrapan signs are just symbols (like highway signs) and not characters in a written language. |
||
| <ref> | <ref> | ||
| {{cite journal | {{cite journal | ||
Revision as of 13:34, 23 August 2006
Michael Witzel (born July 18, 1943 at Schwiebus, Germany) is Wales Professor of Sanskrit at Harvard University. He has been teaching Sanskrit since 1972. He studied Indology in Germany under P. Thieme, H.-P. Schmidt, K. Hoffmann and J. Narten as well as in Nepal under the Mīmāmsaka Jununath Pandit. At Kathmandu (1972-1978), he led the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project and the Nepal Research Centre. He has taught at Tübingen (1972), Leiden (1978-1986), and at Harvard (since 1986) and has held visiting appointments at Kyoto, Paris (twice), and Tokyo. He is noted for his studies of the dialects of Vedic Sanskrit , old Indian history , , the development of Vedic religion , , and the linguistic prehistory of South Asia . He is editor-in-chief of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies (EJVS) , and the Harvard Oriental Series . He has been president of the Association for the Study of Language in Prehistory (ASLIP) since 1999, and has been elected into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2003.
Work
Witzel’s early philological work (details at: ) deals with the oldest texts of India, the Vedas, their manuscripts and their traditional recitation; it included some editions and translations of unknown texts (1972-). He studied at length the various Vedic recensions (śākhā) and their importance for the geographical spread of Vedic culture across North India and beyond. This resulted in book-length investigations of Vedic dialects (1989), the development of the Vedic canon (1997), and of Old India as such (2003). Shorter papers provide analyses of important religious (2004) and literary concepts of the period, such as the oldest frame story (1986, 1987), prosimetric texts (1997), the Mahabarata (2005), the concept of rebirth (1984), the 'line of progeny' (2000), splitting one's head in discussion (1987), the holy cow (1991), the Milky Way (1984), the asterism of the Seven Rsis (1995, 1999), the sage Yajnavalkya (2003), the persistence of some Vedic beliefs in modern Hinduism (1989; 2002, with S. Farmer and J.B. Henderson), as well as some modern Indocentric tendencies (2001-).
Other work (1976-) deals with the traditions of medieval and modern Nepal, including its linguistic history, Brahmins, rituals, and kingship (1987), as well as with Old Iran and the Avesta (1972-), including its homeland (2000).
After 1987, he has increasingly focused on the localization of Vedic texts (1987) and the evidence contained in them for early Indian history, notably that of the Rgveda and the following period, represented by the Black Yajurveda Samhitas and the Brahmanas. This work has been done in close collaboration with Harvard archeologists. Witzel aims at indicating the emergence of the Kuru tribe in the Delhi area (1989, 1995, 1997, 2003), its seminal culture and its political dominance, as well as studying the origin of late Vedic polities and the first Indian empire in eastern North India (1995, 1997, 2003).
The linguistic aspect of earliest Indian history has been explored in a number of papers (1993, 1999, 2000, 2001) dealing with the pre-Vedic substrate languages of Northern India. These result in a substantial amount of loan words from a prefixing language similar to Austro-Asiatic (Munda, Khasi, etc.) as well as from other unidentified languages. In addition, a considerable number of Vedic and Old Iranian words are traced back to a Central Asian substrate language (1999, 2003, 2004, 2006).
In recent years, he has explored the links between old Indian, Eurasian and other mythologies (1990, 2001, 2004-6), resulting in a new scheme of historical comparative mythology that covers most of Eurasia and the Americas ("Laurasia", cf. the related Harvard, Kyoto and Beijing conferences, 1999-2006). .
Recently, he has also published (2001-) some articles attacking what he calls "spurious interpretations" of Vedic texts and decipherments of Indus inscriptions such as that of N.S. Rajaram , pdf . He has co-authored a paper that questions the linguistic nature of the so-called Indus Script (Farmer, Sproat, Witzel 2004) (PDF).
He has organized a number of international conferences at Harvard such as the first of the intermittent International Vedic Workshops (1989,1999,2004), the first of several annual International Conferences on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India (1995 sqq.), the yearly Round Tables on the Ethnogenesis of South and Central Asia (1999 sqq) , and the International Conference on Comparative Mythology (Beijing 2006) .
Criticism
 | The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Several authors have criticized Witzel's approach to Vedic texts and history. Many of them reject the so-called Aryan invasion theory and subscribe to a view of Indian history that stresses a purely Indian and autochthonous origin for the Vedas and Vedic civilization. Among them, David Frawley harshly criticizes Witzel in a 2002 essay..
Another author, Shrikant Talageri asserts that Witzel's analyses are biased and defective. He also harshly criticizes Witzel for consistently misspelling his (Talageri's) name and mis-citing the title of his 1993 book. Since the misspelling and mis-citation follow the usage of a book review by Shri Girilal Jain, Talageri claims that Witzel has not read his book, but is criticizing it on the basis of hearsay. This criticism is contained in Chapter 9 of an online version of Talageri's book , which clearly postdates the original 1993 paper publication. The Witzel articles criticized by Talageri were published in 1995, suggesting that the online version is also later than 1995.
(Witzel's most extensive criticism of Talageri can be found in the April 2001 issue of the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, at . Witzel describes Talageri's effort as "a long and confused ‘analysis' " and has criticized what he considers to be Talageri's wrong starting point, due to his neglect of well-known results dating back well over 100 years, e.g. in the analysis of the Rgveda by Hermann Oldenberg (Prolegomena, 1888, now available in English, Delhi: Motilal 2005). He also criticizes Talageri for lack of knowledge of Vedic Sanskrit and Western Vedic scholarship, citing page numbers. This suggests a close reading of the book. Whether or not Witzel had done such a close reading in 1995 is not clear.)
Witzel's approach to the so-called Indus script has also been controversial. Witzel has supported the view that Harrapan signs are just symbols (somewhat like modern highway signs) and not characters in a written language. This paper has been discussed by the journalist Andrew Lawler and criticized by the archeologist Gregory Possehl . The paper has been opposed by those who argue that the Indus symbols are in fact a script, such as academics J. Mark Kenoyer, an archeologist of the University of Wisconsin, and Asko Parapola, an Indologist of the University of Helsinki.
Politics
| The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
In 2005, several Indian-American groups (the Vedic Foundation, Hindu American Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation) asked the State of California to modify the content of California textbooks dealing with ancient Indian history and also with Hinduism. Witzel wrote a letter to the Board of Education protesting some of these changes. He was supported by many academics and by various Indian-American groups who disagreed with the original critics, including several groups spearheaded by Dalit Christians. A final decision on the textbook issue, which has drawn international attention in the press, was reached by vote of the Board of Education on March 8, 2006. Most of the proposed modifications were rejected. The critics have sued and the suit is on-going.
References
- "The Indus Script--Write or Wrong?". Science. 306. American Association for the Advancement of Science: 2026–2029. December 2004.
- "The Indus Script--Write or Wrong?". Science. 306. American Association for the Advancement of Science: 2026–2029. December 2004.
Publications
- Michael Witzel, "On the localisation of Vedic texts and schools." In: India and the Ancient world. History, Trade and Culture before A.D. 650. P.H.L. Eggermont Jubilee Volume, ed. by G. Pollet. Leuven: Departement Oriëntalistiek 1987 173-213
- Michael Witzel, Tracing the Vedic dialects in Dialectes dans les litteratures Indo-Aryennes ed. Caillat, Paris, 1989, 97-265.
- Michael Witzel, Early Indian History: Linguistic and Textual Parameters, in: Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity. The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia, ed. G. Erdosy, Berlin/New York (de Gruyter) 1995, 85-125.
- Michael Witzel, Rgvedic history: poets, chieftains and politics, in: Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity. The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia, ed. G. Erdosy, Berlin/New York (de Gruyter) 1995, 307-352.
- Michael Witzel, "Early Sanskritization. Origins and development of the Kuru State". B. Kölver (ed.), Recht, Staat und Verwaltung im klassischen Indien. The state, the Law, and Administration in Classical India. München : R. Oldenbourg 1997, 27-52
- Michael Witzel, Das Alte Indien . München: C.H. Beck 2003
- Michael Witzel, "Substrate Languages in Old Indo-Aryan (Rgvedic, Middle and Late Vedic), EJVS Vol. 5,1, Aug. 1999, 1-67
- Michael Witzel, Linguistic Evidence for Cultural Exchange in Prehistoric Western Central Asia. Philadelphia: Sino-Platonic Papers 129, 2003
- Michael Witzel, "The Rgvedic Religious System and its Central Asian and Hindukush Antecedents". In: A. Griffiths & J.E.M. Houben (eds.). The Vedas: Texts, Language and Ritual. Groningen: Forsten 2004: 581-636
- Michael Witzel, "Comparison and Reconstruction : Language and Mythology." Mother Tongue VI, 2001, 45- 62
- Michael Witzel, "Vala and Iwato. The Myth of the Hidden Sun in India, Japan and beyond." EJVS 12-1, 2005, 1-69
- Michael Witzel, "Creation myths." In: T. Osada (ed.). Proceedings of the Pre-Symposium of RHIN and 7th ESCA Harvard-Kyoto Round Table. Published by the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RHIN), Kyoto, Japan 2006: 101-135
- M. Witzel and S. Farmer, "Horseplay in Harappa" Fontline, Oct. 10, 2000.
- Steve Farmer, Richard Sproat, and Michael Witzel, "The Collapse of the Indus-Script Thesis: The Myth of a Literate Harappan Civilization", EVJS, vol. 11 (2004), issue 2 (Dec)