[Y-Indology] Krishna and Gopis

[Guest guest]

What's the rough date of cilappatikAram and that of Bhagavatam?

[Guest guest]

Regarding the date of the Bhaagavatapuraa.na, then there is no

complete consensus between scholars as to when the text was

composed. Ganesh Vasudeo Tagare discusses the date of the

text in the introduction to his translation of ("The Bhaagavata

Puraa.na," Ancient Indian Tradition and Mythology Vol. 7, Delhi:

Motilal Banarsidass, 1976, pp. xxxiv-xl). He mentions opinions

ranging from 1200 BCE to 1300 CE. He himself believes it was

composed around 400 BCE (see p. xli).

 

I hope this helps a little.

 

Sincerely,

Toke Lindegaard Knudsen

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, vvrsps@r... wrote:

> What's the rough date of cilappatikAram and that of Bhagavatam?

 

If Manimekhalai is placed in the second century CE (Danielou), that

will make the date for CilappatikAram also about second century CE.

 

Since Bhagavata Purana is mentioned by Alberuni, it must have been

available by 11th cent. although some claim it may have been composed

by grammarian Vopadeva, who lived in 13h cent at the court of

Hemadri, Raja of Devagiri. Bhagavata purana is considered post-Gupta

by several scholars.

 

Yashwant

[Guest guest]

Just to note that Hemadri was not at any time the Raja of

Devagiri. He was the minister of the Yaadava king at Devagiri.

Best,

Madhav Deshpande

 

INDOLOGY, ymalaiya wrote:

> INDOLOGY, vvrsps@r... wrote:

> > What's the rough date of cilappatikAram and that of

Bhagavatam?

>

> If Manimekhalai is placed in the second century CE (Danielou),

that

> will make the date for CilappatikAram also about second

century CE.

>

> Since Bhagavata Purana is mentioned by Alberuni, it must

have been

> available by 11th cent. although some claim it may have been

composed

> by grammarian Vopadeva, who lived in 13h cent at the court of

> Hemadri, Raja of Devagiri. Bhagavata purana is considered

post-Gupta

> by several scholars.

>

> Yashwant

[Guest guest]

> INDOLOGY, ymalaiya wrote:

>If Manimekhalai is placed in the second century CE (Danielou),

> that will make the date for CilappatikAram also about second

> century CE.

 

I think Danielou follows V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar

who wrote early in the 20th century. VRR's 2nd century is

based on Gajabahu synchronism, many have written about

this - Brenda Beck is one, I think. This date is way too

early for maNi. or cil.

 

Zvlebil, scholars in P. Schalk's volume on maNi. place

cil. in 5th cent. A.D. and maNi. in 6th.

 

The earliest tamil brahmi inscriptions dating sangam era

kings with roman emperors (some just erased the

roman name, and put their name on top of the original)

do not work for cil. or maNi. to be 2nd cent.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

At 06:02 PM 6/22/01 +0000, ymalaiya wrote:

>INDOLOGY, vvrsps@r... wrote:

> > What's the rough date of cilappatikAram and that of Bhagavatam?

>

>If Manimekhalai is placed in the second century CE (Danielou), that

>will make the date for CilappatikAram also about second century CE.

>

>KAN Shastri and Zvelebil both suggest substantially later dates. I just

>got critiqued in a dissertation report for not giving enough attention to

>this.

 

 

John Napier