Guest guest Posted June 19, 2001 Report Share Posted June 19, 2001 What's the rough date of cilappatikAram and that of Bhagavatam? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2001 Report Share Posted June 22, 2001 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2001 Report Share Posted June 22, 2001 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2001 Report Share Posted June 23, 2001 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2001 Report Share Posted June 23, 2001 > 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2001 Report Share Posted June 25, 2001 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.