Any research must follow a proper methodology. The dating research of the Itihāsas is no exception. They describe the past events as had happened. As such they come closer to history that is aimed at absolute or exact dating of the events. In this write-up I have assessed the methodologies as applicable to the Itihāsas and arrived at primary and secondary sources of evidence as suitable for dating Mahābhārata
Primary evidences are original documents and materials of the period under study. The text of Mahabharata is the prime most evidence. Fortunately the time period of Kali Yuga starting at the time of the author of Mahabharata offers another source of prime evidence. In fact Mahabharata was recited to the outside world only after Kali Yuga began. It was recited in the presence of the author, Vyasa and the king Janamejaya. Therefore any inscription issued by Janamejaya having relevance to dates becomes another primary source of evidence. Contemporaneity is the hallmark of primary evidence.
Secondary sources are those created by non-contemporaneous people, not having firsthand experience of the event. Written works by later day people based on primary sources become secondary evidence. They are admissible in support of primary evidence but do not stand on their own. The so-called Epoch of Arundhati running for 6000 years is neither primary evidence nor secondary evidence. A product of 'Hypothetico-deductive method', it is a mis-fit for absolute dating of Mahabharata. Mahabharata date is neither a hypothesis, nor a theory, but a point of time, an exact time.
Dvaraka submergence becomes a primary evidence, by having an exact date coming 7 days after Kali Yuga began. Any marine excavation coming up with a date matching with primary evidence is admissible, otherwise no. Any evidence not going along with date of primary evidence is rejected.
Other evidences such as Saraswati drying-up, Sutlej, Yamuna changing the course and genetic dip are not admissible for not being date-specific, and happening over years. They come under geological, paleological, genetic studies, but not historical dating of Mahabharata.
Coming to the methods of research, the methods are techniques or tools to find the answer to the research question. In Mahabharata, the date is already available by Primary evidence. So there is NO research question. This date must be verified by 2 types of data derived from Mahabharata.
Since Mahabharata gives the dates in traditional Pancanga elements, it is high time people realize that a dating process done with a proper methodology of research and in conformance with the original time elements given in Mahabharata lends authenticity to the date.
Two data sets -(1) Pancanga elements of events and (2) planetary references - must be collected and tested in simulators. The choice of simulator depends on passing the test of reliability - the test being the Kali Yuga date with pancanga features and planetary positions.
Reasons for the unsuitability of astronomy simulators are listed in the article. In contrast astrology software simulated to Surya Siddhanta passes the test of Kali Yuga proving the reliability of that model for Kali Yuga time of zero ayanamsa. It has triple advantages. Read the details in the article here: Methodology of Research for Dating Mahabharata
The plan of the article:
·
Scientific dating of Mahābhārata
·
Where Itihāsa research differs from
Science research
·
Methodology for dating.
·
Primary evidence for the date of
Mahābhārata
·
Importance of inscriptions as primary
evidence for dating
·
Are there secondary sources of evidence
to Mahābhārata?
·
Is the Epoch of Arundhati a source of
evidence?
·
Status of Dvaraka submergence, a primary
or secondary evidence?
·
Other evidences.
·
Methods of dating research
·
A note on Pancāṅga elements
·
Compilation of the data
·
Verification of the data and the date
through simulators.
· Choice of simulators.
