Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/rmahomerargume00lillrich#page/n7/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia700301.us.archive.org/18/items/rmahomerargume00lillrich/rmahomerargume00lillrich.pdf

In Homer's Iliad (and Troy) you see too many parallels with ancient Indian culture and very shockingly with the codes and conducts of war as prescribed in the Mahabharat. I am still on holidays, just saw a few things and still have to reply to mails, but got excited after I saw the Homer reference. Cheers.

Just a quick comment. I've not read the book so I can only be very general and vague. I'm always cautious about such interpretations, it's all too easy to find parallels and relegate differences to mere detail. It's conceivable that Homer had heard stories that had travelled and blended them into his own, though stories can travel in many directions. There may be a third common source or it could be coincidence. The latter has to be one possibility given the similarity between the two societies. Similar codes of conduct, as Sumer mentions, may have independently evolved as the societies evolved. The Bible's Flood story is very similar to a Flood story in the earlier Epic of Gilgamesh, on the other hand there are similar stories in native American culture. Similarly there are, independently, pyramids in S. America and Egypt. OTOH I rather like the idea of a commonality of cultures... We know that goods travelled great distances, so we can be certain that stories, and ideas, also travelled.

The idea of going to war over a woman could have been borrowed from Ramayan by Homer, the 2 antagonists of Troy, Achilies and Hector find a parallel in Arjun and Karna from Mahabharat. Both in each pair were noble, royal and invincible warriors. The real reason for war in Ramayan was the Aryanizing of Bharatvarsh, i.e. spreading Aryan influence right down to Sri Lanka, in Iliad it was quest for mineral wealth by Menelause the Macedonian king. Iliad was the time frame when the world was coming into iron age from bronze age and hence iron was greatly sought after. Both in Ramayan, Mahabharat and Iliad there were divine heros on both sides, i.e. warriors with 1 parent from earth and the other a celestial being.

If Ramayan was about Ram wanting to rescue his wife only and not spreading Aryan influence, consider the following incident in Ramayan: On the 4th day of war, Ravana himself came out battle Ram. Both fought a duel that the gods came out to get an aerial view of from their celestial chariots. One after another, Ravan had to pick 100 bows from his chariot and each time Ram managed to cut the string of the 100 bows with his arrows (Rambann). Ram with his arrow fell the flag on Ravan's chariot, killed his sarthi (chariot driver), killed the horses and had Ravana jump off the chariot with sword in hand when a wheel of the chariot was smashed by an arrow of Ram. Next Ram with his arrow smashed the sword held by Ravana and Ravana was rendered weaponless and helpless. Now comes the interesting part: Instead of capturing/killing Ravana and rescuing his wife, Ram tells Ravana, "Oh Ravana you are helpless and Ram never strikes even his enemies when they are weaponless. Moreover you are wounded. Go back to your palace, rest, recuperate and come back again to fight." The question arises, did Ram want his woman back or not really. Why didn't he rescue Sita on the 4th day itself? Apparently if this narration is true than Ram was not fighting for Sita. In which case, what was he fighting for?????? I would say to spread aryan influence over the entire sub-continent.

BTW, the yavana (ionian) race was founded, as per the claims of the indic sacred lore, by turvasu, son of yayati.

Thanks Pankaj. That is new for me.

Very Interesting interpretation.the funny thing is that any story that fits with biblical stories get publicly announced even if found on poor logic and anything that makes India as source of the story is treated with great caution .Why? aryanization and aryans moving in from central asia or wherever is a big myth that has been questioned by many but still finds its proponents parroting the myth

Dubbing aryanisation as a myth is a recent argument. It requires lot more credibility to explain the aryan-dravidan barriers that still exist from ages.