Talk:Copper Hoard culture: Difference between revisions
Tag: Reverted |
Undid revision 1033259844 by Zombie gunner (talk) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
how can scholars be so biased towards indian arts, there are still tons of iconographic statues from mauryan time, one of which already depicts indra, even going back as early as four hundred BC in one saurasthra coin and here in this article a delusional viewpoint that indra was depicted in the first century BC probably influenced by zeus iconography. The western arts scholars are hell bent on pushing indian artistic analysis towards dates which closely relates to their greek fathers to suit their agenda some how, the thunderbolt of zeus has nothing greek about him since they are shown in all mesopotamian thunder gods iconography, indra is depicted in india as early as indus valley civilization with the same thunderbolt throwing posture, the western/ western influenced indian scholars are just too blindfolded and too aryanistic and egoistic to honestly comment on indian arts. what has symbolism got anything to do with aniconism, its already assumed that symbolism means aniconic, why scholars refuse to use their brains and relate the indus and mauryan iconography to indian gods before putting all burden on the greeks?.[[Special:Contributions/115.135.118.112|115.135.118.112]] ([[User talk:115.135.118.112|talk]]) 14:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC) |
how can scholars be so biased towards indian arts, there are still tons of iconographic statues from mauryan time, one of which already depicts indra, even going back as early as four hundred BC in one saurasthra coin and here in this article a delusional viewpoint that indra was depicted in the first century BC probably influenced by zeus iconography. The western arts scholars are hell bent on pushing indian artistic analysis towards dates which closely relates to their greek fathers to suit their agenda some how, the thunderbolt of zeus has nothing greek about him since they are shown in all mesopotamian thunder gods iconography, indra is depicted in india as early as indus valley civilization with the same thunderbolt throwing posture, the western/ western influenced indian scholars are just too blindfolded and too aryanistic and egoistic to honestly comment on indian arts. what has symbolism got anything to do with aniconism, its already assumed that symbolism means aniconic, why scholars refuse to use their brains and relate the indus and mauryan iconography to indian gods before putting all burden on the greeks?.[[Special:Contributions/115.135.118.112|115.135.118.112]] ([[User talk:115.135.118.112|talk]]) 14:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
== Omiting the early dating and south Indian site of Kallur == |
|||
Even though Kallur, a south Indian site has been identified as copper hoard culture site it has been omitted to suit the specific agenda of the article. similarly another link giving an early date of 3rd mil BCE has also been omitted along with finds from Arabian peninsula. [[User:Zombie gunner|Zombie gunner]] ([[User talk:Zombie gunner|talk]]) 15:47, 12 July 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:49, 12 July 2021
 | India Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Archaeology Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Indra iconography
how can scholars be so biased towards indian arts, there are still tons of iconographic statues from mauryan time, one of which already depicts indra, even going back as early as four hundred BC in one saurasthra coin and here in this article a delusional viewpoint that indra was depicted in the first century BC probably influenced by zeus iconography. The western arts scholars are hell bent on pushing indian artistic analysis towards dates which closely relates to their greek fathers to suit their agenda some how, the thunderbolt of zeus has nothing greek about him since they are shown in all mesopotamian thunder gods iconography, indra is depicted in india as early as indus valley civilization with the same thunderbolt throwing posture, the western/ western influenced indian scholars are just too blindfolded and too aryanistic and egoistic to honestly comment on indian arts. what has symbolism got anything to do with aniconism, its already assumed that symbolism means aniconic, why scholars refuse to use their brains and relate the indus and mauryan iconography to indian gods before putting all burden on the greeks?.115.135.118.112 (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC)