The cut-off date in the Mahābhārata
debate
Last January, Srimati Neera Mishra’s Draupadi Dream
Trust organized a three-day zoom conference on the chronology of the historical
battle at the heart of the much-expanded epic Mahābhārata. Specialists
from different disciplines took part in the debate; we do not have the ambition
for a tour d’horizon of the different positions. Let’s just summarize the
contrast between the archaeologists’ option for the -2nd millennium
and the (professional and self-taught) astronomers’ choice for the late -4th
millennium. (It could have been even earlier, in the -6th
millennium, but Nilesh Oak hadn’t been invited.)
Jijith Nadamuri Ravi, engineer and sanskritist, made a
good overview, and in his account, the archaeologists made a convincing case
why the archaeological evidence doesn't allow for a date prior to the -2nd
millennium. There wouldn't be much of a debate over the date, and there
wouldn't be claims for the -4th millennium or earlier, if there hadn't been
traditionalists and others basing themselves solely on the astronomical data,
impervious to any other evidence. Only, a second look at this astronomical
evidence shows up one pointer, a central one, that sends the date of the battle
to the -2nd millennium even on astronomical grounds. I've shown it before on
various forums, but all those who want to deduce the Mahābhārata date from astronomy
doggedly keep on ignoring it.
In the story of Bhīṣma’s self-chosen death, the
asterism Māgha, centred around the major star Maghā/Regulus, is
said to be on or past the solstice axis: the asterism/star itself is just past
the Summer Solstice, so that the calendar asterism, situated in opposition
where the sun is when the full moon is in the physical asterism, is past the
Winter Solstice. Indeed, Bhishma elects to give up the ghost when the sun is
"past the Winter Solstice/Uttarāyaṇa" and "in Māgha".
He dies when the moon is with Rohiṇī/Aldebaran, which is some 98° past
this point, a distance covered by the moon in 7 1/2 days; hence it is said
that Bhīṣma died on Māgha Śukla Āṣṭamī, the 8th day, therefore
also called Bhīṣmāṣṭamī. This implies that he died 8 days past the
Solstice/ Uttarāyaṇa. (Or more, if the New Moon didn't exactly coincide
with the solstice axis anymore.)
Now, when did Maghā/Regulus pass the Solstice?
The earth's polar axis describes a precessional cycle of 25772 years, or ca. 71
years per degree of arc. In this cycle, Maghā is today 60° past the
solstice axis. We calculate backwards: 60 x 71 years ago, i.e. 4260 years ago,
i.e. ca. -2240. Moreover, we are already on the 8th day of the asterism defined
by this star, and 8 days translate precessionally into 568 years, so the
end result is ca. -1672. All this may have some imprecision about it, so we don't
commit ourselves to a specific year, but certainly to the 2nd millennium. We
leave it to others to argue out -1478 vs. -1728 etc., but we do stick to this
non-negotiable conclusion: it must have been well past -2240, the cut-off time
when Maghā passed the solstice axis.
This makes it impossible for the Mahābhārata battle
to have taken place in 3139, as “the tradition" (but not the Mahābhārata
itself, only an "invented tradition" dating to much later, probably
ca. +500) says, nor in 3067, nor 5561, nor any other year prior to -2240. If
you at all must deny the king-lists and the archaeological evidence pointing to
the -2nd millennium, and exclusively stick to the astronomical
evidence, well alright, here is astronomical evidence. Unlike all the rest of
it, this is not convoluted or contradictory, it is simple and straigntforward. And it excludes the high chronologies.
Read more!
