For regular videos on ancient cultures and forgotten civilizations,
please subscribe. If you would like to support the channel and become part of
our ancient history fan community, visit patreon.com/worldofantiquity.
Hey there! Welcome to the World of Antiquity Book Review series, in which I share with you
some thoughts about books I have been reading about ancient history. Some of you told me that
you also would like me to review books I don’t like. Well, you’re going to get your wish today.
In this review, I am looking at a book that several people recommended to me,
saying it presented convincing scientific evidence, based on astronomy,
for the dating of an ancient Indian text called The Mahabharata. I love stuff like that.
So I purchased the book, read it, and will now tell you what I think about it. Whether you are
interested in ancient Indian history or not, I think a lot of what I say today will contain
broader principles that could apply in a number of contexts.
So settle in, because I think you may find the review valuable on some level. My comments will
have a bearing not only on the Mahabharata, but on how to formulate strong arguments, and how not to.
The book is titled When did the Mahabharata War Happen? The Mystery of Arundhati,
and it was written by Nilesh Nilkanth Oak, a chemical engineer who lives in the United States.
His expertise in chemical engineering doesn’t really come into play in the book, and from what I
can tell, he doesn’t really have deep knowledge of ancient history or archaeology, but he says in his
introduction that he “endeavored to be rational and scientific in researching this problem.”
The Mahabharata War, also known as the Kurukshetra War, between the Pandavas and the Kauravas,
is as popular in Indian ancient history as the Trojan War is in Mediterranean ancient history.
The basic thesis of this book, the answer to the question in the title,
is that the Mahabharata War, that is, the war recounted in the epic story the Mahabharata,
took place in 5651 BCE. Those of you who know something of ancient history will immediately
furrow your eyebrows, I’m sure, because such an early date comes before the invention of writing
and before the urbanization of the world’s first cities.
For reference, though the date of the Mahabharata War is not known for certain,
historians generally date it to around 1500-1200 BCE. So a date of 5651 isn’t a small tweak.
In this review, I could go over every single one of his scientific arguments, based on astronomical
grounds, but I’m not going to do that. In fact, it isn’t really necessary to do that,
because the fundamental problem I have with the book is that all of his “scientific” arguments
are based on a number of assumptions, and these assumptions do not hold up.
In other words, the foundation of his presentation, that upon which everything sits,
isn’t sound. And if the foundation isn’t sound, then the whole structure isn’t sound.
Now what are these assumptions? They are follows:
First, that the Mahabharata War described in the story was a factual event. Now,
for the purposes of argumentation, I am willing to grant him this. After all, he
wants to demonstrate that IF the Mahabharata War was a real event, then it happened in 5651 BCE.
One unproven assumption we can put up with. But he has many more.
Second, the Nakshatra system of time reckoning was well established at the time of the Mahabharata
War. This one is difficult to swallow, because the fact of the matter is that we have no
independent evidence for the existence of the Nakshatra time reckoning system this far back.
All the evidence suggests it was a system developed much later. So he appears to be
retrojecting a later system into an earlier time. This is a controversial assumption.
Third, the Mahabharata was written within 18 years after the Mahabharata War, and although maybe
there were later additions (and there is no doubt there were), all of the astronomical observations
referred to during the War really were recorded at the time of the War. Now, how would he know
that? He wouldn’t. While it may be true that in one part of the text there is a reference to the
story being written 18 years later, since there were additions to the text, it can’t be assumed
the 18-year date applies to every astronomical observation in the text. But he assumes it.
Fourth, that all astronomical details in the Mahabharata were actual visual observations of the
sky in the present and not information passed down through other means or invented at a later time.
It's another unfounded assumption.
Fifth, the Mahabharata astronomers were meticulous and didn’t make mistakes. Notice we are already
at our fifth “if.” If this were true, and if that were true, and if this were true,
and if that were true, and if this were true… but there are more.
Sixth, that the Mahabharata astronomers had means to observe objects in the sky that
would not otherwise be observable to the human eye. This goes against all material evidence,
and especially for the period he wants to place the Mahabharata. So another controversial if.
Seventh, that the purpose for recording the astronomical phenomena was to date
the Mahabharata War, so that people in later times, like Mr. Oak, could figure out what it is.
Eighth, the astronomical observations are not actually explicit astronomical observations,
but they are given in similes that describe bad omens, engagement of warriors on the battlefield,
Now, the first three assumptions I mentioned, Oak admits are assumptions. He contends, however,
that the final five I listed are not assumptions but actually proven by him in the book.
How so? By the fact that his theory makes sense and is consistent with such conclusions.
That is not independent verification. That is circular reasoning.
Sure, maybe his theory does make sense in and of itself if all these things are true. But if
any of these assumptions are not true, any one of them, then his whole theory is falsified.
They need to be established first, independently, and then the theory can be built from them.
Let me give you an idea of the kind of reasoning employed in the book, Oak makes the claim
that the Mahabharata astronomers were aware of all the planets in the solar system, including Pluto.
He says he proves it by testing it scientifically.
What is his scientific test? Pointing out that his interpretation of the text
would make no sense if the astronomers didn’t know about these planets. Yeah.
Oak gives the impression he is critically analyzing his own theory by running various
tests on his proposals. But the tests assume the truth of the eight things I mentioned before.
So there is quite a bit of circular reasoning couched in the language of rationalism.
Now he admits that his thesis is based on several assumptions,
though he seems to think there are fewer than there actually are, and he says,
in reference to his assumptions, that they require the agreement of the reader beforehand.
Okay. But I ask you, how many readers are going to agree to all these assumptions?
I said myself I am willing for the sake of argument to agree to the first assumption.
But when he gets to the second assumption, he’s going to lose me and a bunch of people,
the third assumption will weed out a bunch more people, the fourth a bunch more, and so on.
By the time he gets to the last assumption, he is going to end up with a small number
of people that would even be willing to be persuaded by what he says in the rest
of the book. The target audience here is, by design, very narrow. It will not appeal to the
average ancient history enthusiast. If you are considering writing a book along these lines,
please keep these warnings in mind. The book also suffers from some other issues.
It’s not all that user-friendly. When he refers to parts of the Mahabharata, he usually just
paraphrases and provides no citation. You have to go to the back of the book to find the citations,
and it’s not easy to match them up to the main text. Sometimes little numbers in superscript
appear, which look kind of like footnotes or endnotes, but I have no idea what they are
for. And even though he does attempt to explain some basic information about the Mahabharata,
he refers to quite a number of names, terms, and concepts without much explanation,
so a person unfamiliar with them will have a hard time following. It is a self-published book, and
you can tell. It could have used a professional editor. It looks like I have the third edition.
All in all, don’t waste your money.
If you appreciated this book review, please give the video a thumbs up,
and if you have read the book, let me know your thoughts on it. I’d be interested to hear.
Until next time, happy reading - something else!
You might like my little e-booklet, "Why Ancient History Matters."
It's designed to persuade people that the subject is important,
even in the modern world. You might also wish to use it to help spread the word. So feel free
to share it with someone you know. It's free for anyone who wants it. I've left a link in
the description box below the video for you to grab a copy. Catch you later!