No Error, Only Blunder!
In his recent blog article,
Dr. Elst writes…
“Moreover, your discovery fails to take into account the general picture, with its chronology determined by many other factors. Thus, the Kaushitaki Brahmana and the Shatapatha Brahmana are astronomically dated to ca. 2300 BCE.”
We will ignore the reference of Kaushitaki Brahmana for now (to avoid digression) and only focus on Shatapatha Brahamana.
Of course, to be clear, Dr. Elst is not claiming to have dated Shatapatha Brahmana for 2300 BCE, however, he is accepting the argument (whoever made it) for Shatapatha Brahmana = 2300 BCE.
Whoever this original researcher is, we know for sure that if he was familiar with even basics of astronomy, he would not have made such a blunder to equate time of Shatapatha Brahmana to 2300 BCE.
(We are assuming that this original researcher computed the timing based on the same Krittika reference of Shatapatha Brahmana).
We can speculate what might have led this researcher to this blunder of equating timing of Shatapatha Brahamana (original composition or modification/addition/update) around 2300 BCE.
We conjecture that this researcher(s) confused the ‘rising of Krittika DUE EAST’ with the point of spring equinox coinciding with nakshatra Krittika.
The point of spring equinox coincided with nakshatra Krittika around 2220 BCE.
This was due to, we speculate, confusion of researcher (whoever s/he was) between Zero Declination (correct) to Zero Longitude (in-correct).