A researcher demands….
“Unless you postulate that the Ramayana was pre-Vedic, or the archaeo-astronomical dates indicated in the Vedanga are artificially late dates, you cannot square a 14,000 year before present date for the Ramayana with the 5000-4000 years before present dates seemingly found in the Vedanga.”
What am I missing here?
There is no need to postulate Ramayana as Pre-vedic and one can not postulate it as pre-vedic, otherwise it conflicts with chronological evidence of Veda-Ramayana-Mahabharata, etc.
Surya-Siddhanta is also a Vedanga and its latest update can be assigned to ~500 CE. Why that should have any perceived conflict with Ramayana occurring in ~12000 BCE!
Researcher feels he had me in the trap, with this one….
Or else you have to postulate that the Ramayana as we have it today, is a projection of an ancient story on to the material culture of a much later era, but somehow while all the references to material culture were reworked, the most ancient astronomical references remained intact.
No need to do this. Ramayana descriptions do not contradict its timeline based on available evidence.