References to incendiary material in ancient South Asian texts

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

it seems you are whining since it doesnt agree with your agenda

regards

X says that Y told him that he talked to Z who said that A was afraid of Z because of 'fire, lightening & thunderbolts used as weapons by Z's people'.

Do you see how the chain of narration is problematic? How the eventual 'source' is one that has a vested interest in exaggerating events to make themselves look better and therefore cannot, on its own and without other supporting evidence, be taken as credible.

Fire, lightening and thunderbolts are common natural phenomenon used in mythology for aeons. See Zeuss's thunderbolts for example. Folk tales weaving in natural phenomenon to describe imaginary weaponry is pretty common.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

You beat me to it. I was going to say that Spock matriculated at Nalanda university eons ago. He was taught warp drive by Indian gods.

Artist's recreation of ancient Indian technology. Vimanas, intergalatic spacecraft of Hindu deities, who are will one day return to teach China and Pakistan a lesson.

 

[W.11]

See Zeuss's thunderbolts for example. Folk tales weaving in natural phenomenon to describe imaginary weaponry is pretty common.

lets for sake of argument say, these are imaginery weapons, maybe they are.

what do you have against arthashastra recipes and its fireworks, arthashastra recipes cannot get copied word by word and appear in chinese gunpowder ingredients

ingredients for explosives in Arthashastra

Chinese gunpowder recipe

lac? wax? metallic powders? hemp? all of these ingredients appearing in chinese gunpowder recipes which are already mentioned in arthashastra is no coincidence. (this is also accepted by the western source which i just quoted, a coincidence? dont really think so)

second what do you say on fireworks which are clearly detailed in arthashastra as well.

how could one in any way use fireworks with an incendiary and produce thundering or drumming sounds in the sky, how would one propel them to the sky in the first place, one can argue that these were fire arrows, but then again, no arrows are mentioned only a burning wood which can explode and cause drumming/thundering sounds, the ulka in sanskrit means firebrand, but also meteor, this clearly shows that gunpowder type explosives have been used.

regards

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

lets for sake of argument say, these are imaginery weapons, maybe they are.

what do you have against arthashastra recipes and its fireworks, arthashastra recipes cannot get copied word by word and appear in chinese gunpowder ingredients

ingredients for explosives in Arthashastra

Chinese gunpowder recipe

lac? wax? metallic powders? hemp? all of these ingredients appearing in chinese gunpowder recipes which are already mentioned in arthashastra is no coincidence. (this is also accepted by the western source which i just quoted, a coincidence? dont really think so)

second what do you say on fireworks which are clearly detailed in arthashastra as well.

how could one in any way use fireworks with an incendiary and produce thundering or drumming sounds in the sky, how would one propel them to the sky in the first place, one can argue that these were fire arrows, but then again, no arrows are mentioned only a burning wood which can explode and cause drumming/thundering sounds, the ulka in sanskrit means firebrand, but also meteor, this clearly shows that gunpowder type explosives have been used.

regards

I don't know why you feel the need to attribute all manner of creation to 'ancient Indians', but, as with many of your other threads, the fact remains that the claim of 'ancient Indians inventing gunpowder' remains unsubstantiated, with Historians questioning the interpretation, discrepancies in existing interpretations and pointing to the lack of any physical evidence supporting these claims.

 

[W.11]

the claim of 'ancient Indians inventing gunpowder' remains unsubstantiated, with Historians questioning the interpretation, discrepancies in existing interpretations and pointing to the lack of any physical evidence supporting these claims.

i asked you a simple question what is your issue with Arthashastra and its ingredients which the western scholar and not an indian scholar has drawn similarity with the gunpowder how do you explain such similarities?, i have provided you the western source which you desire and yet you refuse you answer my question, what is your isue with the fireworks which has been mentioned in Arthashastra as well (which clearly indicates use of explosives if not ''gunpower''), you keep moving the topic based on your agenda. Try to answer the questions and the evidences which have been raised.

regards

 

[masterchief_mirza]

lets for sake of argument say, these are imaginery weapons, maybe they are.

what do you have against arthashastra recipes and its fireworks, arthashastra recipes cannot get copied word by word and appear in chinese gunpowder ingredients

ingredients for explosives in Arthashastra

Chinese gunpowder recipe

lac? wax? metallic powders? hemp? all of these ingredients appearing in chinese gunpowder recipes which are already mentioned in arthashastra is no coincidence. (this is also accepted by the western source which i just quoted, a coincidence? dont really think so)

second what do you say on fireworks which are clearly detailed in arthashastra as well.

how could one in any way use fireworks with an incendiary and produce thundering or drumming sounds in the sky, how would one propel them to the sky in the first place, one can argue that these were fire arrows, but then again, no arrows are mentioned only a burning wood which can explode and cause drumming/thundering sounds, the ulka in sanskrit means firebrand, but also meteor, this clearly shows that gunpowder type explosives have been used.

regards

Neither is there evidence of sulphur based gunpowder, nor is there evidence that this glorified popcorn you speak of was in any way invented in the ancient gangetic plains.

As for propulsion, even Greek fire was propellable using rudimentary pneumatic or recoil force generators - you yourself described this in your earlier post to me. The Greeks used a "flamethrower" type variant. You're cherry picking circumstantial evidence to support a predetermined conclusion - confirmation bias.

The documentation however is significant, impressive and substantial. However, you are simply taking that sound documentation and extrapolating and reinterpreting as you see fit. Yet despite all this, you are the one accusing others of having an agenda.

Zeus' thunderbolts, Thor's Mjollnir, Mesoamerican and Pacific island mythology all have similar descriptions of mythical weapons causing great sound or damage or thunderous and lightning like phenomena - why? Because these are the scariest things ancient man knew about, hence the exaggeration of real articles and sheer invention of items in their minds that manifested with such traits. To then declare that because the descriptors for such items are derivatives of words like "thunder" that such items must be gunpowder driven is deliberate conjecture.

Assyrians and near eastern empires using this supposed gunpowder, as well as projectable incendiary weapons (flamethrower):

" They included a number of sulfur-,petroleum-, and bitumen-based mixtures.[3][4] Incendiary arrows and pots containing combustible substances surrounded by caltrops or spikes, or launched by catapults, were used as early as the 9th century BC by the Assyrians and were extensively used in the Greco-Roman world as well. Furthermore, Thucydides mentions that in thesiege of Delium in 424 BC a long tube on wheels was used which blew flames forward using a large bellows.[5][6][7] The Roman author Julius Africanus, writing in the 3rd Century AD, records a mixture that ignited from adequate heat and intense sunlight, used in grenades or night attacks:"

 

[LeGenD]

^^^

The Empire Master Strikes Back.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

The chinese text credited as first evidence of gunpowder has been declared as ''incendiary'' not explosive



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wujing_Zongyao

regards



lmao

secondly surphur ingredient was known in the indian gunpowders, here is another source, the sources for indian gunpowder are extensive, even mentioned by the greek historians

https://archive.org/stream/onweaponsarmyor00oppegoog/onweaponsarmyor00oppegoog_djvu.txt

regards

Read page 213 of the book referenced below - I can't cut and paste it. Oppert - who seems to be the main proponent for this ideation of gunpowder being accurately itemised in ridiculously ancient texts - has been discredited for vague referencing of texts that have had spurious insertions made at later dates. In fact, it is postulated that the interpolations of specific recipes for gunpowder that you keep holding up as gospel truth of Vedic supremacy
were done during the period of Islamic reign in Hindustan. The same Oppert further calls his credibility into question by describing ancient Indian armies numbering BILLIONS strong in personnel. The "evidence" you cite is discredited and moreover, you yourself neglect to mention the numerous commentators who have already discredited it in the very book you are quoting.

So, again, you Sir are cherry picking to "confirm" your pre-existing bias.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...onepage&q=atharvana rahasya gunpowder&f=false

 

[W.11]

Assyrians and near eastern empires using this supposed gunpowder, as well as projectable incendiary weapons (flamethrower):

Please dont go around marry go round and simply answer how do we see gunpowder ingredients seemingly using indian ''incendiary'' ingredients, if you can answer, please do. Otherwise its useless to go any futher in this discussion. As for greek fire being used as a propellent, do you have any source for that? how was it used as a propellent, what device? we are discussing historic instances here not your day dreaming, it could be, you can make water into propellent if you could but that doesnt answer how the arthashastra description matches with the fireworks, what non gunpowder logic do you apply in this case? i mean you guys are just making excuses here.

regards

 

[masterchief_mirza]

@LeGenD

I enjoy dealing with rebel scum.

 

[W.11]

Read page 213 of the book referenced below - I can't cut and paste it. Oppert - who seems to be the main proponent for this ideation of gunpowder being accurately itemised in ridiculously ancient texts - has been discredited for vague referencing of texts that have had spurious insertions made at later dates. In fact, it is postulated that the interpolations of specific recipes for gunpowder that you keep holding up as gospel truth of Vedic supremacy
were done during the period of Islamic reign in Hindustan. The same Oppert further calls his credibility into question by describing ancient Indian armies numbering BILLIONS strong in personnel. The "evidence" you cite is discredited and moreover, you yourself neglect to mention the numerous commentators who have already discredited it in the very book you are quoting.

So, again, you Sir are cherry picking to "confirm" your pre-existing bias.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fNZBSqd2cToC&pg=PA214&lpg=PA214&dq=atharvana+rahasya+gunpowder&source=bl&ots=VpP8W5sm4E&sig=ACfU3U3yXmVrKfmZtl9jz6xF_i9lUbOlNg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwixmq6c8cDqAhUwXRUIHVYLBTgQ6AEwBHoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=atharvana rahasya gunpowder&f=false

lmao, oppert wasn't around when arthashastra was translated (discovered in 1903 and translated in 1915 while oppert died in 1906), the discovery of arthashastra recipes infact coroborates with oppert's theories, so nobody has been discredited.

Again im asking for the last time, how do you analyse arthashastra's explosive recipes ending up in chinese gunpowder recipes.

regards

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Please dont go around marry go round and simply answer how do we see gunpowder ingredients seemingly using indian ''incendiary'' ingredients, if you can answer, please do. Otherwise its useless to go any futher in this discussion. As for greek fire being used as a propellent, do you have any source for that? how was it used as a propellent, what device? we are discussing historic instances here not your day dreaming, it could be, you can make water into propellent if you could but that doesnt answer how the arthashastra description matches with the fireworks, what non gunpowder logic do you apply in this case? i mean you guys are just making excuses here.

regards

Greek fire as a propelled weapon? Come on. It's common knowledge. It was fired off ships onto other ships. Various battles around Constantinople and Levant..must I reference such well known instances?

Before then, incendiaries were commonly fired from trebuchet-type devices during sieges throughout the near east.

lmao, oppert wasn't around when arthashastra was translated (discovered in 1903 and translated in 1915 while oppert died in 1906), the discovery of arthashastra recipes infact coroborates with oppert's theories, so nobody has been discredited.

Again im asking for the last time, how do you analyse arthashastra's explosive recipes ending up in chinese gunpowder recipes.

regards

You're holding up insertions and interpolations as some kind of evidence. No wonder you're asking for the last time.

And I'm not even talking about the Arthashastra in relation to Oppert. He's the one who has decided to quote recipes including the key ingredient sulphur and he quoted completely different texts if you bothered to read what I posted. He is using interpolated sources and stands discredited.

 

[LeGenD]

@LeGenD

I enjoy dealing with rebel scum.

Henceforth you shall be known as: Darth Clobber

 

[masterchief_mirza]

"how do you analyse arthashastra's explosive recipes ending up in chinese gunpowder recipes."

That's your assumption, not substantiated or proved.

 

[W.11]

"how do you analyse arthashastra's explosive recipes ending up in chinese gunpowder recipes."

That's your assumption, not substantiated or proved.

what more proves do you need to make it ''substantiated''

regards