This is the chapter on DD Kosambi which appears in a forthcoming book on a popular introduction to Indian scientists. The book has been written by Arvind Gupta and is being published at the initiative of the Indian Science Academy.
Blog dedicated to the life and works of the path breaking Indian historian and mathematician.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Recent Researches into the Harappan Script
Veteran epigraphist Iravatham Mahadevan shares some fascinating breakthroughs on his researches on deciphering the Harappan script.
Courtesy: Harappa Project
Note: This article is not related directly to DD Kosambi but I felt it might be of some interest to the readers of this blog.
When the Indus script became extinct, the memory of its grammatical elements should have been lost; but it did not quite happen that way. Since most of the Harappan ruling classes had names or titles ending in -(a)nr , that sound was borrowed by Indo-Aryan as an ethnic name to denote the neighbouring Non-Aryan people. Thus, Dr. –(a)nr > IA anr > andhra ( attested in Aitareya Brahmana VII:18).Download pdf file
...
The ‘alpha and omega’ signs have been so designated not only because they respectively commence and end most of the Indus texts, but also because they sum up the essence or most important feature of the Indus seal-texts, namely, the identity of the Harappan ruling class. This is shown below schematically (from left to right for convenience) :...
...
After the collapse of the Indus Civilisation, the institution of mel-akam (‘High House’) did not survive. But those who owned allegiance to the mel-akam , the akatt-u people, did survive and, in course of time, re-emerged in the Vedic period as the ‘jar-born’ priests typified by Agastya. A section of the ruling classes did not stay on, but migrated under the leadership of the Akattiyar clan to South India, where they founded the Early Historical kingdoms (of Andhras and their successors in the Deccan, and the triple kingdoms, Chera, Chola and Pandya, in the Tamil country).
Courtesy: Harappa Project
Note: This article is not related directly to DD Kosambi but I felt it might be of some interest to the readers of this blog.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
DDK on Solar Energy
An Indian Express editorial cites DDK's views in favour of solar energy.
In the ’50s and ’60s, solar energy was just a glint in the Indian scientific establishment’s eye. Two of our intellectual heavyweights, D.D. Kosambi and Homi Bhabha, clashed over whether India should concentrate on solar or nuclear energy. Kosambi’s view that India has a natural advantage in the solar sector, compared to the enormous costs of nuclear power, was ultimately disregarded. Since then, we have dawdled for years. According to the CAG, our solar energy centre in the renewable energy ministry, which is meant to link government, institutions, industry and consumers, sent back 44-76 per cent of its budget between 2002-7. There was practically no headway in research or tech, or any productive relationships with industry.
But now, India is all set to come up with a global energy breakthrough, with a solar plan that aims to generate 20 GW (that is, 20,000 MW) over the next couple of decades (the largest in the world). This would make us a leader in renewable energy, and would radically change India’s role in climate change mitigation. Obviously, there is much to be worked through in order to transform solar energy from a small boutique alternative to a steady and substantial part of our energy mix — most importantly in the price differential between conventional and solar power. India’s solar plan aims for grid parity by 2020. Another significant shift is the focus on solar thermal, along with photo-voltaic (electricity-generating) technology.
All of this sounds thoroughly commendable, but the question is, how will it be executed and who will pick up the tab? While private industry is most competent to take on this task, payback will take a long time, and much of the risk and R&D will have to be publicly footed. The challenge is to structure incentives to spur disruptive innovation, without having to prop it up altogether. Once we have a clear aim, cost estimates, and a set of our own commitments by the time Copenhagen rolls around, India is entitled to ask the world to pitch in, at least in terms of financial support. Either way, India has finally come to a constructive position and crafted a plan commensurate with its capacities, rather than whingeing about the unfairness of having to take action on the world’s behalf.
DDK on Adivasis
JJ Roy Burman cites DDK in his article on the term 'Adivasis':
At the outset it needs to be realised that a nation-state like India is not a cultural but political entity which was borne due to a quirk of history. Imposing Hindi as a national and official State language over all the regions is not a very civilised act—it smacks of North Indian chauvinism. Secondly, it is also not true that the tribes in all quarters of the country are aboriginals of the regions where they inhabit at present. While the famous historian Kosambi (1956) viewed that the tribes had migrated to the plain areas at a much later date only after the vegetation had thinned out and wild animals became less numerous—making the area less dangerous for human habitation and fit for settled cultivation, Archana Prasad (2003), the young scholar from Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi, feels that the tribes practising settled cultivation in the plains were pushed to the hills and forests by the profligate Aryan invaders and later Hindu settled cultivators and the outside traders. Either way the tribes are not autochthons of the spaces occupied by them at present. In 1980s Andre Betteille` had similarly expressed about the inapplicability of the concept of aborigine to the tribesmen in India.
MR Rajagoplan on DDK
MR Rajagoplan of the Gandhigram Trust writes a biographical sketch of DD Kosambi and Dharmanand Kosambi. (.doc file)
The impact of his work, however, continued growing after his death. Eight years after his death, in 1947, three books honouring Kosambi were published. As many as 14 years after his death, in the year 1980, he was decorated with the ‘Hari Om Ashram Award’ by University Grants Commission for bringing to light the mutual relationship between science and society. The freshness of his ideas and thoughts has not reduced one bit even nearly half a century after his demise. Last, but not least year long celebration has been arranged for his centenary in Pune beginning from July, 2007. The inaugural lecture was delivered by Romilla Thapar a famous Historian. Prabhat Patnaik and Irtan Habih have delivered talks. The last in the series would be in June 2008. Pune University would bring out a publication of these 12 lectures.
Prime Minister of India has sanctioned a Chair in the name of Kosambi with an amount of Rs. One crore in Pune University. He has also announced the release of a postal stamp in Kosambi’s honour.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Kosambi the Mathematician
Dr. CK Raju writes in the current issue of the EPW on DD Kosambi the Mathematician (pdf file). I will convert the pdf to html at a later point and re- post the full article here. Here is the summary:
Apart from his more popular work on numismatics and genetics, D D Kosambi worked on path geometry, exploring the foundations of general relativity. He also worked on statistics in infinite dimensions, computing, and probabilistic number theory. His whole mathematical career appears as one long clash of values. A rejection of the value of specialisation saw him leave Harvard. The high value he placed on research saw his exit from Banaras Hindu University and Aligarh Muslim University. His attempt to impart real knowledge of mathematics saw him sacked from Fergusson College, Pune. His insistence on ethical and relevant research led to his exit from the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research where, too, the diversity of his interests was portrayed negatively, though he continued his mathematical research till the end of his life. His mathematical career raises a number of questions regarding science management in post-independence India. These questions are vital today when the state is again making huge investments in science and technology.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Kosambis at Fergusson College
Dr Meera Kosambi, daughter of DD Kosambi, writes about her family's association with the Fergusson College in Pune. (via Arvind Gupta)
My father, Damodar Dharmanand Kosambi (1907-1966), followed in his father's footsteps by joining Fergusson College in 1933. He had completed his schooling at Cambridge, Massachusetts, and passed his Bachelor's degree from Harvard University with distinction, majoring in Mathematics. On returning to India he taught for two years at Benares Hindu University and then for two years at Aligarh Muslim University before coming to Pune and Fergusson College. Here he taught Mathematics and Statistics for 13 years, before joining the newly opened Tata Institute of Fundamental Research as a professor of mathematics to work there until he retired.
The informal American style characteristic of D. D. Kosambi contrasted with the more British and staid atmosphere of Fergusson College. He gave extra help to the interested students (who also adored him), but felt little sympathy for those whose only interest was in scraping through the examination (and who found him to be strict and demanding). One of his foremost students was A.R. Kamat who was associated with the Deccan Education Society as a professor of Statistics for many years.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Review of DDK's Collected Works
A fitting centenary tribute (Source)
by KESAVAN VELUTHAT
A compilation of Kosambi’s writings on Indology and other areas
THE OXFORD INDIA KOSAMBI — Combined Methods in Indology and Other Writings: Compiled, edited and introduced by Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 1250.
D.D. Kosambi has been rightly described as responsible for a “paradigm shift” in Indian historiography. His writings went beyond providing variations in the narrative of history. However, most of them remained in journals that are not easily accessible to the ordinary reader. B.D. Chattopadhyaya has put students of Indian history under a heavy debt not only for bringing together the writings of Kosambi but also for the learned introduction and the piece “Remembering Kosambi” written specifically for this edition. In the introduction, Chattopadhyaya had earlier raised many refreshing questions concerning the methodological turn that Kosambi brought about in Indian historiography. A few of these questions, and the tentative answers he had given them, are taken up for reconsideration in the freshly written piece. This is a clear example of the self-reflexivity of an honest scholar constantly interrogating his own positions — not clinging fast to an opinion, however considered that may have been.
Distinct historian
What distinguish Kosambi as a historian are two things — unorthodox ways including a consistent application of Marxism and uncompromising fidelity to evidence whether textual or generated by himself through field work. Field work for him included not only walking the difficult terrain in a literal sense; it also meant going through the grind, discovering and deciphering inscriptions or comparing and collating recensions to fix a text. The first of these, Marxism, was not the official one — what one would have been initiated into by the Communist Party of India or through the Soviet Union. He and the party were ill at ease with each other: he had only contempt for the Official Marxists (“OM”) while the party thought that Kosambi’s Marxism was only skin-deep (to which he would retort that they did not know how thick his skin was!). Hence it is difficult to explain his Marxism.
Inaccessibility
So also, being professionally trained in Mathematics and staying at the forefront of its practice, what took him to Indological research of the most rigorous variety is another question. Chattopadhyaya suspects that he acquired both, as well as his somewhat eclectic approach, from his father although the two shared little ground. The rejection of the European model of historiography, too, is at the centre of Kosambi’s philosophy although it is seldom recognised by those who claim to follow him. Here Kosambi shares, strangely, common ground with Rabindranath Tagore.
Another uncomfortable question that Chattopadhyaya raises relates to the somewhat high decibel produced on the occasion of the birth centenary of Kosambi. Kosambi, in reality, has not been read as much as he has been sought to be appropriated. Both as a person and as a scholar, he has been somewhat inaccessible; and his writings were more so. This inaccessibility has been responsible for the relative obscurity of the genius. Despite this, scholars have sworn by him, chanting a few things he said as a formula. Chattopadhyaya shows that much of this is make-believe.
The instances of the major debate on feudalism and a recent book on prehistory, both by leading Marxist historians of India, where Kosambi is practically ignored in spite of his path-breaking work in these areas should open our eyes. Repeating mindlessly what Kosambi had said more than half a century ago is not the best way to achieve greater clarity on issues he had raised; but refusing to so much as consider him, even while swearing by him and his philosophy, certainly is not a step in that direction.
Path-breaker
Besides these two pieces by Chattopadhyaya, the volume contains almost all articles Kosambi has written on Indology and have not been included in collections already available. It will be preposterous to say anything about the articles of the giant, except to salute the memory of the path-breaker. We are beholden to the publisher and the editor for the yeoman service of making these articles available to us, so that we can be partly absolved of the charge that Chattopadhyaya makes in remembering Kosambi. In short, it is the most fitting centenary tribute to the polymath.
The volume would have been even more useful had it contained a bibliography of Kosambi’s writings. This is important because Kosambi wrote on aspects outside Indology. Apart from mathematics and statistics — his own professional concerns — he wrote on many other subjects. An index would have been of help, particularly given the size of the volume, and misprints abound. The volume is too important and valuable to be marred by such minor irritants.
by KESAVAN VELUTHAT
A compilation of Kosambi’s writings on Indology and other areas
THE OXFORD INDIA KOSAMBI — Combined Methods in Indology and Other Writings: Compiled, edited and introduced by Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 1250.
D.D. Kosambi has been rightly described as responsible for a “paradigm shift” in Indian historiography. His writings went beyond providing variations in the narrative of history. However, most of them remained in journals that are not easily accessible to the ordinary reader. B.D. Chattopadhyaya has put students of Indian history under a heavy debt not only for bringing together the writings of Kosambi but also for the learned introduction and the piece “Remembering Kosambi” written specifically for this edition. In the introduction, Chattopadhyaya had earlier raised many refreshing questions concerning the methodological turn that Kosambi brought about in Indian historiography. A few of these questions, and the tentative answers he had given them, are taken up for reconsideration in the freshly written piece. This is a clear example of the self-reflexivity of an honest scholar constantly interrogating his own positions — not clinging fast to an opinion, however considered that may have been.
Distinct historian
What distinguish Kosambi as a historian are two things — unorthodox ways including a consistent application of Marxism and uncompromising fidelity to evidence whether textual or generated by himself through field work. Field work for him included not only walking the difficult terrain in a literal sense; it also meant going through the grind, discovering and deciphering inscriptions or comparing and collating recensions to fix a text. The first of these, Marxism, was not the official one — what one would have been initiated into by the Communist Party of India or through the Soviet Union. He and the party were ill at ease with each other: he had only contempt for the Official Marxists (“OM”) while the party thought that Kosambi’s Marxism was only skin-deep (to which he would retort that they did not know how thick his skin was!). Hence it is difficult to explain his Marxism.
Inaccessibility
So also, being professionally trained in Mathematics and staying at the forefront of its practice, what took him to Indological research of the most rigorous variety is another question. Chattopadhyaya suspects that he acquired both, as well as his somewhat eclectic approach, from his father although the two shared little ground. The rejection of the European model of historiography, too, is at the centre of Kosambi’s philosophy although it is seldom recognised by those who claim to follow him. Here Kosambi shares, strangely, common ground with Rabindranath Tagore.
Another uncomfortable question that Chattopadhyaya raises relates to the somewhat high decibel produced on the occasion of the birth centenary of Kosambi. Kosambi, in reality, has not been read as much as he has been sought to be appropriated. Both as a person and as a scholar, he has been somewhat inaccessible; and his writings were more so. This inaccessibility has been responsible for the relative obscurity of the genius. Despite this, scholars have sworn by him, chanting a few things he said as a formula. Chattopadhyaya shows that much of this is make-believe.
The instances of the major debate on feudalism and a recent book on prehistory, both by leading Marxist historians of India, where Kosambi is practically ignored in spite of his path-breaking work in these areas should open our eyes. Repeating mindlessly what Kosambi had said more than half a century ago is not the best way to achieve greater clarity on issues he had raised; but refusing to so much as consider him, even while swearing by him and his philosophy, certainly is not a step in that direction.
Path-breaker
Besides these two pieces by Chattopadhyaya, the volume contains almost all articles Kosambi has written on Indology and have not been included in collections already available. It will be preposterous to say anything about the articles of the giant, except to salute the memory of the path-breaker. We are beholden to the publisher and the editor for the yeoman service of making these articles available to us, so that we can be partly absolved of the charge that Chattopadhyaya makes in remembering Kosambi. In short, it is the most fitting centenary tribute to the polymath.
The volume would have been even more useful had it contained a bibliography of Kosambi’s writings. This is important because Kosambi wrote on aspects outside Indology. Apart from mathematics and statistics — his own professional concerns — he wrote on many other subjects. An index would have been of help, particularly given the size of the volume, and misprints abound. The volume is too important and valuable to be marred by such minor irritants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)