<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Mar 21 2007, 08:02 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Mar 21 2007, 08:02 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->numerous scholars in IE Studies themselves have variously questioned:
(d) <i>IE Urheimat and Mythos and IE 'culture':</i> when such things as IEL, PIE and Indo-Europeans are not a given, how in the world could the IE homeland, religion and culture/society be?[right][snapback]65940[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Pasting an example of IE scholar who no longer believes in Indo-European mythological motifs (no longer believes in common mythology/religion of Indo-Europeans).
Bruce Lincoln's particular field is in fact IE mythology. That he now doubts it, says a lot:
Taken from Rajesh_G's post 114 of Unmasking AIT thread - below is IE scholar S. Arvidsson writing about Lincoln in book <i>Aryan Idols</i>:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the 1990s, Lincoln continued to critically study the history of Indo-European scholarship, which resulted in <i>Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and Scholarship</i> (2000; a work that would have been very important to the ideas in my study had it been published before the Swedish edition). His studies of Indo-European mythology have now made him question the very belief in an objective historiography, and he sees the scientific search for knowledge as a site for political power struggles. The work of cultural studies is, according to Lincoln, "myth plus footnotes". In one of his latest articles, Lincoln has also chosen to modify the classification system of the history of religions. The myths that he earlier studied as "Indo-European" are now presented as "Eurasian" or as "Indo-European" (in quotation marks). With that, the category of religion that saw the light with Oriental Jones' discovery in 1786 is eliminated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
(d) <i>IE Urheimat and Mythos and IE 'culture':</i> when such things as IEL, PIE and Indo-Europeans are not a given, how in the world could the IE homeland, religion and culture/society be?[right][snapback]65940[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Pasting an example of IE scholar who no longer believes in Indo-European mythological motifs (no longer believes in common mythology/religion of Indo-Europeans).
Bruce Lincoln's particular field is in fact IE mythology. That he now doubts it, says a lot:
Taken from Rajesh_G's post 114 of Unmasking AIT thread - below is IE scholar S. Arvidsson writing about Lincoln in book <i>Aryan Idols</i>:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the 1990s, Lincoln continued to critically study the history of Indo-European scholarship, which resulted in <i>Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and Scholarship</i> (2000; a work that would have been very important to the ideas in my study had it been published before the Swedish edition). His studies of Indo-European mythology have now made him question the very belief in an objective historiography, and he sees the scientific search for knowledge as a site for political power struggles. The work of cultural studies is, according to Lincoln, "myth plus footnotes". In one of his latest articles, Lincoln has also chosen to modify the classification system of the history of religions. The myths that he earlier studied as "Indo-European" are now presented as "Eurasian" or as "Indo-European" (in quotation marks). With that, the category of religion that saw the light with Oriental Jones' discovery in 1786 is eliminated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->