several google sites on {date rig veda written}:
Forbidden
The conventional dates for the RV in modern scholarship place the RV between 1700 BC and 1000 BC. An example of how these dates are constructed can be found on the Indology list. Some of the argument is reproduced here.
Rig Veda - Audio download
Rig Veda (also written as Rik Veda in English) is the oldest of all Vedas. Some scholars date the Rig Veda as early as 12000 BC - 4000 B.C.
http://www.hyperhistory.com/...2/histscript1_n2/rigveda.html
The oldest written collection of texts is the Rig Veda composed in archaic Sanskrit probably between 1500 and 1200 BC.
http://www.gurjari.net/ico/Mystica/html/veda.htm
The Vedas are written in the form of hymns or mantras in an archaic form of Sanskrit. Most of these hymns are believed to have been composed around 1500 - 1000 BC, although some are believed to date back upto 5,000 years.
and from wikipedia (
Rigveda - Wikipedia):
Scholars standardly date the Rig-Veda to the 2nd millennium BC on grounds of its references to late bronze age culture (horse-drawn chariots; mostly bronze, but some iron weapons) and to the assumption that Vedic culture post-dates the Indus Valley Civilisation. It is commonly held to have been completed between 1500 BC and 1200 BC.
clearly it is possible this is the oldest, but also that this is not assured.
certainly it qualifies as within the group of "oldest traditions" and certainly it was
not monotheistic. this is enough to render the quote of zweemer false.
there are also ancient chinese traditions that were not monotheistic, and certainly all the native american (north and south) were not monotheistic.
one point that can be made though is that each had one bigger and badder god in charge -- one head honcho, and it is unclear from the quote whether zweemer was talking about this aspect or monotheism
per se.
there is also no way to know what faiths abounded before written records were made, so to claim that all faith started in one form or another is specious speculation at best.
{added by edit}btw: I made no conscious choice on sites other than the wikipedia one and make not editorial comment on the content (or lack) of the sites -- what I was interested in was seeing what kind of consensus there was on the age, and they seem fairly consistent.
enjoy.
This message has been edited by RAZD, 03*19*2005 11:06 PM
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel
AAmerican
.Zen
[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
™ Version 4.2
