> [[saeedipour]]. "Alberuni: The Knowledge-Bridge of Indo-European Mythology". *International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications*, Volume 2, Issue 9, September 2012. [pdf](http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-0912.php?rp=P09210), [pdf](http://www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-0912/ijsrp-p0993.pdf), [pdf](a/a-saeedipour2012d.pdf) Index Terms- Alberuni, pioneer, IE mythologist, knowledge, myth, deities, self-consciousness, Rig Veda, multidisciplinary, approach ## Abstract Alberuni should be revisited and reread. Another chapter and characteristic should be rediscovered and added to alberuni's records: Mythology. Mythology, as a branch of knowledge, a non-major field and course of study, as a perspective, critical opinion and attitude, nearly an informal subject at universities, a playful part of comments and interpretations, and then, as an approach and informal discipline, criticism etc. intermingled with, philosophy, anthropology, cultural studies, sociology, and poetry, has been also appeared and recorded before and emphatically after Alberuni. He can be realized as a knowledge-bridge of mythology between and across the old and the new eras. With his very silent but controversial India Alberuni may not realistically be ignored and put away at all. Both Alberuni himself and his book:[ 'Tahghigh ma lil Hind' translated, edited, annotated, and titled in English by Edward Sachau: 'Alberuni's India' in modern and academic sense] are complex, multidisciplinary, abstract and concrete both. What is significantly sorrowful is in fact Alberuni is tried to be absolutely ignored and misjudged as the first and modern mythologist by contemporary mythologists and their colleagues while the subject, terminology, suggestions, hints, and signs in several chapters of his 'India' hand over, and connected to, myths and mythology. This is what, presumably, university graduate students: undergraduates and postgraduates both must appear to, and go through and see it in depth. The paper, necessarily, is also to exploit and emphasize mythological trends and components of AlBeruni's writing. What else this paper would like to do is to explore to what extent the claim or hypothesis of Abu Reihan Alberuni being the mythologist, with his book, does have an approach to mythology of its own. It is also to persuade academics and scholars to investigate why Alberuni should, to such an extent, be ignored as the great pioneer of Indo-European mythology.