Sugriva’s Atlas - 14000 years back

[dwai]

Sugriva is a character from the Hindu epic Ramayana, and this talk is a presentation of the description of the world from sugriva’s point of view, as documented in Valmiki’s Ramayana.

 

 

[Nungali]

It looks interesting , I am interested in what the ancients knew of the world and old atlases . 

 

I got to the bit where I was asked to accept the   14 ,000 year old date .    That's still in the Ice Age  .

[Cleansox]

You need to practice trust and acceptance 😁

[dwai]

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

It looks interesting , I am interested in what the ancients knew of the world and old atlases . 

 

I got to the bit where I was asked to accept the   14 ,000 year old date .    That's still in the Ice Age  .

 maybe. The ice age is purported to have ended around 11,500 years ago. However, The Indian subcontinent was not affected by it. 

[Nungali]

Really ?    From  115, 000 to  11, 500  years ago , the whole planet was in an ice age  .....  Except for the whole Indian subcontinent  ?

 

 

What an amazing place !   They manage to stop the ocean dropping and kept the ice and glaciers  back up there in their modern positions - where they belong !  No droughts, no drop in temperature .

 

 

Didnt even need a  wool  jumper or socks ! 

 

 

[dwai]

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

Really ?    From  115, 000 to  11, 500  years ago , the whole planet was in an ice age  .....  Except for the whole Indian subcontinent  ?

 

 

What an amazing place !   They manage to stop the ocean dropping and kept the ice and glaciers  back up there in their modern positions - where they belong !  No droughts, no drop in temperature .

 

 

Didnt even need a  wool  jumper or socks ! 

 

 

This is not made up  

 

https://qz.com/india/1575810/indian-monsoons-effect-on-ice-age-sheds-light-on-global-warming/

 

 

https://www.quora.com/How-was-Indian-Sub-continent-during-Ice-age-Was-it-covered-with-ice/answer/Hamza-Shaikh-3?ch=10&share=6949d64d&srid=9nkbf

 

If I find more references, will gladly share here. 

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

This is not made up  

 

https://qz.com/india/1575810/indian-monsoons-effect-on-ice-age-sheds-light-on-global-warming/

 

 

Thats about climate warming  after the ice age before the last one - its about an interglacial warming period .

 

" the Indian summer monsoon pulled heat and moisture into the northern hemisphere when Earth was entering a warmer climate around 130,000 years ago "

 

and

 

" Our study used these deep sea sediments from the northern Bay of Bengal to capture a direct signal of the Indian summer monsoon from 140,000 to 128,000 years ago  ....  This occurred when the Earth was coming out of a glacial state and into the interglacial which occurred before the one we live in, separated by a single ice age. "

 

The last ice age stated around 115, 000 ya   -  15, 000  years later .

 

Even you agreed with my dates   and  that I was talking about the last ice age ;

 

13 hours ago, dwai said:

.... The ice age is purported to have ended around 11,500 years ago. However, The Indian subcontinent was not affected by it. 

 

Even so it does not address my point about the ocean level  dropping .

 

 

Quote

 

 

https://www.quora.com/How-was-Indian-Sub-continent-during-Ice-age-Was-it-covered-with-ice/answer/Hamza-Shaikh-3?ch=10&share=6949d64d&srid=9nkbf

 

 

This reference you give to show how India was not effected by the last ice age is rather  bizarre , because ;

 

" Oh yes. Evidence suggests that the ice age heavily affected the climate of prehistoric India.

During the warmer Interglacial periods, the ice would have thawed, and the subcontinent would have experienced more intense Monsoons, with sub-humid climates in otherwise arid areas, whereas the inverse would have taken place during the colder Glacial periods, giving less intense monsoons and lower amounts of precipitation. This would have had a definite impact on the fauna of India. "

 

- Like I said ; lower ocean levels and a dryer climate .

 

Quote

 

If I find more references, will gladly share here. 

 

That would be nice , but I dont need  more  references to support what I said  ..... its basic high school science     . 

 

 

 

.

 

Edited February 9, 2021 by Nungali

[Nungali]

However , this part of the  2nd links content is interesting  ;

 

" These slim, dark-skinned, small-faced and large-forheaded travelers were equipped with a brilliant capacity to adapt and survive. With an unmatched imagination and intelligence, they were able to make Spears, Spear-throwers, Nets, Slings, Clothing and were capable of Cooking food, traits which erectus lacked. In the end, erectus was unable to survive, and died out, replaced by the more adaptable and intelligent Homo sapiens.

In the Indian subcontinent, our kind made their presence known. Just as their cousins in Europe and Australia were doing, they made cave paintings "

It did leave out  'sea fearing ' though .   

 

I find it interesting in that   some have postulated  a  'centre of  divergence '  for these   'technologies'   in South-east Asia .

 

More about that  , from a scientific perspective ;

 

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/books/eden_in_the_east.php

 

" The biblical flood really did occur - at the end of the last Ice Age. The Flood drowned for ever the huge continetal shelf of Southeast Asia, and caused a population dispersal which fertilized the Neolithic cultures of China, India, Mesopotamia, Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean, thus creating the first civilizations. The Polynesians did not come from China but from the islands of Southeast Asia. The domestication of rice was not in China but in the Malay Peninsula, 9,000 years ago. In this ground breaking new book Stephen Oppenheimer reveals how evidence from oceanography, archaeology, linguistics, genetics and folklore overwhelmingly suggests that the lost 'Eden' - the cradle of civilization - was not in the Middle East, as is usually supposed, but in the drowned continent of Southeast Asia.  .... "

 

Indeed , the first Indians and the first Australians  may well have been 'cousins '  ....    cousy bro   

 

https://www.pbase.com/image/75419522

[dwai]

This is a very interesting research paper on the paleo climate in the Indian context. Read specifically pages 14-16 

 

https://www.insaindia.res.in/pdf/Paleoclimate-Final_18-12-09-web.pdf

 

 

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

This is a very interesting research paper on the paleo climate in the Indian context. Read specifically pages 14-16 

 

https://www.insaindia.res.in/pdf/Paleoclimate-Final_18-12-09-web.pdf

 

 

 

Okay. I will put it on my list

 

Here is one for you  about early south Asian  ('sub continent ')   origins

 

Look !  India No. 1 !   

 

 

https://theconversation.com/southeast-asia-was-crowded-with-archaic-human-groups-long-before-we-turned-up-119818

 

Of course these are slow developments of hominid 'technology' towards 'modern' , but  the question of 'Modern Homo sapiens ' behaviour '  is a tricky one .  Still, it does not un favour  'India'  ;

 

When did Homo sapiens first reach Southeast Asia and Sahul?
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/34/8482

 

 

 

[dwai]

7 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Okay. I will put it on my list

 

Here is one for you  about early south Asian  ('sub continent ')   origins

 

Look !  India No. 1 !   

 

 

https://theconversation.com/southeast-asia-was-crowded-with-archaic-human-groups-long-before-we-turned-up-119818

 

Of course these are slow developments of hominid 'technology' towards 'modern' , but  the question of 'Modern Homo sapiens ' behaviour '  is a tricky one .  Still, it does not un favour  'India'  ;

 

When did Homo sapiens first reach Southeast Asia and Sahul?
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/34/8482

 

 

 

I think you are mistaking interest for intent  

 

India number 1 is not of concern to me. There has not been a reconciliation of traditional knowledge/narrative with the western narrative. India, on account of being   Colonized by European nations, has faced a systematic dismantling of the traditional narrative. Whether it is of interest to non-Indians or not, it is well with the rights of the Indians/people of Indian origin to reclaim their own narrative.

 

I believe this should also be the case with natives of other civilizations who were destroyed by European expansionism. Aborigines in Australia, native north and South Americans, Africans etc. 

[Apech]

45 minutes ago, dwai said:

I think you are mistaking interest for intent  

 

India number 1 is not of concern to me. There has not been a reconciliation of traditional knowledge/narrative with the western narrative. India, on account of being   Colonized by European nations, has faced a systematic dismantling of the traditional narrative. Whether it is of interest to non-Indians or not, it is well with the rights of the Indians/people of Indian origin to reclaim their own narrative.

 

I believe this should also be the case with natives of other civilizations who were destroyed by European expansionism. Aborigines in Australia, native north and South Americans, Africans etc. 

 

By western narrative do you mean archeology, genetics and linguistic studies?  And what does traditional knowledge mean?  

 

Just asking - don't get cross. (  ).

 

 

[dwai]

22 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

By western narrative do you mean archeology, genetics and linguistic studies?  And what does traditional knowledge mean?  

 

Most of what is known about Indian history (and pre-history) is on the back of some very dubious translations/narration building done by the likes of Max Muller. The western narrative suffers from a massive confirmation bias simply by accepting the European narratives from the 18th and 19th centuries as valid narratives. For example, take the Aryan Invasion Theory (disproved), and its child, the Aryan Migration theory (also suspect) -- these are still being considered valid in the western Indology circles. 

 

By traditional knowledge, I mean internal narratives in the classic texts -- Vedic material, Puranas, Itihaasa, astronomical references therein, the genealogy of royal dynasties, etc. Also, newer research being performed by Indian scientists in the area of archeology, geology, genetics. etc, which are trying to reconcile these traditional narratives with modern research. 

Quote

Just asking - don't get cross. (  ).

 

 

 

Not getting cross...but I find this subject very fascinating. While some of these internal claims can be dismissed away as mythology, not all of them can be dismissed, at least not without serious consideration.

 

Here's an interesting find in Central India, with cave paintings ranging from 10,000 BCE onward --

 

http://www.natgeotraveller.in/madhya-pradesh/rock-of-ages-madhya-pradeshs-ancient-art-galleries-come-alive-in-bhimbetka/

The petroglyphs of Ratnagiri in South indian western coastal region --

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-45559300

 

Edited February 9, 2021 by dwai

[Apech]

1 minute ago, dwai said:

Most of what is known about Indian history (and pre-history) is on the back of some very dubious translations/narration building done by the likes of Max Muller. The western narrative suffers from a massive confirmation bias simply by accepting the European narratives from the 18th and 19th centuries as valid narratives. For example, take the Aryan Invasion Theory (disproved), and its child, the Aryan Migration theory (also suspect) -- these are still being considered valid in the western Indology circles. 

 

By traditional knowledge, I mean internal narratives in the classic texts -- Vedic material, Puranas, Itihaasa, astronomical references in therein, the genealogy of royal dynasties, etc. Also, newer research being performed by Indian scientists in the area of archeology, geology, genetics. etc. 

 

 

Well ... Max Muller died in 1900 and no-one as far as I know subscribes to his views - it would be like saying Egyptologists still follow Wallis-Budge and so on.  The migration theory is supported by genetics and linguistics - and to some extent by archeology - so that is why it persists.

 

I can completely understand why it is galling for a culture as old and noble as the Indic/dharmic one to be lectured by upstart Europeans but that doesn't mean you can justify a narrative without proof.  Well, you can of course if you choose to but then expect some kickback.

 

 

[dwai]

10 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Well ... Max Muller died in 1900 and no-one as far as I know subscribes to his views - it would be like saying Egyptologists still follow Wallis-Budge and so on.  The migration theory is supported by genetics and linguistics - and to some extent by archeology - so that is why it persists.

There certainly is scope for the migration theory to play out, but it is not a large scale exodus of central Europeans as has been narrated. Migrations have always happened. Iran (Persia) is considered as being populated with relatives of the Vedic Indians. 

Quote

 

I can completely understand why it is galling for a culture as old and noble as the Indic/dharmic one to be lectured by upstart Europeans but that doesn't mean you can justify a narrative without proof.  Well, you can of course if you choose to but then expect some kickback.

 

 

Of course, that's why there is research ongoing in Indian universities and by Indian scholars/researchers. These things take time. 

 

Some challenges in a continuous civilization like India is that a lot of what would be archeological sites actually have people living in them. Take a city like Varanasi for example -- it has been continuously inhabited by people for thousands of years. New buildings rising above older ones. 

Edited February 9, 2021 by dwai

[Apech]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

There certainly is scope for the migration theory to play out, but it is not a large scale exodus of central Europeans as has been narrated. Migrations have always happened. Iran (Persia) is considered as being populated with relatives of the Vedic Indians. 

Of course, that's why there is research ongoing in Indian universities and by Indian scholars/researchers. These things take time. 

 

Some challenges in a continuous civilization like India is that a lot of what would be archeological sites actually have people living in them. Take a city like Varanasi for example -- it has been continuously inhabited by people for thousands of years. New buildings rising above older ones. 

 

From what I understand the Afghanistan/Pakistan area was subject to continuous migration and trade based movement of people for all of what we might call the historical period.  Also to call the Proto-Indo-Europeans Central European is stretching a bit.  As you probably are aware what we now call Europeans were the product of at least three distinct migrations (or even 'replacements') over the last 7-8,000 years.  So there was no population which could have been meaningfully called European at any time before then.

 

The oldest Indian civilisation that we know about was the IVC ... so where exactly was this proposed 14,000 year old culture, which part of the sub-continent and what was their history?

 

 

[dwai]

10 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

From what I understand the Afghanistan/Pakistan area was subject to continuous migration and trade based movement of people for all of what we might call the historical period.  Also to call the Proto-Indo-Europeans Central European is stretching a bit.  As you probably are aware what we now call Europeans were the product of at least three distinct migrations (or even 'replacements') over the last 7-8,000 years.  So there was no population which could have been meaningfully called European at any time before then.

 

The oldest Indian civilisation that we know about was the IVC ... so where exactly was this proposed 14,000 year old culture, which part of the sub-continent and what was their history?

 

 

IVC is considered as late Rig Vedic 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Apech said:

 

By western narrative do you mean archeology, genetics and linguistic studies?  And what does traditional knowledge mean?  

 

Just asking - don't get cross. (  ).

 

 

 

Well,  I might have to retract those studies that show the earliest development of Modern HSS in India  as I dont want  to offend the 'traditional narrative'   .....   that there was an earlier development of modern HSS in India  .

 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, dwai said:

 

Most of what is known about Indian history (and pre-history) is on the back of some very dubious translations/narration building done by the likes of Max Muller. The western narrative suffers from a massive confirmation bias simply by accepting the European narratives from the 18th and 19th centuries as valid narratives.

 

What I posted, and the information in the links I gave are based on current research not the theories of 18th and 19th century 'European natives '  .   And they indicate movement towards some of the things some Indians have been claiming , yet you dismissed them for some obscure reason about not going along with traditional knowledge .

 

 

 

4 hours ago, dwai said:

 

 

 

For example, take the Aryan Invasion Theory (disproved), and its child, the Aryan Migration theory (also suspect) -- these are still being considered valid in the western Indology circles. 

 

Really ?    I dont think so .  Some people are considering them valid and some are not  in these ' western Indology circles ' .  I have read   many a debate where one is arguing for AIT and another discounting it  BOTH from ' western Indology circles ' .

 

 

4 hours ago, dwai said:

 

By traditional knowledge, I mean internal narratives in the classic texts -- Vedic material, Puranas, Itihaasa, astronomical references therein, the genealogy of royal dynasties, etc. Also, newer research being performed by Indian scientists in the area of archeology, geology, genetics. etc, which are trying to reconcile these traditional narratives with modern research. 

 

Ahhhh , no .    Scientists are not supposed to be trying to reconcile their data  with religious narratives .

 

Although some attempt it  ... we got them in the west too     

 

 

 

4 hours ago, dwai said:

 

Not getting cross...but I find this subject very fascinating. While some of these internal claims can be dismissed away as mythology, not all of them can be dismissed, at least not without serious consideration.

 

You dont seem to have any trouble 'dismissing ' stuff .  Like the stuff I pointed out above re ;

 

I made certain claims .

 

You disputed them and cited references .

 

I pointed out how the references you supplied actually supported what I was saying .

 

So you sorta ignored that and now have moved on to this  ....   a more 'general'  claim  ,  so to speak .      

 

 

 

4 hours ago, dwai said:

 

Here's an interesting find in Central India, with cave paintings ranging from 10,000 BCE onward --

 

http://www.natgeotraveller.in/madhya-pradesh/rock-of-ages-madhya-pradeshs-ancient-art-galleries-come-alive-in-bhimbetka/

The petroglyphs of Ratnagiri in South indian western coastal region --

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-45559300

 

 

Thats interesting but what is the context ? How does it relate to what we are talking about here ?  It says the art was made about 10,000 ya by a people who where hunter gatherers and did not know agriculture .

 

The links I offered above, that you glossed over showed a much earlier establishment of such people in India and also discussed their  range of technology and artistic expressions .

 

It certainly does not indicate  any early Indian civilisation   regardless of the articles title ... unless we call Hunter Gatherers a 'civilisation' .  '

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Well ... Max Muller died in 1900 and no-one as far as I know subscribes to his views - it would be like saying Egyptologists still follow Wallis-Budge and so on.  The migration theory is supported by genetics and linguistics - and to some extent by archeology - so that is why it persists.

 

I can completely understand why it is galling for a culture as old and noble as the Indic/dharmic one to be lectured by upstart Europeans

 

Hey !  

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 

 

but that doesn't mean you can justify a narrative without proof.  Well, you can of course if you choose to but then expect some kickback.

 

 

 

 

I am showing some of the latest info that moves towards supporting his views  , but  even that isnt good enough, it seems .

 

probably won't be good enough either ... until I show proof of  flying vimana 

 

 

 

 

 

( which, by the way  .... isn't even traditional !   )

 

[dwai]

An interesting video on the Ice age on Earth --

 

Spoiler

 

It is very clear that there were grasslands and tropical rainforests in the Indo-Malay region.

 

The time period that is being proposed in the OP is towards the end of the last ice age, and so not implausible in terms of the development of civilization. 

 

 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

An interesting video on the Ice age on Earth --

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

It is very clear that there were grasslands and tropical rainforests in the Indo-Malay region.

 

The time period that is being proposed in the OP is towards the end of the last ice age, and so not implausible in terms of the development of civilization. 

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone is disputing that India was not under ice during the ice age - or that there was human occupation.  But where is the evidence for anything that might be called a civilisation?  I don't think cave painting do it really since they exist in many places going back to maybe 35,000 BC and even before.

 

 

[dwai]

21 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

I don't think anyone is disputing that India was not under ice during the ice age - or that there was human occupation.  But where is the evidence for anything that might be called a civilisation?  I don't think cave painting do it really since they exist in many places going back to maybe 35,000 BC and even before.

 

 

There is sufficient scriptural evidence, and the Sarasvati-Indus valley civilization (SVC) being the late Vedic one shows sufficient archaeological evidence of civilization there as early as 7500 BCE. The motifs and artifacts there are strikingly Vedic (fire altars, yogic posture, pasupathinath seals etc). 
 

There is sufficient geological evidence to show that the sarasvati river was real and not a mythological river that the Europeans dismissed away. There is evidence to show that this river started to run dry around 2900 BCE due to plate shifts, hence marking the decline of the SVC not as a defeat of Dravidians but as an exodus to the gangetic plains and further south.  
 

Recently scientists have found a massive river bed (now dried up) in the Thar desert dating up to 175000 years back, with several large Paleolithic sites on its banks. 

The entire Aryan vs Dravidian angle was manufactured by the Europeans to justify their expansionary lust. 

Genetic data shows a minor genetic separation between North Indian and South Indian populations, but from around 6000 BCE, and not due to the so-called Aryan invasion (or migration for that matter). 
 

However this topic is heavily politicized, primarily due to the European indology muddying the water due to British imperialistic ambitions. 
 

Which is why, studies such as these (OP) are very important. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by dwai

[Apech]

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

There is sufficient scriptural evidence, and the Sarasvati-Indus valley civilization (SVC) being the late Vedic one shows sufficient archaeological evidence of civilization there as early as 7500 BCE. The motifs and artifacts there are strikingly Vedic (fire altars, yogic posture, pasupathinath seals etc). 
 

 

The IVC is dated 3300 - 1300 BC.

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

There is sufficient geological evidence to show that the sarasvati river was real and not a mythological river that the Europeans dismissed away. There is evidence to show that this river started to run dry around 2900 BCE due to plate shifts, hence marking the decline of the SVC not as a defeat of Dravidians but as an exodus to the gangetic plains and further south.  
 

 

The Ghaggar-Hakra river dried up about 1900 BC.

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

Recently scientists have found a massive river bed (now dried up) in the Thar desert dating up to 175000 years back, with several large Paleolithic sites on its banks. 

 

 

Yes - Paleolithic!

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

 

The entire Aryan vs Dravidian angle was manufactured by the Europeans to justify their expansionary lust. 

 

Two different language groups.

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

Genetic data shows a genetic separation between North Indian and South Indian populations, but from around 6000 BCE, and not due to the so-called Aryan invasion (or migration for that matter). 
 

However this topic is heavily politicized, primarily due to the European indology muddying the water due to British imperialistic ambitions. 
 

Which is why, studies such as these (OP) are very important. 

 

Yes it is - far too politicised.

 

You do know that the British Empire is dead and gone don't you?

 

 

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

The IVC is dated 3300 - 1300 BC.

wrong. There are settlements dating back to 7500 BCE  

Quote

 

 

The Ghaggar-Hakra river dried up about 1900 BC.

 

 

 

Quote

 

Yes - Paleolithic!

 

 

Two different language groups.

who said so? Hasn’t been deciphered yet 

Quote

 

 

Yes it is - far too politicised.

 

You do know that the British Empire is dead and gone don't you?

 

 

Yes but their effects still linger, but won’t for too long. India is purging itself of that scourge. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by dwai