Sugriva’s Atlas - 14000 years back

[dwai]

4 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Not by  ASI   ?    ( Archaeological Survey of India   project )

 

The dates I have seen range from 3,800 to 4,000  ya . 

 

 

 

 

Why ? 

 

 

IE   invasion chariots   ? 

 

 

 

 

.... just joking        

More likely proof that there were no invaders, the Sinauli people were natives of the gangetic plains. 🙄

[Apech]

11 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Not by  ASI   ?    ( Archaeological Survey of India   project )

 

The dates I have seen range from 3,800 to 4,000  ya . 

 

 

 

 

Why ? 

 

 

IE   invasion chariots   ? 

 

 

 

 

.... just joking        

 

Yes and they are suggesting that this is the Mahabharata culture - which we were told was 12,000 BC or some such.

 

Actually I am thinking this does answer a question about the legacy of the IVC ... up till now it seemed to go up in a puff of smoke (metaphorically).

[dwai]

6 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Yes and they are suggesting that this is the Mahabharata culture - which we were told was 12,000 BC or some such.

No Mahabharata has been dated from anything between 5561 BCE to 3000 BCE (depending on whose interpretation you read).  

Ramayana is dated in the OP presentation to be 12000 BCE. 

 

Sinauli clearly shows that both horses and chariots existed in India far before the invasion by the marauding Aryans around 1500 BCE.  I bet you dollars to donuts that older sites will be excavated all over that region, which has significant historical relevance (Kurukshetra is right near by, as are Hastinapur and Indraprastha). 

6 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Actually I am thinking this does answer a question about the legacy of the IVC ... up till now it seemed to go up in a puff of smoke (metaphorically).

There are far more archaeological sites from that period (or earlier) on the banks of the Sarasvati River than Indus. This is relevant because it is from the yamuna-gangetic plains, which was the "hub" of civilization in late Vedic/post-Vedic literature (itihaasa, puranas etc). 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

No Mahabharata has been dated from anything between 5561 BCE to 3000 BCE (depending on whose interpretation you read).  

Ramayana is dated in the OP presentation to be 12000 BCE. 

 

Sinauli clearly shows that both horses and chariots existed in India far before the invasion by the marauding Aryans around 1500 BCE.  I bet you dollars to donuts that older sites will be excavated all over that region, which has significant historical relevance (Kurukshetra is right near by, as are Hastinapur and Indraprastha). 

There are far more archaeological sites from that period (or earlier) on the banks of the Sarasvati River than Indus. This is relevant because it is from the yamuna-gangetic plains, which was the "hub" of civilization in late Vedic/post-Vedic literature (itihaasa, puranas etc). 

 

Ah ok I got confused by all the wild dates floating round.

[Nungali]

51 minutes ago, dwai said:

No Mahabharata has been dated from anything between 5561 BCE to 3000 BCE (depending on whose interpretation you read).  

Ramayana is dated in the OP presentation to be 12000 BCE. 

 

Sinauli clearly shows that both horses and chariots existed in India far before the invasion by the marauding Aryans around 1500 BCE. 

 

 

 

 

LOOK ! LOOK  - he admitted it ! 

 

 

 

 

51 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

I bet you dollars to donuts that older sites will be excavated all over that region, which has significant historical relevance (Kurukshetra is right near by, as are Hastinapur and Indraprastha). 

 

You would win, I think.  

 

The thing about archaeology is,  it is based on    what has been found -  so far .

 

 

51 minutes ago, dwai said:

There are far more archaeological sites from that period (or earlier) on the banks of the Sarasvati River than Indus. This is relevant because it is from the yamuna-gangetic plains, which was the "hub" of civilization in late Vedic/post-Vedic literature (itihaasa, puranas etc). 

 

Years back , I proposed a theory based on my extensive studies of  ancient  southern Centra Asia .  Many westerners and Indians seemed to have a really wrong idea about what the dynamic was in Central Asia   - a virtual vacuum until arrival of IE . This is not the case .  I realised it was  an area greatly misunderstood .   Not surprising since it was  an ancient culture  that developed civilisation , only recently discovered  last century in the 70s  ( terrain, war and other issues have made further research very difficult  ) . It appeared that  'Aryan' influence' in India was gradual (over 'phases' ) -  over time, each with smaller numbers and a lot earlier, than  previously thought .    I was poo-pooed by many . 

 

But more recently [ Phase Two: The Indo-Aryan Evolution phase (before 2500 BC) ]

 

 "The Indo-Aryans may have first arrived in the Northern most tip of India in statistically in

significant numbers and settled in the Sapta Sindhu region or the Vedic homeland comprising of

present day Punjab, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Southern Kashmir and large parts of North

Eastern Pakistan) from a homeland believed to be somewhere in Central Asia (formulated in

several hypotheses already discussed in this write-up) sometime before 2500 BC (3000 BC

 

"

 

(   check out the  'The Proposed Nine Phase Acculturation model between the Harappans, Indo-Aryans and

other cultures to explain how the transfer of power took place from the Harappans to the

Indo-Aryans .)

 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275949775_Syncretism_and_Acculturation_in_Ancient_India_Part_One_ICFAI_Journal_of_History_and_Culture#pf28

 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

37 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Ah ok I got confused by all the wild dates floating round.

 

 

Mmmmmmm  ! 

 

 

 

 

Chinese red date soup .

[dwai]

36 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

 

 

LOOK ! LOOK  - he admitted it ! 

 

 
 

I was being sarcastic there  

There were no marauding Aryan invaders  , Sinauli is proof that horses and chariots were already in India at that time. 

36 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

 

You would win, I think.  

 

The thing about archaeology is,  it is based on    what has been found -  so far .

Yes there are also pretty old sites discovered in south India, off the south east coast of India. The problem with proper study was lack of capital — which is not the case anymore.

36 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

Years back , I proposed a theory based on my extensive studies of  ancient  southern Centra Asia .  Many westerners and Indians seemed to have a really wrong idea about what the dynamic was in Central Asia   - a virtual vacuum until arrival of IE . This is not the case .  I realised it was  an area greatly misunderstood .   Not surprising since it was  an ancient culture  that developed civilisation , only recently discovered  last century in the 70s  ( terrain, war and other issues have made further research very difficult  ) . It appeared that  'Aryan' influence' in India was gradual (over 'phases' ) -  over time, each with smaller numbers and a lot earlier, than  previously thought .    I was poo-pooed by many . 

 

But more recently [ Phase Two: The Indo-Aryan Evolution phase (before 2500 BC) ]

 

 "The Indo-Aryans may have first arrived in the Northern most tip of India in statistically in

significant numbers and settled in the Sapta Sindhu region or the Vedic homeland comprising of

present day Punjab, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Southern Kashmir and large parts of North

Eastern Pakistan) from a homeland believed to be somewhere in Central Asia (formulated in

several hypotheses already discussed in this write-up) sometime before 2500 BC (3000 BC

I’ve seen this earlier too. In fact, Kazanas proposes this very model, iinm. 

36 minutes ago, Nungali said:

"

 

(   check out the  'The Proposed Nine Phase Acculturation model between the Harappans, Indo-Aryans and

other cultures to explain how the transfer of power took place from the Harappans to the

Indo-Aryans .)

 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275949775_Syncretism_and_Acculturation_in_Ancient_India_Part_One_ICFAI_Journal_of_History_and_Culture#pf28

 

 

Will respond after reading it. 

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

Ah ok I got confused by all the wild dates floating round.

That’s why you got me to share the info buddy.  

Edited February 18, 2021 by dwai

[Apech]

20 hours ago, dwai said:

That’s why you got me to share the info buddy.  

 

So what Harrapens next?

 

(this is my best joke of the day so don't complain).

[dwai]

4 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

So what Harrapens next?

 

(this is my best joke of the day so don't complain).

We stop calling the Harrapans IVC,  and correctly name them Vedic Sarasvati Civilization is what harrapans