Pre-Harappan Cities "Flood"ed

[Ramo]

Yet this notion that the Aryan invaders authored the Vedas is still the status quo in archaeological circles. But "Manu", the flood survivor, appearing in the Vedas has an Indus counterpart going back 5,000 years long before the Aryans arrived.

Of course there was a massive flood around the Black Sea about 7000 years ago, which explains the Vedas story too (and why it was probably brought by Indo-European invaders).

[Dr Strangelove]

Isn't the Black Sea on the wrong side of the Caucasus to havbe had much effect on the writing of the Vedas?

Besides, everyond knows that the Vedas were written by Irving "Godavari" Berlin.

[Ramo]

The immigrants who probably brought the Vedas (as an oral tradition) to India originated from roughly that region.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ramo
The immigrants who probably brought the Vedas (as an oral tradition) to India originated from roughly that region.

You mean Irving don't you?

[Ramo]

Naturally. He was Russian after all.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Berzerker
... It's a bit surprising how archaeology sought to overturn the traditions of myth and religion only to become the new dogma.

I can understand the need to be skeptical and critical, but I find it interesting that there are scientists, archaeologists, etc., out there who, in mind-set if not spirit, aren't that much different from the religious authorities of centuries past who persecuted those who sought knowledge.

I guess it's human nature, no matter the cloak you wear. You become attached to something and will defend it by any means possible if there's something else out there that threatens its credibility.

The people I can respect the most are those who are open-minded to at least look into seemingly legitimate claims and discoveries made by those who may not be in the "mainstream" of science. And I respect those outsiders who can acknowledge it graciously when their pet theory has been fractured.

Personally, I've always believed there's more to human history than we can imageine. I'm not necessarily talking about ancient super-civilizations that had rocketry and spaceflight, either, but civilizations that simply stretch further back in time and, by gosh, maybe did know how to circumnavigate the globe with what we would consider to be rudimentary technology.

Heh. Although if there was a super-civilization, that'd be cool. Of course, it would raise another question: If what destroyed that civilization came back, would we suffer an identical fate, and be the subject of myths and legends 10,000 years from now?

Gatekeeper

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Berzerker
The 2 cities are submerged by 120 feet of water and an expert on ancient coastlines shows that the cities' site would have been above sea level during the ice age up until roughly 7,500 years ago. That's about when the cities were abandoned and the "myths" of Manu take over. According to the myth, Manu was the wise sage who re-established civilisation after surviving the flood via boat coming to rest on some mountains near the Himalayas. Settlements sprung up there and people gradually resettled along the nearby Indus and another more massive river system since dried up, cities well inland away from the coast.

Is the river you are speaking of the Sarasvati? IIRC the river changed course, but the Goddess who was associated with it survived.

I thought that the bit about the Aryans writing the Vedas was already long demolished. It should have been obvious that the Vedas weren't the sudden inspiration of the Aryans, they are so completely foreign to Indo-European culture. "Harrapan" civilization was big and successful, but apparantly no match for the Aryan war machine. By and large the language of the Aryan's and some of their religious culture survived, but there is a huge amount of cultural baggage that needs to be sorted out, and much of it bears no resemblence to anything else produced by IE peoples in other regions. I think it's safe to assume that just as the Greeks and Romans came into a sizable inheritance of knowledge as they made their way into the civilized world, so too did the Aryans.

And one has to watch like a hawk that whatever one reads about this subject isn't wishful fantasy by the many different groups who have a lot of stake in the history of India. I've seen some pretty special pleading from various quarters on occasion.

[Bosh]

I can understand the need to be skeptical and critical, but I find it interesting that there are scientists, archaeologists, etc., out there who, in mind-set if not spirit, aren't that much different from the religious authorities of centuries past who persecuted those who sought knowledge.

Real scientists went back and looked at sites of supposed flooded cities (specifically Malta) and found that all the "evidence" that the pseudo-scientists claimed proved that there was cities there was the sort of natural phenomenons that could be found all over the world.

[Berzerker]

Boshko -

There wasn't much in the way of settled civilization back them. The talk of flooded very early cities that you're talking about is pseudo-science that is not accepted by any professional and trained archeologists that I know of (or at least so said the prof of my Climate Change and Human Evolution class two years ago).

That is the current theory, but these ruins defy that view. We'll have to wait for confirmation of the ruins, but the side scan sonar revealed far too many right angled walls to be a coincidence and dredging brought up plenty of confirmed artifacts.

Ramo -

The antecedents of Sanskrit have been in India for at least 8000 years? Why do these linguists think so? How do they explain its similarities with other Indo-European languages? I'm no linguist, but this sounds like nonsense to me.

That is what Indian linguists claim, but the show focused on the ruins and not on the linguistic evidence. But it makes sense that if Sanskrit had an older origin it had more time to disperse and show up in other cultures. It doesn't make much sense that the language spoken by ancient Indians would have simply disappeared and the assertion that the Aryans authored the Vedas was based on the same evidence for the assertion that Aryan invaders destroyed the Indus civilisation and that evidence was shown to be dubious at best in this documentary. Read on...

Of course there was a massive flood around the Black Sea about 7000 years ago, which explains the Vedas story too (and why it was probably brought by Indo-European invaders).

But the cause of that flooding also caused flooding around the world, including India. Why would you need foreigners to bring a Flood story to India? New World Indians didn't need western Europeans to bring them the Flood legend, they not only had their own, one tribe even dated their Flood version. According to the Vedas, Manu was a practitioner and codifier of yoga, a practice that goes back far beyond the Aryans.

Sikander -

Is the river you are speaking of the Sarasvati? IIRC the river changed course, but the Goddess who was associated with it survived.

Yes, but according to the documentary, the river ceased flowing. And this is key to the issue since the Vedas claim this river was monstrous with a delta ~22 km wide. But according to the geologists studying this ancient river, it stopped flowing 6,000 years ago. How could a river mentioned in the Vedas as being so large cease flowing 6,000 years ago if the Vedas were written 3,500 years ago? Another piece of evidence is this "Manu" character in the Vedas, he's said to be a great sage who codified the art of yoga, a practice Indian historians claim goes back at least 6,000 years. But at Mohenja-Daro or was it Harappa, cylinder seals have been found dating back 4,700 years depicting what is believed to be Manu sitting in a yoga position.

[Bosh]

That is the current theory, but these ruins defy that view.

Except that there is no solid evidence that there are ruins, until that happens this sort of speculation is only a step up from blather about Altantis.

[Berzerker]

Boshko, why did the Black Sea flood? Rising waters in the Mediterranean? Doesn't that suggest Malta was larger in the past? Given how much of the world's population lives near the sea now, wouldn't you conclude people were living near the sea during the ice age? That doesn't mean they lived in cities, but it does mean many settlements would have been flooded. If you could have seen the outlines of submerged city at Cambay you wouldn't be so skeptical. Those kind of features are not found all over the world. And down at Sri Lanka the ruins were not only layered, i.e., piled up layers of stones, it was in the shape of a large horseshoe.

[Berzerker]

Boshko, you didn't see the documentary so how can you claim there is no solid evidence? The find has been publicised in the Indian media ever since the discovery.

[Tingkai]

Interesting topic. Can anyone suggest books about it (Harappan and Pre-Harappan civilisations)?

[Ramo]

That is what Indian linguists claim, but the show focused on the ruins and not on the linguistic evidence. But it makes sense that if Sanskrit had an older origin it had more time to disperse and show up in other cultures.

But language perturbations are hierarchial. So linguists can trace where languages split, and they seem to be pretty sure that Sanskrit wasn't a native language.

It doesn't make much sense that the language spoken by ancient Indians would have simply disappeared

Look at, say, the Arab conquest of Egypt. The original Egyptian language completely disappeared. And the original North Indian languages didn't disappear per se, they were likely related to Dravidian languages which continue to be used to this day.

Why would you need foreigners to bring a Flood story to India?

My understanding is that the Black Sea flooding was extraordinarily large in scope relative to local incidents.

It should have been obvious that the Vedas weren't the sudden inspiration of the Aryans, they are so completely foreign to Indo-European culture.

But flood myths aren't particularly foreign to I-E culture. 'Course I'm not up to date on the current academic debate about this, do you know any good sources?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Berzerker

Ramo -

That is what Indian linguists claim, but the show focused on the ruins and not on the linguistic evidence. But it makes sense that if Sanskrit had an older origin it had more time to disperse and show up in other cultures. It doesn't make much sense that the language spoken by ancient Indians would have simply disappeared and the assertion that the Aryans authored the Vedas was based on the same evidence for the assertion that Aryan invaders destroyed the Indus civilisation and that evidence was shown to be dubious at best in this documentary. Read on...

We have a fair deal of evidence that puts those claims into the extraordinarily dubious category. Sanskrit did not live secretly in India for thousands of years before recorded history. No linguist who is taken seriously by his peers posits this. The evidence that the Aryans destroyed the Indus civilization at least has the fact that many people in India speak a language derived from Aryan in its favor. To hold the "early Sanskrit theory" one would have to destroy every canon of linguistics one at a time, as well as debunk a good deal of historical and archeological data.

Originally posted by Berzerker

Sikander -

Yes, but according to the documentary, the river ceased flowing. And this is key to the issue since the Vedas claim this river was monstrous with a delta ~22 km wide. But according to the geologists studying this ancient river, it stopped flowing 6,000 years ago. How could a river mentioned in the Vedas as being so large cease flowing 6,000 years ago if the Vedas were written 3,500 years ago? Another piece of evidence is this "Manu" character in the Vedas, he's said to be a great sage who codified the art of yoga, a practice Indian historians claim goes back at least 6,000 years. But at Mohenja-Daro or was it Harappa, cylinder seals have been found dating back 4,700 years depicting what is believed to be Manu sitting in a yoga position.

Oh I think that the memory of this river is certainly true, it shows up in aerial photos and such. I'm not as sure on the time line, but it definitely was an important river to this civilization. IIRC it changed course upstream, which to people downstream seems like it simply stopped. IMO the general ideas put forward over the years are pretty much true. In broad strokes,

There was an ancient neo-lithic civilization on the subcontinent of India which we will call the Harrapa. They built up a large population along the rich river valleys through the use of agriculture and irrigation. They also developed trading networks that spread their goods and people to South East Asia and possible beyond, as well as to the Middle East and possible beyond.

At some point some of this civilization was conquered and partially subsumed by Aryan invaders from Iran. What eventually evolved was a hybrid culture that held the usual pantheon one expects from an Indo-European culture (and one which the Aryans were shown to possess before they arrived in India) as well as aspects of a unique religious culture that included among many things the practice of Yoga.

Evidence for an Aryan conquest includes the caste system in India, which seems like just the sort of thing that the whites would have going in South Africa had they been left unmolested for a few centuries.