Historical Indus Valley Civilization Research papers and Theories.

[Joe Shearer]

Here I was only pointing that speakers of indo European languages and Dravidian languages have intermixed and it shouldn't be a cause of division in modern India. The only sanskrit speaking village is in South India if I remember correct.

Fair comment.

 

[Levina]

There is no evidence bearing out these fanciful suggestions, none whatever.

GO READ--- THE LOST RIVER by Michel Danino and books by RS Bhist, the archeologist of Dholavira.
These are not expensive books. It should help you get rid of your notions about your roots.

Please dont quote me again.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Vedics came around 2000 bce to 1800bce in Indian subcontinent ivc survived up until 1300 bce. They would have come in contact and interacted

You are right, in that this cannot be ruled out entirely.

 

[Joe Shearer]

GO READ--- THE LOST RIVER by Michel Danino and books by RS Bhist, the archeologist of Dholavira.
These are not expensive books. It should help you get rid of your notions about your roots.

Please dont quote me again.

I do not want to quote idle minds with no background in these matters except their sympathetic attitude towards arch-Hindu revisionists.

Every post, every message is open to all. If you wish to send closed messages, do so - outside the forum's transactions.

 

[SavageKing456]

Claiming, thousands of years after the event, that a god mentioned in the Rg Veda is another form of Siva, and that Siva was a god worshipped in the IVC is an old trope of the Hindutvavadi reinterpretation of Indian history. The links are so tenuous that it should be embarrassing to even bring it up.

Just throw "hindutva" words at anyone whom you don't agree with
Rudra and shiva are in fact one
Only stupid people say that shiva is non-vedic deity
Different names are for different quality
Now say "hindutva" to make yourself comfortable,the only word you know.
AIT/AMT larpers used to say saraswati river is a hindutva myth until it's existence was proven

 

[Levina]

I do not want to quote idle minds with no background in these matters except their sympathetic attitude towards arch-Hindu revisionists.

Every post, every message is open to all. If you wish to send closed messages, do so - outside the forum's transactions.

If a simple suggestion to BUY A BOOK of an ARCHEOLOGIST and a researcher who have spent their lives digging up SARASWATI Sindhu civilization can irk you so much then I guess it's time you applied your suggestion to yourself.
PRACTISE WHAT YOU PREACH!

I know you can not control your habits--- but please do not QUOTE me again. I don't want to bang my head against a WALL.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Just throw "hindutva" words at anyone whom you don't agree with
Rudra and shiva are in fact one
Only stupid people say that shiva is non-vedic deity
Different names are for different quality
Now say "hindutva" to make yourself comfortable,the only word you know.
AIT/AMT larpers used to say saraswati river is a hindutva myth until it's existence was proven

I note that you believe that printing 'in fact' after any statement makes it true. Bad news - it doesn't.

Since there is NO mention of Siva in the Rg Veda, it is only the wishful thinking of regressive people that can draw a connection between the two, based on subsequent writing.

As for the Saraswati, its existence has not been proven; what has happened is that the existing, seasonal river named today the Ghaggra has proved to have a lot of IVC sites along its course. That in no way proves that this was the Saraswati referred to.

If you have nothing to do with Hindutva, why are you so sensitive to it?

 

[Joe Shearer]

If a simple suggestion to BUY A BOOK of an ARCHEOLOGIST and a researcher who have spent their lives digging up SARASWATI Sindhu civilization can irk you so much then I guess it's time you applied your suggestion to yourself.
PRACTISE WHAT YOU PREACH!

I know you can not control your habits--- but please do not QUOTE me again. I don't want to bang my head against a WALL.

Please do not bang your head against a wall. There is an easy way to avoid being quoted. Use it.

As for your researcher who has spent his life digging up unconnected facts and currying favour with regressive Hindus, neither he nor his kind have found any acceptance in any respectable academic circles. You mentioned R. S. Bhisht; I suppose it is a matter of time before you drag in S. R. Rao, who has found a whole city under the waves of the sea, or B. B. Lal, who perjured himself in his professional evidence before a court, or Dilip Chakravarti, the doyen of Indian archaeology, whose connnections have been brought into the open daylight in spite of his best efforts - should I mention Vasant Shindey, who has messed around with the Rakhigarhi findings to serve his own purposes?

Once again, if you want not to be quoted, take the obvious way out.

 

[SavageKing456]

I note that you believe that printing 'in fact' after any statement makes it true. Bad news - it doesn't.

Since there is NO mention of Siva in the Rg Veda, it is only the wishful thinking of regressive people that can draw a connection between the two, based on subsequent writing.

As for the Saraswati, its existence has not been proven; what has happened is that the existing, seasonal river named today the Ghaggra has proved to have a lot of IVC sites along its course. That in no way proves that this was the Saraswati referred to.

If you have nothing to do with Hindutva, why are you so sensitive to it?

Where there is no mention of shiva in rig veda
I'm afraid you're wrong.

Regarding saraswati
Researchers have came to the conclusion that same river is in fact saraswati not me,if you are against it go challenge them and prove them wrong
In fact you take the not mentioning of Shiva(which is rumor,shiva is clearly mentioned) as true and mentioning and clear geographical indications of saraswati river by rig veda as false.

 

[SavageKing456]

See - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41...LXIEe30Oo3UuI8HTPzAnpyHgSeQF0W-TPp21ybhkfr8Ak

The Nadu Sukta hymn of the Rig Veda which mentions 19 rivers starting from the Ganges, moving westward to Indus and three of its tributaries flowing from Sulaiman ranges in Afghanistan, places Saraswati between Yamuna and Sutlej.

The later Hindu literature also mentions the drying up and receding of the river.



Given that the Rig Veda mentions Saraswati in full might, meeting the sea from the mountains; based on geological evidence, its composition would coincide (in the latest) with the Mature phase of the Saraswati civilisation.

Based on the above mentioned paper, Rig Veda will go back between 9-5 ka.

Also in this region, no archaeological evidence separating ‘x’ from ‘Harappan’ is found. There is only one culture - Harappan. There is also biological continuity witnessed at this time..

++
The legendary river Saraswati of Indian mythology has often been hypothesized to be an ancient perennial channel of the seasonal river Ghaggar that flowed through the heartland of the Bronze Age Harappan civilization in north-western India. Despite the discovery of abundant settlements along a major paleo-channel of the Ghaggar, many believed that the Harappans depended solely on monsoonal rains, because no proof existed for the river’s uninterrupted flow during the zenith of the civilization. Here, we present unequivocal evidence for the Ghaggar’s perennial past by studying temporal changes of sediment provenance along a 300 km stretch of the river basin. This is achieved using 40Ar/39Ar ages of detrital muscovite and Sr-Nd isotopic ratios of siliciclastic sediment in fluvial sequences, dated by radiocarbon and luminescence methods. We establish that during 80-20 ka and 9-4.5 ka the river was perennial and was receiving sediments from the Higher and Lesser Himalayas. The latter phase can be attributed to the reactivation of the river by the distributaries of the Sutlej. This revived perennial condition of the Ghaggar, which can be correlated with the Saraswati, likely facilitated development of the early Harappan settlements along its banks. The timing of the eventual decline of the river, which led to the collapse of the civilization, approximately coincides with the commencement of the Meghalayan Stage

 

[Joe Shearer]

Where there is no mention of shiva in rig veda
I'm afraid you're wrong.

Really? Apart from the identification of Shiva with Rudra, who in much later texts, and much later writings, got identified with the angry form of Shiva, what did you have in mind? Do explain.

Regarding saraswati
Researchers have came to the conclusion that same river is in fact saraswati not me,if you are against it go challenge them and prove them wrong

Which researcher? There has been a lot of speculation; how precisely have the two sets of references to the Saraswati in the Rg Veda been linked to the Ghaggra, other than by people who are speculating on a possibility?

It is possible that you may suddenly come out with an argument that is sound; the possibility does not mean that it is a proof.

Similarly, there is no other river that can be identified with the Saraswati IN ONE OF THE TWO TYPES OF REFERENCE TO IT more conveniently than the Ghaggra; do you think that is proof? There is no challenge needed; they have expressed an opinion, and every human being possesses an opinion, along with an organ not referred to in polite company. So what? What is there to disprove, when I say that the moon is not made of blue cheese, but it is probably made of yellow cheese?

In fact you take the not mentioning of Shiva(which is rumor,shiva is clearly mentioned) as true and mentioning and clear geographical indications of saraswati river by rig veda as false.

Again, you have your facts in a tangle.

Shiva is not mentioned in the Rg Veda. Go through it for yourself if you wish; you will not find that name, you will only find Rudra mentioned.

Similarly, if you knew for yourself, there is no geographical indication of the Saraswati in the Rg Veda. There are two sets of references, and those are at best indicative. I assume that you know nothing about either reference, otherwise you would have spotted the contradiction between them straightaway.

 

[Levina]

If you have nothing to do with Hindutva, why are you so sensitive to it?

Hindutva-- Hindu + Tatva, a name by which outsiders called Sanatanis, as the number of Santana followers decreased outside India.
So the right term is SANATANA-- the term is used to denote the “eternal” or absolute set of duties.
Yes, I am a Sanatani.

Shiva is a our deity, Shivlings have been in existence since ancient times. One must be BLIND, to know recognise these figurines or just must be an arrogant libtard.

And then ofcourse there's the famous Pashuptai seal.

Ah! My days! Sporadically I have to force myself to drill some sense into ..ahem.. few walls.

 

[Joe Shearer]

See - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41...LXIEe30Oo3UuI8HTPzAnpyHgSeQF0W-TPp21ybhkfr8Ak

The Nadu Sukta hymn of the Rig Veda which mentions 19 rivers starting from the Ganges, moving westward to Indus and three of its tributaries flowing from Sulaiman ranges in Afghanistan, places Saraswati between Yamuna and Sutlej.

The later Hindu literature also mentions the drying up and receding of the river.

It is precisely between this and the next 'fact' that you have mentioned that there is a gulf. Placing the Saraswati between the Yamuna and the Sutlej DOES NOT identify the Ghaggra as that Saraswati; it merely encourages speculation that this might be a possible candidate. That is not proof, that is speculation, informed speculation, but one that breaks down in very short order.

Given that the Rig Veda mentions Saraswati in full might, meeting the sea from the mountains; based on geological evidence, its composition would coincide (in the latest) with the Mature phase of the Saraswati civilisation.

Based on the above mentioned paper, Rig Veda will go back between 9-5 ka.

It is precisely for this reason that regressive and wishful thinkers keep trying to push back the date of the Vedas. For one thing, if the Vedic reference to the foaming river is to be identified to the Ghaggra, that river had already dried up by 1300 BCE. So the only way to wish ourselves into being the originators of the IVC is to push back the date of the composition of the Vedas to the dates when the Ghaggra was in full flow.

There is a problem with that. A problem that a mind looking desperately for such an identification will not notice.

The problem can be explained in the following points (these are the findings of palaeo-geologists, the same people who think that the dried-up Ghaggra could have been the Saraswati):

1. The Sutlej, and possibly also the Yamuna, flowed south-west into the Hakra, and from there, according to satellite imagery, into the Nara River, a delta channel of the Indus, that today falls into the sea by way of Sir Creek.
2. Around 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, the Sutlej changed course, as did the Yamuna, the latter becoming a tributary of the Ganges system. THIS WAS WELL BEFORE THE INDUS VALLEY CIVILISATION HAD BEGUN.
3. By 5,000 years ago (another way of saying this is around 3500 BCE, that is, 3,500 + 2,100 = 5,600 years ago), the monsoon rains had diminished. This allowed urban settlements to flourish along the banks of the now-seasonal river system, that is known as the Ghaggra until it falls into the Hakra.
4. Contrary to what many people in India think, not every settlement was of a major size. Many of these sites were quite small. The number of sites does not therefore indicate the centre of gravity of the civilisation, merely its extent and spread.
5. Between 2500 BCE and 1900 BCE, the course of the channels changed; the older course was left even more short of water, and this was when the decline of the IVC began, in archaeological terms. The end came about 1300 BCE, or about 3,400 years ago.
   1. It was not an abrupt ending; there was gradual, extended degradation, with the orderly plan of the settlements becoming compromised step by step, with buildings in the middle of what were once empty streets.
   2. The people abandoned these decaying settlements and, according to pottery remains, and grave-sites (the SWAT Culture and the Cemetery H, and in pottery, the Ochre pottery as a starting and tracking point), spread out in the north-east into the Punjab-Haryana plains (Rakhigarhi being such a site); in the south-east, it went east beyond Lothal into the hinterland.

This should make clear that for the first reference to the Saraswati in the Rg Veda, a foaming brimful river, the Rg Veda should have been composed around 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, when there was no urban community, and only neolithic settlements of hunter-gatherers in archaeological terms, and only the wishful thinking of regressives to suggest that any kind of civilisation existed then.

It also requires a reconciliation of the canonical dates of the Indo-Iranian movement from the Andronovo Culture to the Oxus-Jaxartes region by 2000 BCE or so, and the westward movement of the Mitanni to Anatolia, where their peace treaties spoke of Varuna, the Nasatyas and Indra, and their horse training treatises faithfully followed the Indo-Iranian, and thereafter, the Indo-Aryan numbering system. Unfortunately, those who keep trying to establish the OOI fail at reconciling these points.

On the other hand, that there was renewed effort at setting up urban settlements after the collapse of the IVC and that a percentage of steppe dwellers were involved, is clear from archaeological evidence.

The second reference to the Saraswati in the Rg Veda is to a river that disappears into the desert. This is precisely the condition of the Ghaggar in the period 1300 BCE, around 200 years after the first migrants had entered south Asia. If there is to be an identification of the Ghaggar with the Vedic river, it is this reference that is logical and consistent with the facts, and not the other, earlier one.

It is for these reasons that it is unlikely that the Ghaggar was the Saraswati of Vedic times. At least, it was not the brimful Saraswati; it may have been the Saraswati disappearing into the desert.

Also in this region, no archaeological evidence separating ‘x’ from ‘Harappan’ is found. There is only one culture - Harappan. There is also biological continuity witnessed at this time..

++
The legendary river Saraswati of Indian mythology has often been hypothesized to be an ancient perennial channel of the seasonal river Ghaggar that flowed through the heartland of the Bronze Age Harappan civilization in north-western India. Despite the discovery of abundant settlements along a major paleo-channel of the Ghaggar, many believed that the Harappans depended solely on monsoonal rains, because no proof existed for the river’s uninterrupted flow during the zenith of the civilization. Here, we present unequivocal evidence for the Ghaggar’s perennial past by studying temporal changes of sediment provenance along a 300 km stretch of the river basin. This is achieved using 40Ar/39Ar ages of detrital muscovite and Sr-Nd isotopic ratios of siliciclastic sediment in fluvial sequences, dated by radiocarbon and luminescence methods. We establish that during 80-20 ka and 9-4.5 ka the river was perennial and was receiving sediments from the Higher and Lesser Himalayas. The latter phase can be attributed to the reactivation of the river by the distributaries of the Sutlej. This revived perennial condition of the Ghaggar, which can be correlated with the Saraswati, likely facilitated development of the early Harappan settlements along its banks. The timing of the eventual decline of the river, which led to the collapse of the civilization, approximately coincides with the commencement of the Meghalayan Stage

<sigh>
This brimful phase was long before any traces of urban development. For your information, the archaeological research of Raymond and Bridget Allchin showed the gradual growth of villages, then towns, then the full-fledged cities of the IVC, spreading down from the Afghan plateau, to the Indus valley banks, and then proliferating along channels of the Indus and its tributaries. These are clear signs of systematic growth and development, not planned by some higher authority, but as the natural progression of urban development.

It is also clear that the urbanisation along the banks of the Ghaggar was most convenient when weather conditions permitted, not at a time of flooded rivers, but at a time of lesser monsoon precipitation and lesser river activity. That would also explain why there are so many more urban settlements, even though of smaller sizes, along these shrinking tributaries, than along the main Indus itself.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hindutva-- Hindu + Tatva, a name by which outsiders called Sanatanis, as the number of Santana followers decreased outside India.
So the right term is SANATANA-- the term is used to denote the “eternal” or absolute set of duties.
Yes, I am a Sanatani.

Shiva is a our deity, Shivlings have been in existence since ancient times. One must be BLIND, to know recognise these figurines or just must be an arrogant libtard.
View attachment 39592







And then ofcourse there's the famous Pashuptai seal.

View attachment 39593


Ah! My days! Sporadically I have to force myself to drill some sense into ..ahem.. few walls.

Nice try.

Hindutva has nothing to do with Sanatan Dharma, with Hinduism, whether or not you shrink from that term as all well-brought up Hindu regressives would.

Please don't shove pictures into my face that I saw sixty years ago. Please confine yourself to your masonry, and leave history, pre-history and archaeology to those who have made an effort to see the various dimensions of these.

If you really want to understand how spurious your little conjectures are, do say so. The fact that you have absorbed Michel Danino, rather than throwing the book as far across the room as you might, says much for the credibility of Danino's readers - his believing readers. If you think for a few minutes, not more than ten, you may understand the significance of those shivlingas. Nothing can be ruled out; possibly you may not get it even after ten minutes, in which case that will be the end of civilisation as we know it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Fair comment.

If you are seriously interested in a discussion, I should like to address the points about the spread of the Indus Valley Civilisation into Central Asia; artifacts have been found in the very areas that the Indo-Iranians should have visited in their transit to three different destinations.

A reconciliation of the dates is eminently possible, but a discussion is always useful.

 

[Levina]

Nice try.

Hindutva has nothing to do with Sanatan Dharma, with Hinduism, whether or not you shrink from that term as all well-brought up Hindu regressives would.

Please don't shove pictures into my face that I saw sixty years ago. Please confine yourself to your masonry, and leave history, pre-history and archaeology to those who have made an effort to see the various dimensions of these.

If you really want to understand how spurious your little conjectures are, do say so. The fact that you have absorbed Michel Danino, rather than throwing the book as far across the room as you might, says much for the credibility of Danino's readers - his believing readers. If you think for a few minutes, not more than ten, you may understand the significance of those shivlingas. Nothing can be ruled out; possibly you may not get it even after ten minutes, in which case that will be the end of civilisation as we know it.

Counter me with facts and not your preconceived notions.
LEARN TO DEBATE first!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Counter me with facts and not your preconceived notions.
LEARN TO DEBATE first!

If you mean quoting seedy authors on the fringe is your definition of facts, I am at a disadvantage.

Second, if you are serious about debating, decide the rules. Don't just use words without meaning them.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Counter me with facts and not your preconceived notions.
LEARN TO DEBATE first!

What subject do you want to debate?
Who will moderate it?
Is it to be on a proposition or just a broad subject?
Do you know anything about debating? I've been on a team with Kalyan Chatterjee, in school, in college, at the institute. We met Shashi baba more than once, and beat him, except when he was with Ramu Damodaran.
So when you make cocky statements like the one you just did, I have to wonder what you think you are doing.
I'm game to debate; read what I've written above.

 

[Levina]

What subject do you want to debate?
Who will moderate it?
Is it to be on a proposition or just a broad subject?
Do you know anything about debating? I've been on a team with Kalyan Chatterjee, in school, in college, at the institute. We met Shashi baba more than once, and beat him, except when he was with Ramu Damodaran.
So when you make cocky statements like the one you just did, I have to wonder what you think you are doing.
I'm game to debate; read what I've written above.

In case your memory has failed you— you quoted my post 1st. Go back and check the topic my post was about.


As far as your statements about Sanatana and SSC are concerned, you have already displayed your “sagacity” on the topic.

To this day Saraswati Sindhu Civilization continues to thrive in the subcontinent through the Sanatanis.
Shiva, of Harappa and the one worshipped in the temples in the southern India are one and the same. If someone fails to comprehend this, then either they have no clue about Ved and Sanatan or they have an agenda.

 

[Joe Shearer]

In case your memory has failed you— you quoted my post 1st. Go back and check the topic my post was about.


As far as your statements about Sanatana and SSC are concerned, you have already displayed your “sagacity” on the topic.

To this day Saraswati Sindhu Civilization continues to thrive in the subcontinent through the Sanatanis.
Shiva, of Harappa and the one worshipped in the temples in the southern India are one and the same. If someone fails to comprehend this, then either they have no clue about Ved and Sanatan or they have an agenda.

We will talk when you are not so agitated.