Archaeologica.org

Thanks Beags!

Beags, thanks for the article. Some of the references appear to be antiquated but the outline of Sumerian, Akkadian and Ubaidian words was interesting. I'll need to follow the references to gather a better understanding of where the author was headed.

One part in the article with which I disagree. It is mentioned that the word "Ur" is Ubaidian, not Sumerian. That might be so, but the word "Ur" predates the Ubaidians by eons and is a paleolithic word for "fire" (References upon request).

the first part seems to be an attempt to link the Indus civilissation with the mythical Sumerian land of Dilmun
the main problem with this is that the land of Dilmun according to the Sumerians was a land that existed long in the past
as they were writing that at least 500 years before the Indus civilisation existed I find that ide a little unlikely
There is a reference in the Babylonian chronicles as well that mentions King Sargon
http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/abc20/kings.html

1 Sargon, king of Agade, came to power during the reign of Ištar [1] and
2 he had neither rival not equal. His splendor, over the lands
3 it diffused. He crossed the sea in the east.
4 In the eleventh year he conquered the western land to its farthest point

.
note it doesnt say he crossed the sea in the east to Dilmun
seeing as Sargon lived around 2400bce its quite clear that at that point there wasn't any real civilisation worth mentioning
or it would have

Cognito wrote:Beags, thanks for the article. Some of the references appear to be antiquated but the outline of Sumerian, Akkadian and Ubaidian words was interesting. I'll need to follow the references to gather a better understanding of where the author was headed.

One part in the article with which I disagree. It is mentioned that the word "Ur" is Ubaidian, not Sumerian. That might be so, but the word "Ur" predates the Ubaidians by eons and is a paleolithic word for "fire" (References upon request).

Yep. It's not any kind of authoritive article, but I thought much of it was interesting. One can sort've cherry pick it. (I like this, I don't like that).

the first part seems to be an attempt to link the Indus civilissation with the mythical Sumerian land of Dilmun
the main problem with this is that the land of Dilmun according to the Sumerians was a land that existed long in the past
as they were writing that at least 500 years before the Indus civilisation existed I find that ide a little unlikely

Two dates given for the references are from a time when it was popular to link the two together. However, it's been almost a century since, and we've been down that road before, right?

I've done a bit of reading on this and I have a couple of questions for any takers .
I read a few articles pointing to evidence that the original towns in the indus valley were constructed of wood with very little evidence surviving but pre-dating harappa , which surely makes dating the origins of the civilisation circumspect . From the texts I have read it appears the Harappan cities did not develop slowly , considering the streets laid out in grids and central drainage systems where did the relevant skills come from or if they were immegrates, from where ??
Another strange fact seems to be the cities that were built over each other , each seemes to be done less skillfully , why ? though other civilisations from the same time seem to have had similar traits ,egyptian pyramids for example .

Hi Tech. We're just getting this discussion started, so you'll hear differing opinions. I'll try to post more later, but my focus on the Indus/Sarasvati culture is in it's origins.

Earlier in this thread I posted a PDF about the flint quarries at Sindh. These quarries date from 10,000 BC and are large enough to hold all flint quarries known to date from 100,000 BC. That's a lot of flint mining and also gives a picture of the antiquity of the culture.

The culture had vanished by 1500 BC due to climate change and geologic upheaval. After that there were other influences from other cultures that may have mingled.

Harrapa held a population of 50,000 people. That seems to be the largest city for it's day.

As I said, I'll get more up later. Other folks will give input but the timeline is important.

Beags, screw the 10,000bce. I'm more interested in the picture of the Acheulian bifacial tool from the surface of site ZPS1 (see the article):

http://harappa.com/rohri/rohri-hills-sites.pdf

Since I'm too lazy or inept, could someone get me a good map-point for this quarry site? Appears to me it was popular during more than just the late Pleistocene / early Holocene.

PS And while you're at it, "Bring me the head of a pig!"

Cognito wrote:Beags, screw the 10,000bce. I'm more interested in the picture of the Acheulian bifacial tool from the surface of site ZPS1 (see the article):

http://harappa.com/rohri/rohri-hills-sites.pdf

Looking at the article, Cogs it reminds me of the saying "how can you know where you're going, if you don't know where you've been?" But it seems in India and other places, progress can't wait for the archaeologists to finish their work. (see my video link in Off-Topic).

This whole area of Indus civilization is very confused to me and very interesting. I need to catch up to it soon because, like progress, you guys won't wait for me. Otherwise I have little to contribute to this thread.

I'm more interested in the picture of the Acheulian bifacial tool from the surface of site ZPS1

those Harappans were a bit backwards weren't they
they were using Acheulian tools during the bronze age
what happened to all the Vimanas and nuclear weapons

This whole area of Indus civilization is very confused to me and very interesting. I need to catch up to it soon because, like progress, you guys won't wait for me.

Monk, I view India pretty much as a stopping-off point on the way to somewhere else in the Pleistocene. The climate was not decent for extended periods of time except along the ocean and inland rivers. However, I would like to know who made the Aucheulian point found in the quarry.

Wait for you? Sheesh ... speed-read, already!

And tell me you weren't look for sympathy here, OK?

those Harappans were a bit backwards weren't they
they were using Acheulian tools during the bronze age
what happened to all the Vimanas and nuclear weapons

Marduk, Marduk, Marduk ... yes, I am surprised to find the Harappans using flint at such a late date when other cultures were into metals. However, that Acheulian bifacial tool is very old technology ... far older than the Harappans. Acheulian technology dies out about 100,000 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheulean

I am more interested in the quarry being a stopping off place to make tools during the Lower Paleolithic.

The Vimanas and nuclear weapons are nothing more than a wet dream.

If you look at Free Thinkers videos in the OOA thread, it ties in nicely to this thread. Homo erectus showed up quite early in SE Asia by passing through India. I thinks it very importatnt to understand how migrations are impeded by things like oceans, deserts, mountains, rivers, climate, etc. These things are conduits or gateways if you will, to how settlements and cultures emerged in different time periods.

The Vimanas and nuclear weapons are nothing more than a wet dream

youre a very strange man Cognito

PS And while you're at it, "Bring me the head of a pig!"

Happy to.