--- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
wrote:... In press releases and popular publications the piece of
wood is pluralised to become "wooden artifacts", the regular patterns
visible in sonar images are confidently interpreted as an acropolis,
a Harappan-style bath, a staircase, a temple and what not -- all that
before a single _scientific_ analysis has been published in a serious
journal. It's difficult not to be wary of such revelations.
Piotr, there is a lot more to the complex than the piece of wood.
Hancock is entitled to his views. NIOT scientists who have been
working on this remarkable site for over 2 years -- an equivalent of
6 archaeological seasons -- before making their announcements.
Articles have been published in Current Science; I will provide the
references. A scientific symposium will be held on July 1 with about
40 scientists participating. The exploratory work will go forward.
It is incorrect to assume, based on press reports, that the only
evidence for dating is the piece of sawn wood. Many other artefacts
have also been dated and confirm the date. Over 1,000 objects have
been collected, of which about 250 are of archaeological and cultural
interest. The methods used for dating some selected artefacts, mostly
at a depth of 40 metres below sea level -- 30 km. from the coast-
line, were: Carbon-14, at the National Geophysical Research
Institute, Hyderabad, and the Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeo-
Botany, Lucknow; thermo luminiscence at the Physical Research
Institute, Ahmedabad, for pottery samples; and accelerated mass
petrometry from the Regional Research Laboratory, Bhubaneswar, for
corals and shell artefacts.
In addition, there is a fundamental geological factor which lends
credence to the date; the formation of the Gulf of Khambat itself by
the incursion of the sea, submering 9 km. stretches of two rivers
(extensions of palaeo-courses of Rivers Tapati and Narmada) and the
settlements on their banks. This has been published in geology
journals.
Before rushing to judgment, it will be prudent to await the updates
to the NIOT website reporting these and other scientific evidence.
Now, for the cultural/linguistic significance. Even assuming that the
date is, say, 5000 BP (co-terminus with Padri in Saura_s.t.ra), the
names of Bharukaccha and Khambat have to be explained. Gregory
Possehl (Indus Age, The Beginnings, 1999: sites such as Lothal,
Padri, Somnath, Dwaraka, Dholavira) observed about the Amri-Nal
culture hugging the coastline of the Arabian Sea, Rann of Kutch and
the Persian Gulf, pointing to the early association with the sea of
pre-Harappans. For e.g., the association of Bhr.gu (Bharu-kaks.a in
Maha_bha_rata) and Varun.a is emphatic in the R.gveda.
http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1907/19070940.htm
Gulf of Khambat debate (Asko Parpola and I. Mahadevan)
http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1907/19071010.htm
Gulf of Khambat (S. Kalyanaraman)
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/khambat/khambat01.htm
Background links
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/khambat/bhrgu01.htm
Bhr.gu, va_run.i
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/khambat/khambat05.htm
Language X, Nahali, Vedic