It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Adolf Erman (1854-1937) author of Life in ancient Egypt and A handbook of Egyptian religion, says that the persons who were responsible for a highly developed Egyptian civilization were from Punt, an Asiatic country, a description of which is unveiled by this scholar from the old legends - a distant country washed by the great seas, full of valleys, incense, balsum, precious metals and stones; rich in animals, cheetahs, panthers, dog-headed apes and long tailed monkeys, winged creatures with strange feathers to fly up to the boughs of wonderful trees, especially the incense tree and the coconut trees.
Louis Jacolliot (1837-1890), who worked in French India as a government official and was at one time President of the Court in Chandranagar, translated numerous Vedic hymns, the Manusmriti, and the Tamil work, Kural. This French savant and author of La Bible Dans L'Inde says:
"With such congruence before us, no one, I imagine, will appear to contest the purely Hindu origin of Egypt, unless to suggest that: "And who tells you that it was not Indian that copied Egypt? Any of you require that this affirmation shall be refuted by proofs leaving no room for even a shadow of doubt?
"To be quite logical, then deprive India of the Sanskrit, that language which formed all other; but show me in India a leaf of papyrus, a columnar inscription, a temple bas relief tending to prove Egyptian birth."
Heinrich Karl Brugsch agrees with this view and writes in his History of Egypt that,
"We have a right to more than suspect that India, eight thousand years ago, sent a colony of emigrants who carried their arts and high civilization into what is now known as Egypt." The Egyptians came, according to their records, from a mysterious land (now known to lie on the shores of the Indian Ocean)."
It is testified by Herdotus, Plato, Salon, Pythagoras, and Philostratus that the religion of Egypt proceeded from India....It is testified by Neibuhr, Valentia, Champollian and Weddington that the temples of upper Egypt are of greater antiquity than those of lower Egypt...that consequently the religion of Egypt, according to the testimony of those monuments....came from India...The chronicles found in the temples of Abydos and Sais and which have been transmitted by Josephus, Julius Africanus, and Eusebius, all testify that the religious system of the Egyptians proceeded from India."
The extensive maritime activities of India in the remotest time led to her earliest contacts with Egypt, Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, Judea and many other countries. There are strong indications showing that Egypt in remote antiquity derived her civilization from India. Those who went from India must have mixed themselves with the natives of the land and the indigenous culture absorbed, rejected or modified the impulse from India. Eusebius and Philostratus believe that Indians first colonized Abyssinia and gradually descended to Egypt watering her civilization. The earliest Ethiopian tradition says that they came from a land situated near the mouth of the Indus. While there can be little doubt that trade occupied a central position in the relations between India and Egypt through the ages, it must be remembered that commercial transactions brought in their wake intellectual and cultural exchanges.
(source: The Soul of India - By Satyavrata R. Patel ASIN 0896844536 p. 1-4).
The flower so prolific in the imagery of both India and Egypt, grows out of the waters and opens its petals to be warmed by the sun: to be fertilized. From the earliest imagery in stone at Sanchi, of the first century BC in India, the lotus is associated with Sri, the goddess of fertility, who is later invoked as Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth and abundance - being worshipped by Buddhists, Jains, and Hindus alike. The lotus is held in each hand by Surya, signifying the fertilizing powers of the sun as he travels through the universe.
In Egypt, the blue lotus appears in the earliest wall paintings of the VI Dynasty at the pyramids of Saqqara and in all funerary stelae. They are offered to the deceased, and held in the hand as thought they possess the power to revitalize them: to bring the deceased back to life. Carved out of blue lapis, along with the golden falcon and the sun that are the symbols of the god Horus, the lotus appears among the funerary treasures from the tomb of Tutankhamen.
The lotus then, becomes a leitmotiv, a symbol most apt since its links the waters with the sun, the earth to sky - signifying fertility and regeneration in both Egypt and India. For, it is the seed of the plant which spells out the cycle of birth-decay-death and rebirth that forms the essential pattern of belief in these two riverine and agricultural societies. In India and Egypt, the rivers Saraswati and Ganga and the Nile have brought sustenance to the land and nourished these civilizations which have survived five millennia. Both these rivers, the Ganga and the Nile, are personified and worshipped. They provide the dramatic backdrop against which myths and indeed created, to explain the topographic conditions of the land.
Louis Jacolliot has written:
“Egypt received from India, by Manes or Manu, its social institutions and laws, which resulted in division of the people into four castes, and placing the priest in the first rank; in the second, kings; then traders and artisans; and last in the social scale, the proletaire – the menial almost a slave.”
Manu – Manes – Minos – Moses
A philosopher gives political and religious institutions to India and named Manu. The Egyptian legislator receives the name of Manes.
The dawn of human civilization finds the Hindus as captains of industry and entrepreneurs of commerce. They were in touch with the Pharaohs of Egypt. The mummies of the Egyptians were wrapped in muslin which was imported from India. Hindu trade gave to the land of the Nile ivory, gold, spices, tamarind-wood, sandal-wood, monkeys, and other characteristic Indian plants and animals. It is also believed that the textile craftsmen of Egypt dyed their cloth with Hindu indigo. Hindu ships brought the Indian commodities to the Arabian ports, or to the Land of Punt; and from there these were transported to Luxor, Karnak and Memphis.
Hindu commerce with the land of the Euphrates was more intimate and direct. As early as about 3000 B.C. the Hindus supplied the Chaldean city of Ur on the Euphrates with teak-wood. The Assyrians also, like the Egyptians, got their muslin from India. In fact, vegetable "wool", i.e. cotton, and wool producing plants have been some of the earliest gifts of Hindu merchants to the world. From the tenth to the sixth century B.C. the Assyro-Babylonian trade of the Hindus seems to have been very brisk. Hindus brought with them apes, elephants, cedar, teak, peacocks, tigers, rice, ivory, and other articles to Babylon, the Rome of Western Asia. It was through this Indo-Mesopotamian trade that the Athenians of the sixth century B.C. came to know of rice and peacocks.
This expansion of Hindu activity influenced the literature of the time, e.g. the Vedas and Jatakas. A cylinder seal of about 2,000 B.C. bearing cuneiform inscriptions and images of Chaldean deities have been unearthed in Central India. In Southern India has been found a Babylonian sarcophagus.
Hindu trade with the Hebrews also was considerable. Soloman (1015 B.C), King of Judaea, was a great internationalist. In order to promote the trade of his land he set up a port at the head of the right arm of the Red Sea. He made his race the medium of intercourse between Phoenicians and Hindus. The port of Ophir (in Southern India) is famous in Hebrew literature for its trade in gold under Soloman. The Books of Genesis, Kings and Ezekiel indicate the nature and amount of Hindu contact with Asia Minor. It is held by Biblical scholars that the stones in the breast plate of the high priest may have come from India. The Hindus supplied also the demand of Syria for ivory and ebony. The Hebrew word, tuki (peacock), is derived from Tamil (South Indian) tokei, and ahalin (aloe) from aghil.
According to Sergi, “the Egyptians and all other Hamitic peoples came out of Asia,” while according to Haddon, “at the beginning of history, some Asians came to Egypt, first from the south, eventually bringing with them bronze and probably also the plough and wheat.”
In the seventh century, St. Isidore made a summary in his Encyclopedia of knowledge derived from ancient Greek and Latin authors, many of whose works have now disappeared. He also speaks of “Ethiopians” in his Etymologiarium (IX.2.128): “They came in ancient times from the River Indus, established themselves in Egypt between the Nile and the sea, towards the south, in the equatorial regions. They became three nations: the Hesperians to the west, the Garamantes in Tripolitania, and the Indians in the east. (The Hesperians” are the ancient inhabitants of Spain; “Garamantes” can be connected to Karama “city in Dravidian); and “the Indians” refers to the inhabitants of Ethiopia, who were also mistaken in ancient literature for the inhabitants of India.”
Between the 6th and the first millennium B.C.E., relations between India and the Near East are evident. Precious stones – amazonite – coming from Nilgiri in southern India have been found at Ur prior to the Jemder Nasr period (3000 B.C.E). Indian seals have been found in Bahrain and in Mesopotamia in pre-Sargonic levels (2500 B.C.E). Traces of Indian cotton have been found, and there are archaeological indications of sea trade with India in the Larsa period (2170 to 1950 B.C.E). The beams of the Temple of the Moon, at Ur of the Chaldees, and those of the palace of Nebuchadnezzar (6th century B.C.E.) were of teak and cedarwood coming from Malabar in southern India.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Its mature phase coincides with the Mahabharata and Krishna. It’s decline phase is the time of the historical Buddha in 1800BCE and the Mauraya empire in 1500 BCE, which adopted the religion of Buddhism. This means the bulk of India’s philosophical and scientific traditions appeared around 2000BCE and this is most probably the time Panini the codifier of Sanskrit lived.
This means in Indus valley times(mature phase) Indian civilisation was a naval power as the Maurayans were a naval power and even had a shipbuilding industry and a large navy. The Mahabharata time(3000BCE) were also a naval power as it records deep sea voyages around the world and gives accurate descriptions of various places in the world. In other words it was in a position to colonize the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong about the date lines of Maurya empire, Chandragupta, the founder of Maurya empire was fighting against the Alexander's army and when Greeks left India he attacked Magadh and started the empire. Alexander was in India around 320BC, so the Mauryan empire was founded around 322BC. Your date line of 1500BC is wrong.
Also there was no historical evidences of Mahabharata, except the book of Mahabharata. I read the Mahabharata and even Ramayana and there are no evidences of any state as Naval power. In fact Ram in Ramayana decides to construct the bridge to go to SriLanka rather than using ships. There are no evidences of Muryan's using naval army, who should they use navy against?
Please explain how you come up with the date of 3000BC for Mahabharata?
Where is evidences of use of navy is any of the Indian battles?
I think you have made lot many claims but no evidences, I would appreciate less claims and more evidences to support those claims.
You are wrong about the date lines of Maurya empire, Chandragupta, the founder of Maurya empire was fighting against the Alexander's army and when Greeks left India he attacked Magadh and started the empire. Alexander was in India around 320BC, so the Mauryan empire was founded around 322BC. Your date line of 1500BC is wrong.
Also there was no historical evidences of Mahabharata, except the book of Mahabharata. I read the Mahabharata and even Ramayana and there are no evidences of any state as Naval power. In fact Ram in Ramayana decides to construct the bridge to go to SriLanka rather than using ships. There are no evidences of Muryan's using naval army, who should they use navy against?
Please explain how you come up with the date of 3000BC for Mahabharata?
Where is evidences of use of navy is any of the Indian battles?
THE Superintendent of Ships shall examine the accounts relating to navigation not only on oceans and mouths of rivers, but also on lakes natural or artificial, and rivers in the vicinity of stháníya and other fortified cities.
Villages on seashores or on the banks of rivers and lakes shall pay a fixed amount of tax (kliptam).
Fishermen shall give 1/6th of their haul as fees for fishing license (naukáhátakam).
Merchants shall pay the customary toll levied in port-towns.
Passengers arriving on board the king's ship shall pay the requisite amount of sailing fees (yátrávetanam).
Those (who make use of the king’s boats in) fishing out conch-shells and pearls shall pay the requisite amount of hire (Naukáhátakam), or they may make use of their own boats.
The duties of the superintendent of mines will explain those of the superintendent of conch-shells and pearls.
The superintendent of ships shall strictly observe the customs prevalent in commercial towns as well as the orders of the superintendent of towns (pattana, port town).
Whenever a weatherbeaten ship arrives at a port-town, he shall show fatherly kindness to it.
Vessels carrying on merchandise spoiled by water may either be exempted from toll or may have their toll reduced to half and let to sail when the time for setting sail approaches.
Ships that touch at harbours on their way may be requested the payment of toll.
Pirate ships (himsríká), vessels which are bound for the country of an enemy, as well as those which have violated the customs and rules in force in port towns shall be destroyed.
In those large rivers which cannot be forded even during the winter and summer seasons, there shall be launched large boats (mahánávah) provided with a captain (sásaka), a steersman (niyámaka), and servants to hold the sickle and the ropes and to pour out water.
Small boats shall be launched in those small rivers which overflow during the rainy season.
There were obvious risks attending sea-voyages.
Sanskrit and Pali literature contains innumerable
allusions to vessels wrecked on the high seas so much
so that we seem to hear across the ages the piteous
wailings of souls lost in the ocean. But nothing
could daunt the people into passivity. Love of
adventure and wealth stimulated them to defy death;
and in storm and tempest these early navigators and
their comrades learned the art and craft of the sea.
They established commercial relations not only with
Burma and the islands of the Indian Archipelago on
the east but also with Mesopotamia, Arabia, Phoenicia
and Egypt on the West. And the same volkerwanderund,
which had impelled the primitive Aryans to move out
of their original home, found expression in the
colonial empire which their descendants built up in
southern Asia. Ceylon was colonised before the 3rd
century B.C., and Burma and Siam not much later. The
colonial movement went on apace, and by the 2nd
century A.D. Hindu soverignty and Hindu culture
dominated almost all the lands and islands, which
constitute the Indian Archipelago.
116, 3; 117, 14-15; 119, 4; iv. 27, 4; vi, 62, 6).
The Mahabharata relates how the Pandavas, ingeniously
escaping from the 'house of lac' by a subterranean
passage, came upon the Ganges and got on board a
vessel, which 'was provided with machinery and all
kinds of weapons and was capable of defying storms
and waves': sarvavatasaham navam yantra-yuktam
patakinim (Adi Parva, ch. 15). Elsewhere in the same
work we read how Sahadeva, the youngest of the
Pandava brothers, continued his march of conquest
till he reached several islands in the sea (no doubt
with the help of ships) and subjugated the Mleccha
inhabitants thereof.(1) In the Santi Parva there is a
verse which specifically refers to the navy as one of
the angas of a complete army(2). In the Ramayana we
have a picture of the preparations made by a Nisada
chief for an impending naval encounter with Bharata.
Finding the huge folIowing of Bharata from a
distance, the tribal chieftain thus ordered his
retinue:
Originally posted by Sunski
The argued superpower status and the dominant Indian influence on China i.e Buddhism which you referred to for instance, the question is isnt the spread of Buddhism to Korean peninsula and the Japanese islands etc were due to the Chinese rather than the Indian influence over these regions, despite the religon itself is of Indian origin?
SNIP
Hence, if one is going to count the embrace of buddhism by the Chinese as an evidence to argue the superpower status of ancient India (which by the way is the title of this thread, correct me if i misunderstand the title),
,without taking any consideration of the detailed reasons and background of such cultural transfer, but nevertheless attribute India dominant status by default simply because its the originator of this particular religion and simply because India did not get something in return from nations embraced buddhism. Then the question again is why arent Korea and Japan etc included in such argument? Afterall Buddhism influenced them as well and afterall it is Indian invention.
SNIP
As far as im concerned, the reality is the spread of buddhism to other East Asian cultures was because of Chinese rather than Indian influence
The conversion of the Mauryan emperor, Ashoka to Buddhism marked the elevation of Buddhism from the position of a sect to that of a state religion. Ashoka's patronage of Buddhism was responsible for the propagation and spread of Buddhism beyond the Indian subcontinent.
•3rd century BCE: Buddhism is brought into Sri Lanka by Mahendra, son of the Mauryan Emperor Ashoka; it might have found its way into Thailand about the same time
•Early 1st centuries: Buddhism began to enter China via the Silk Road
•1153-86 CE: Sinhalese monks from Sri Lanka takes Buddhism to Burma
•4th century CE: Buddhism enters Korea from China
•6th century CE: Buddhism comes to Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and Indonesia; Buddhism enters Japan from Korea
•Tibet 7th -8th CE
Very little is known about Southeast Asian religious beliefs and practices before the advent of Indian merchants and religious influences from the second century BCE onwards. Prior to the 13th century, Buddhism and Hinduism were the main religions in Southeast Asia.
The Jawa Dwipa Hindu kingdom in Java and Sumatra existed around 200 BCE. The history of the Malay-speaking world begins with the advent of Indian influence, which dates back to at least the 3rd century BC. Indian traders came to the archipelago both for its abundant forest and maritime products and to trade with merchants from China, who also discovered the Malay world at an early date. Both Hinduism and Buddhism were well established in the Malay Peninsula by the beginning of the 1st century CE, and from there spread across the archipelago.
The origins of the name 'Java' are not clear. One possibility is that an early traveller from India named the island after the jáwa-wut plant, which was said to be common in the island during the time, and that prior to Indianization the island had different names.[2] There are other possible sources: the word jaú and its variations mean "beyond" or "distant".[3] And, in Sanskrit yava means barley, a plant for which the island was famous.[3] Another source states that the "Java" word is derived from a Proto-Austronesian root word, meaning 'home'.[4]
The name Indonesia derives from the Latin Indus, meaning "India", and the Greek nesos, meaning "island".[6] The name dates to the 18th century, far predating the formation of independent Indonesia.[7] In 1850, George Earl, an English ethnologist, proposed the terms Indunesians — and, his preference, Malayunesians — for the inhabitants of the "Indian Archipelago or Malayan Archipelago".[8] In the same publication, a student of Earl's, James Richardson Logan, used Indonesia as a synonym for Indian Archipelago.[9]
Indonesia's strategic sea-lane position fostered inter-island and international trade. For example, trade links with both Indian kingdoms and China were established several centuries BCE.[18] Trade has since fundamentally shaped Indonesian history.[19]
There is no continuous knowledge of Srivijaya in Indonesian histories; its forgotten past has been recreated by foreign scholars. No modern Indonesians, not even those of the Palembang area around which the kingdom was based, had heard of Srivijaya until the 1920s, when French scholar George Coedès published his discoveries and interpretations in Dutch and Indonesian-language newspapers.[6] Coedès noted that the Chinese references to "Sanfoqi", previously read as "Sribhoja", and the inscriptions in Old Malay refer to the same empire.[7]
Srivijaya became a symbol of early Sumatran greatness, and a great empire to balance Java's Majapahit in the east. In the twentieth century, both empires were referred to by nationalist intellectuals to argue for an Indonesian identity within an Indonesian state prior to the Dutch colonial state.[6]
A defining characteristic of the cultural link between South East Asia and Indian subcontinent is the spread of ancient Indian Vedic/Hindu and Buddhist culture and philosophy into Myanmar, Thailand, Malaya, Laos and Cambodia. Indian scripts are also found in South East Asian islands ranging from Sumatra, Java, Bali, south Sulawesi and most of the the Philippines.[25] The impact of Indian culture is visible in the following notable examples:
Hinduism is practiced by majority of Bali's population.[26]
Hindu mythological figure Garuda features in the coat of arms of Indonesia, Thailand and Ulan Bator.
Hindu temple architecture-style features prominently on several ancient temples in South East Asia including Angkor Wat, which was dedicated to Hindu God Vishnu and features on the flag of Cambodia.
Many Indonesian names have an Indian flavour (eg. Megawati Sukarnoputri)
Batu Caves in Malaysia is the most popular Hindu shrine outside India.[27]
Erawan Shrine, dedicated to Brahma, in Thailand is one of the most popular religious shrines in the country.[28]
Kaharingan, an indigenous religion followed by Dayak people of Borneo, is categorized as a form of Hinduism in Indonesia
Will Durant (1885-1981) American historian:
He has observed:
Indian art had accompanied Indian religion across straits and frontiers into Sri Lanka, Java, Cambodia, Siam, Burma, Tibet, Khotan, Turkestan, Mongolia, China, Korea and Japan;
“in Asia all roads lead from India.”
(source: Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage - By Will Durant MJF Books. 1935. p. 605)
“Indian art and culture seem naturally to have exercised an extraordinary art fascination over the indigenous peoples of all these territories, no doubt, owing to the attractions offered by Buddhism and Hinduism, while Chinese art, not bearing any particular religious message, apparently made but little impression inspite of the fact that they Chinese, too sailed the southern seas in search of trade from very early time.”
He wrote:
“The beginnings of Indian colonization overseas eastward go back a very long way in time and it is almost certain that the results seen today were, in the main, not achieved by military expeditions, but by peaceful trading and religious teaching – and thereby all the more permanent.”
Sir Marc Aurel Stein (1862-1943) a Hungarian and author of several books including Ra`jatarangini: a chronicle of the kings of Kashmir and Innermost Asia : detailed report of explorations in Central Asia, Kan-su, and Eastern Iran carried out and described under the orders of H.M. Indian Government, whose valuable researches have added greatly to our knowledge of Greater India.
He remarks:
"The vast extent of Indian cultural influences, from Central Asia in the North to tropical Indonesia in the South, and from the Borderlands of Persia to China and Japan, has shown that ancient India was a radiating center of a civilization, which by its religious thought, its art and literature, was destined to leave its deep mark on the races wholly diverse and scattered over the greater part of Asia."
(source: The Vision of India - By Sisir Kumar Mitra p. 178 and Main Currents of Indian Culture - By S. Natarajan p. 50).
Sir Charles Norton Edgcumbe Eliot (1862-1931) British diplomat and colonial administrator, in his book, Hinduism and Buddhism, vol. I, p.12. says:
"In Eastern Asia the influence of India has been notable in extent, strength, and duration."
"Scant justice is done to India's position in the world by those European histories which recount the exploits of her invaders and leave the impression that her own people were a feeble dreamy folk, surrendered from the rest of mankind by their seas and mountain frontiers. Such a picture takes no account of the intellectual conquests of the Hindus."
Even their political conquests were not contemptible, and are remarkable for the distance, if not the extent, of the territories occupied...But such military or commercial invasions are insignificant compared with the spread of Indian thought." The south-eastern region of Asia both mainland and Archipelago - owed its civilization almost entirely to India. In Ceylon, Burma, Siam, Cambodia, Champa, and Java, religion, art, the alphabet, literature, as well as whatever science and political organization existed, were the direct gift of Hindus, whether Brahmin or Buddhists, and much the same may be said of Tibet, whence the wilder Mongols took as much Indian civilization as they could stomach."
Yet, Punt remains a mystery to us even today, for we do not precisely know its actual location.
The people of Punt, at first are depicted with dark-reddish complexions and fin features wearing long hair......
We know of trading missions sent to Punt by the Egyptians dating from at least Egypt's 5th Dynasty, while our latest definite record of a Punt expedition comes from the 20th Dynasty reign of Ramesses III.
Punt indeed seems to have been a commercial center for goods not only from within its own borders, but from elsewhere in Africa. Here, the Egyptians sought and found many items that did not exist within the Two Lands. From Punt, the received the incense known as antyu which was produced in considerable quantities near Punt in the region of Utjenet (God's Land), as well as ivory, ebony (hebny) and gum (Kemy). From this mystical place they also imported the skins of giraffes, panthers and cheetahs which were worn by temple priests, and sometimes the live animals themselves for their own amusement or religious purposes. For example, the sacred Cynocephalus baboons were imported from Punt. Because of the goods from Punt used by priests and to adorn temples, it was known as a region of God's Land, and considered a personal pleasure garden of the god, Amun.
"...loading of the ships very heavily with marvels of the country of Punt; all goodly fragrant woods of God's-Land, heaps of myrrh resin, with fresh myrrh trees, with ebony and pure ivory, with green gold of Emu, with cinnamon wood, khesyt wood, with two kinds of incense, eye-cosmetics, with apes, monkeys, dogs, and with skins of the southern panther, with natives and their children. Never was brought the like of this for any king who has been since the beginning"
Klaus K. Klostermaier, in his book A Survey of Hinduism p. 18 says:
"For several centuries a lively commerce developed between the ancient Mediterranean world and India, particularly the ports on the Western coast. The most famous of these ports was Sopara, not far from modern Bombay, which was recently renamed Mumbai. Present day Cranganore in Kerala, identified with the ancient Muziris, claims to have had trade contacts with Ancient Egypt under Queen Hatsheput, who sent five ships to obtain spices, as well as with ancient Israel during King Soloman's reign. Apparently, the contact did not break off after Egypt was conquered by Greece and later by Rome.
but remember that one of the oldest creator gods of the Egyptians (Ptah) has the body of a fish, or of a man with fish-scales, indicating that the cult came to Egypt having arrived from somewhere else over water (like the half fish fgod Dagon the clan-god of the 'biblical' nonSemitic 'Philistines' who came from Mycene i.e. inported into Canaan 'over water').
The Matsya Avatar or the Fish Incarnation is the first of the ten incarnations of Vishnu. The Matsya avatar never made it into independent status for worship. It has no temples and no significant independent representations in art and literature. Yet it remains significant for many reasons. It is the very first incarnation and establishes a prototype for all the various incarnations of god that follow. Secondly, it shares with the rest of the world a generic belief that at one time the planet was threatened with a great flood and a savior in a boat preserved all life forms. Thirdly it establishes the concept of Manus for each Great Age as defined in Hindu Mythology. The Manu is a proto-Adam, responsible for overseeing the first hesitant stages of all life forms in the new cycle of creation and he lives for the entire cycle as some sort of cosmic warden. The Manu and his wife become the First Parents for each cycle. In the Fish Incarnation Vishnu chose a great and pious king named Satyavrata to become the next Manu. And finally the task of this avatar was the most important of all, nothing less than the recovery of the lost Vedas. Taken all together then, the Matsya Avatar is not as inconspicuous an event as is mistakenly presumed.
Read more at Suite101: Matsya Avatar - The Fish Incarnation | Suite101.com www.suite101.com...
This proves Egypt was the more advanced civilization. They were the ones sending fleets for luxury items. They were the ones providing economic gain to "Punt" by trading for items that could only be used by the rich elite back in Egypt.
Originally posted by UcantBserious
Too bad mitochondrial DNA proves India was seeded by Africa.
India is not the center of the universe or earthly civilization. This stuff doesn't belong in the same forum as for example ancient Egyptian archeology.
Since Mitochondrial DNA proves migration out of Africa, Egypt came first, then the Sumarians, then the civilization of India.
You propose that peoples wandered out of Africa creating no civilizations at all and once they reached India civilization arose and then backwards migration occured through Sumaria and then onto Egypt. This is the only thing you can be proposing because mitochondrial DNA proves Africa first.
Then we are to believe these bedtime stories of India being more technologically advanced than today having starships and whatnot. Why bother going back to Egypt to start a bronzeage colony?
This is just some nationalist supremacy history revisionist stuff on the same page as Nazi Germany was when they made their stand on the world stage. Remember arian supremacy? When is India gonna start wrapping cloth measuring tapes around peoples skulls to prove their infuriority?