Talk:Periodisation of the Indus Valley Civilisation

message: The report is at Oxygen isotope in archaeological bioapatites from India: Implications to climate change and decline of Bronze Age Harappan civilization byAnindya Sarkar, Arati Deshpande Mukherjee, M. K. Bera, B. Das, Navin Juyal, P. Morthekai, R. D. Deshpande, V. S. Shinde & L. S. Rao. It does say "Within the experimental errors both the stratigraphically controlled new ages agree with the time scale based on archaeological evidences (as well as 14C ages) proposed by earlier workers8,17,18,34; Fig. 3C,D) and suggest that the Bhirrana settlements are the oldest of known sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra tract" and that "The climate reconstruction at Bhirrana demonstrates that some of the Harappan settlements in the Ghaggar-Hakra valley are the oldest in India and probably developed at least by the ninth millennium BP over a vast tract of arid/semi-arid regions of NW India and Pakistan." It also says "The recent excavations at Rakhigarhi suggest hitherto unknown largest Harappan settlement in India preserving all the cultural levels including the Hakra phase" but this is too vague to use. Doug Weller talk 18:20, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits I just removed as they were based on an inaccurate newspaper report 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
* Oppose - It's confusing, and may turn this article into a mere fork. Why not simply merge it? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:52, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And then, rename "Indus Valley Civilization" into "Indus Valley Tradition." That would be appropriate, since "IVC" now covers "IVT." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support that (although it's a small 't' for tradition). Shall we start a rename there? Doug Weller talk 12:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actuallly I've done that. Withdrawing this one. Doug Weller talk 12:37, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: have you noticed this trend in Indian thought to shift the antiquity of Indian culture from the Vedic religion to the IVC? Somehow the use of the name "Sarasvati," instead of Haggar, in these publications on Bhirrana, sounded weird. Together with proposed older datings, going toward 8,000 BCE, I was reminded of those ancient rishis of Indian mythology, sitting at the banks of the river Sarasvati 10,000 years ago. And see, what do you expect: Rami (2006/2008), Kashmir Neolithic and Early Harappan : A Linkage, links horned deities and soma to pre-Harappan pottery:
:"Thus, the pre-Harappan pots with painting of horned deity were seemingly meant to contain Soma juice which was often mixed with either milk or curd with the help of a possible wooden mixer or mathani whose representation (Fig. 8) alongwith horned deity can be identified on one of the two pots representing the horned deity from Kunal (Figs. 9-10)."(p.242)
Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The banks of the River Sarasvati and the ancient Rishis 

message: shouldn't this article be moved to :Indus Valley Tradition? Or otherwise just be merged into :Indus Valley Civilisation? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:37, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops... That's what you proposed before, and I opposed... My apologies! But... why not move IVC to IVT? That's the term Kenoyer, and Coningham & Young use. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops again.. That's what you also proposed before... Ehm... maybe we can restart that discussion some time in the future? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indus Valley Tradition 

message: I've tried to make a start for a separate article on "Indus Valley Tradition," but I don't think it's going to work; it would be too much of a fork of the IVC-article. As it is now, the IVT is mentioned there; that should suffice. But it might be good to rework this artyicle, on the periodisation, into an article on the various periodisations which have been used, the differences in datings, and present proposals for redatings. That would mean that the sections on "Early Food Producing Era" would disappear, and be replaced by sections on various periodisations, which provide info on their context: the Early-Mature-Late Harappan system, the Era system, etc; and a section on proposed earlier datings, c.q. recent proposals. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'v taken the freedom to boldly rework this article as proposed above; I think the results speak for itself. The way I've ordered it now offers sufficient possibilities to add information on the various classifications, explain them further, and show how they correlate. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworking this article