<b>Civilisation</b>
Just looking at the following three posts:
Post 260 (romani): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Post 261 (dhu): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Not bengal but the northeastern culture<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Post 265 (romani) again: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->SO i have wright ,Bengal and NE wasnt part of Indus culture<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I don't know where the conclusion in post 265 comes from, but it seems to be opposite to what member dhu stated.
As it is, in India, archaeologists have only now started digging up other regions beyond the area of the IVC, though the government is still only grudgingly giving them leave to do so. Anyways, they're finding ancient cities in more southern parts too (central and south-central India). I don't know if these are in the same style as IVC or totally different from it.
I have no idea if Bengal's communist government would bother or be willing to dig in Bengal. In short, we don't know what was there in the East, so it's too early to make such a comment as "Bengal was not part of Indus culture".
Nevertheless, what is known is that the Bengali people are related to the rest of Indians.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The rice culture start south china not in India<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I thought it was South East Asia (say Indonesia) and not China where rice culture started?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->THe full mature art start in Greece not in India<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->No doubt, with Europeans determining what is "full, mature art". Naturally, the prize won't go to any non-Europeans then.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->WE can tanks basques for Altamira .By the way they are full europeans<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Of course they are Europeans. But they are not at all "Indo-Europeans" (that strange term which is supposed to be used for languages but that all Europeans tend to use as an ethnic, even racial, indicator). The European branch of IE is what you seemed to be discussing for the most part. That seems to be why member Dhu was indicating that since Basques are not IE Europeans in the least, Altamira is a non-IE European achievement.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The mention of astral event in 4000bc in Vedas doesnt mean that Vedas is from 4000 bc. If Bible mention a guy name Iob(2600bc) doesnt mean that the Bible is from 2600bc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Please see K. Elst's discussion of this in his article Astronomical data and the Aryan question (see especially paragraph 4 and onwards). He discusses this.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In 1900 bc also apear incineration in India.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->There's not been significant archaeological or other research in India so far, as I already stated. Therefore, just 'cause the date for the earliest find in India is 1900bce, doesn't mean that that is the earliest incineration. Besides, how does one prove that the Ganga, or Kaveri and other holy rivers hold the ashes of billions of people - since the rivers would've swept away most of the evidence into the ocean? So how does one show that these rivers might have held (and dispersed) the ashes of many another? Are only the remains of organised incineration plants taken as signs of incineration? What about unorganised cremation, which is what ancient Indians did and most do today? And do researchers take into account cremations held in someone's backyard? For instance, deceased household pets and domesticated animals like dogs, cows, horses and buffalos have been cremated in our backyards. This is especially true of animals held in high esteem (for example - horse, cow, elephant) and could well have been more applicable in the ancient past.
Just looking at the following three posts:
Post 260 (romani): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Post 261 (dhu): <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Not bengal but the northeastern culture<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Post 265 (romani) again: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->SO i have wright ,Bengal and NE wasnt part of Indus culture<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I don't know where the conclusion in post 265 comes from, but it seems to be opposite to what member dhu stated.
As it is, in India, archaeologists have only now started digging up other regions beyond the area of the IVC, though the government is still only grudgingly giving them leave to do so. Anyways, they're finding ancient cities in more southern parts too (central and south-central India). I don't know if these are in the same style as IVC or totally different from it.
I have no idea if Bengal's communist government would bother or be willing to dig in Bengal. In short, we don't know what was there in the East, so it's too early to make such a comment as "Bengal was not part of Indus culture".
Nevertheless, what is known is that the Bengali people are related to the rest of Indians.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The rice culture start south china not in India<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I thought it was South East Asia (say Indonesia) and not China where rice culture started?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->THe full mature art start in Greece not in India<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->No doubt, with Europeans determining what is "full, mature art". Naturally, the prize won't go to any non-Europeans then.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->WE can tanks basques for Altamira .By the way they are full europeans<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Of course they are Europeans. But they are not at all "Indo-Europeans" (that strange term which is supposed to be used for languages but that all Europeans tend to use as an ethnic, even racial, indicator). The European branch of IE is what you seemed to be discussing for the most part. That seems to be why member Dhu was indicating that since Basques are not IE Europeans in the least, Altamira is a non-IE European achievement.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The mention of astral event in 4000bc in Vedas doesnt mean that Vedas is from 4000 bc. If Bible mention a guy name Iob(2600bc) doesnt mean that the Bible is from 2600bc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Please see K. Elst's discussion of this in his article Astronomical data and the Aryan question (see especially paragraph 4 and onwards). He discusses this.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In 1900 bc also apear incineration in India.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->There's not been significant archaeological or other research in India so far, as I already stated. Therefore, just 'cause the date for the earliest find in India is 1900bce, doesn't mean that that is the earliest incineration. Besides, how does one prove that the Ganga, or Kaveri and other holy rivers hold the ashes of billions of people - since the rivers would've swept away most of the evidence into the ocean? So how does one show that these rivers might have held (and dispersed) the ashes of many another? Are only the remains of organised incineration plants taken as signs of incineration? What about unorganised cremation, which is what ancient Indians did and most do today? And do researchers take into account cremations held in someone's backyard? For instance, deceased household pets and domesticated animals like dogs, cows, horses and buffalos have been cremated in our backyards. This is especially true of animals held in high esteem (for example - horse, cow, elephant) and could well have been more applicable in the ancient past.