Guest guest Posted June 2, 2002 Report Share Posted June 2, 2002 --- elayavalli <elayavalli wrote: However, the British team that was part of the expedition > has a different take: > > "I had a chat with some of my colleagues here in the Dept. of > Geological Sciences and it is probably reasonable to assume that > there has been very little vertical tectonic motion in this region > [i.e. the coastal region around Mahabalipuram] during the past five > > thousand years or so. Therefore, the ominant process driving sea- > level change will have been due to the melting of the Late > Pleistocene ice sheets. Sir, This appears to be more hypothesis than theory. Geologists tell us that submersion need not always be the result of tectonic movement. Flooding can also be caused over several years through gradual but relentless sea-erosion. (As experts now say is what is happening to the Gangetic deltaic region of W.Bengal and parts of Bangladesh). Is it not therefore possible to offer an alteranate hypothesis that Mammallapuram may have been submerged due to sea-erosion rather than through tectonic movemements caused by seismic agitation? And hence, the date of the AzhwAr may have been much later/more recent than may be otherwise inferred from the tectonic hypothesis? Anyway, it should be interesting to find out what facts are unearthed by experts from the new discovery of more submerged temples in the area. Let us all wait and see. Just a thought. Regards, dAsan, Sudarshan - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 3, 2002 Report Share Posted June 3, 2002 Dear Bhagavatas: Since the matter is under investigation by experts, it would be better for us to await their findings and not proceed with any further speculations either way. Hope you all will agree that we may for now, close the discussions on the subject. Dasoham Anbil Ramaswamy Moderator ======================================================== Dear Sri Sudharshan That is true, but if it was gradual errosion there would have been some effort to preserve the temples. It is logical to conclude that a society that goes to the extent of building a city with 7 temples would not stand by to see it get washed away. For example, The three temples that form the thanjai maamanik kovil have been relocated atleast once and there is record for it. If there was a danger to the temples and that too a gradual one, the locals would have retrieved the moolavars and other items and installed them elsewere. But the history of the temple says that, they were able to retrieve only the utsavar (i had mentioned that it was the moolavar in my original). Also the sheer size of the site is mind bogling from historical standpoint. the only evidence that can be attributed to the theory 1200-1500 year back to the present is if you go with the story that Pallava king Raja Simman built three temples which eventually got lost due to the flood. The only problem with this is the three temples were supposed to be close to one another and not spread across a large area as the site discovered. The site is apparently about 1 mile from the shore and is spread across several sq miles, according to the discovery team. This is not the only place the got flooded, Poompuhar and the gulf of cambay are also targets for submerged civilization. In addition there seem to coastal settlements across the world that seem to have submerged in a span of few thousand years. All of it cannot be attributed to tectonic movement, errosion etc. If you take all of these into account, then the increase in sea level all over can be attributed to melting of huge ice sheets and icebergs (a drastic climatic change). adiyEn Venkatesh Elayavalli adiyEn Venkatesh Elayavalli > Sir, > This appears to be more hypothesis than theory. Geologists tell us > that submersion need not always be the result of tectonic movement. > Flooding can also be caused over several years through gradual but > relentless sea-erosion. (As experts now say is what is happening to > the Gangetic deltaic region of W.Bengal and parts of Bangladesh). Is > it not therefore possible to offer an alteranate hypothesis that > Mammallapuram may have been submerged due to sea-erosion rather than > through tectonic movemements caused by seismic agitation? And hence, > the date of the AzhwAr may have been much later/more recent than may > be otherwise inferred from the tectonic hypothesis? Anyway, it should > be interesting to find out what facts are unearthed by experts from > the new discovery of more submerged temples in the area. Let us all > wait and see. > > Just a thought. > > Regards, > dAsan, > Sudarshan > > > > - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup > http://fifaworldcup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.