Revising

History (Again?) - Evidence of

an Even Older Civilization in India
Mark Carlotto (mark@carlotto.us)

ABSTRACT
The theory that civilization developed in India as the result of the migration of Aryans from
the north had to be revised after the discovery of the Indus Valley Civilization in the 1920s.
In 1999-2000, a marine archaeological survey found the remains of an ancient civilization
beneath the Gulf of Cambay. The similarity of structures submerged for more than 10,000
years to those in Harappa, Mohenjo-daro, and other Indus Valley cities that are thought to
have been built in the 3rd millennium BCE raised the question of whether or not an even
earlier civilization once existed in this part of the world. New evidence is presented
suggesting that certain sites in the Indus Valley and in other parts of India were first
established during and possibly even before the last ice age based on their alignments to
previous locations of the North Pole.

Introduction
It was once thought that civilization developed in India following the migration of Aryan-
speaking people from the north in the second millennium BCE. This theory was revised
after the discovery and excavation of mounds in the Indus Valley in the 1920s that revealed
the existence of a previously unknown civilization. Together with those in the Nile and
Tigris-Euphrates valleys, the Indus Valley Civilization is now regarded as one of the world’s
earliest civilizations.

Unlike ancient cities in Egypt and Mesopotamia that developed gradually over a long period
of time, Indus Valley cities seem to have been fully planned from the start (Cotterell 1980).
Beneath the mounds, archeologists discovered ancient streets organized in rectangular
grids, public water supply and drainage systems, brick-built homes, two or three stories tall,
and the remains of a sophisticated material culture including figurines, beads, pots for
cooking and storage, and other objects made of clay, gold, semi-precious and precious
stones, copper, ivory and glass.

Without a “rosetta stone” or some other means of translating the Indus script it is far from
certain how the Indus Valley (also known as the Harappan) civilization began. One theory is
that it developed from earlier agricultural societies such as those at Mehrgarh in the 7th
millennium BCE with cities such as Harappa and Mohenjo-daro established much later
during the 3rd millennium BCE.

Another theory is that the Indus Valley was once a part of a larger and older civilization.
This theory is supported by the discovery of ruins by marine archaeological expeditions in
the late 1990s off the coast of Gujarat in western India (Badrinaryan 2010). Surveys
revealed the presence of ancient river channels in the Gulf of Cambay 20-40 meters below
the surface (Figure 1). According to Badrinaryan “Most of the structures that were
discovered in the Gulf of Cambay had many similarities to the CITADEL, GREAT BATH and
grid-iron pattern habitation sites, grannery, etc. of the Harappan civilization.” (Figure 2 is an
aerial image over Mohenjo-daro shown for comparison.)

Considering Badrinaryan’s discoveries, Robinson (2018) argues that it may be time to
revise history once again:

Is this lost city the stuff of legends and myth? Badrinaryan’s discovered city feels
similar to the lost city of Troy before Heinrich Schliemann found it in the 1870s.

Based on their location and depth, the ruins below the Gulf of Cambay must be at least
10,000 years old. Thermoluminescence dating of pottery shards recovered at several
locations in the gulf revealed even more ancient dates, some as old as 31270±2050 years
BP, more than 10,000 years before the last glacial maximum.

This paper presents evidence supporting the possibility that the beginnings of civilization in
this part of the world may date back to an even earlier time. A recent paper (Carlotto 2020)
proposed the existence of an advanced prehistoric civilization in Central Asia based on the
alignment of archaeological sites to previous locations of the North Pole. Similar evidence
presented here suggests an advanced prehistoric civilization that predated the Indus Valley
Civilization extended south into the Indian subcontinent corroborating Badrinaryan’s
discovery of submerged archeological sites in the Gulf of Cambay that could be tens of
thousands of years old.

The following sections summarize our methodology for dating certain ancient sites based
on their alignment to previous locations of the North Pole, describe the alignments of
specific structures and sites in the Indus Valley and in other parts of India, analyze the
alignments relative to those in Central Asia, and discuss the implications of our findings.

Methodology
In Earth’s Shifting Crust, Hapgood (1958) argues that prior to its current location in the
Arctic, the North Pole was located near Hudson Bay in Canada. Based on his analysis of
climate data, Hapgood estimated that a crustal displacement occurred 12,000 to 18,000
years ago causing the North Pole to shift from Hudson Bay to its present location in the
Arctic. Carlotto (2019a) shows that the alignments of ancient sites across the world are
correlated with previous locations of the North Pole and uses the site alignments to refine
Hapgood’s original location estimates. To date, well over one hundred sites have been found
throughout the world that reference previous pole locations. Gaffney’s interpretation of
mammalian biostratigraphy data in Britain supports the refined location estimates and
provides a basis for developing a timeline of pole shifts (see Appendix). Table 1 lists the
locations and dates of the four hypothesized poles.

Indus Valley Sites

The Nile and Tigris-Euphrates valleys were once regarded as the birthplace of modern
civilization. Excavations of the ancient cities at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro in the 1920s
offered the first hint that another equally advanced, contemporaneous civilization once
existed in the Indus Valley.
Harappa
The first excavations at Harappa were led by Daya Ram Sahni who uncovered as many as
eight levels of construction within the ancient city.1 Dales and Kenoyer (1991) describe the
lowest levels:

Beneath these latest Harappan structures are earlier mud-brick platforms that
overlay a series of eroded and reconstructed platforms. The mud-brick platforms
and retaining wall appear to have been strengthened by a baked brick revetment or
facing. Traces of this baked brick revetment have been found to the west of the mud-
brick revetment wall. This structure was about 2 meters wide at the base, with a
sloping exterior face. Based on calculations of toppled courses of brick, it is
estimated that this baked brick facing stood some 3 to 4 meters high from natural
soil to the crest of the mound...

Wanzke (1984) notes that structures at Harappa are misaligned with respect to the cardinal
directions. Little is discernable in Google Earth imagery due to the size of the structures and
the limited aerial exposure of the excavation. However detailed drawings (Dales and
Kenoyer 1991) show that extended sections of brick walls and platforms within Mound E
are rotated approximately 14° west of north. Kak (2010) discusses Harappan (i.e., Indus
Valley Civilization) astronomy but does not comment on the alignment of the ancient city
itself. As shown in Figure 3 structures in Mound E appear to be aligned north relative to the
Hudson Bay pole. Based on its alignment to this pole (Table 1), Harappa may be as old as
the structures beneath the Gulf of Cambay.

Mohenjo-daro
According to Jansen (1984), the goal of the excavations at Mohenjo-daro was to reach
“virgin soil.” He states:

Since virgin soil was never reached through vertical diggings the full horizontal
extent of the site beyond the mounds visible at present, which were normally
regarded as being the outer limits of the former site, remains unknown.

Archaeologists date Harappa, Mohenjo-daro, and other Indus Valley cities to around 2600
BCE. The results of several deep digs at Mohenjo-daro suggest that it could be much older.
Drilling reports at what is known as the “old site” found bricks and pottery down as far as
70 feet below the surface. An early report from 1931 stated: “The excavation revealed the
existence superimposed one above the other of structural remains belonging to the three
latest cities and remains of other structures underneath them.” An attempt in 1950 to find
the bottom-most level of the site was unsuccessful. It can be argued that if archaeologists
cannot find the bottom-most layer of a site they cannot state with any certainty its age.

Aerial imagery over Mohenjo-daro clearly shows the site is not aligned to the cardinal
directions. Wanzke (1984) made detailed measurements of the site that he was unable to
explain:

For the divergence of system from the cardinal points several possible explanations
can be considered: no great importance was attached to the exact orientation of the
axes but whatever orientation happened to be chosen initially it was subsequently

1 See https://www.harappa.com/blog/rediscovery-ancient-indus-civilization-1924
 followed, the orientation had some relevance but it was technically impossible to
take more exact measurements. It cannot be reconstructed which orientation
techniques were used.

Kak (2010) proposed that certain alignments at Mohenjo-daro and other sites 1° to 2° east
of north were to the rising of Aldebaran and the Pleiades. A similar explanation has been
given for the alignment of Teotihuacan (Aveni 1980). We propose a different interpretation.
Figure 4 shows the stupa, bath, grainary and other structures atop the acropolis are aligned
in solstice directions relative to the Hudson Bay pole. Similar alignments can be found
throughout the ancient city. What is particularly interesting is that these alignments are
identical to those found at Merv and Gonur Tepe in Central Asia (Carlotto 2020). We thus
hypothesize that based on its alignment, Mohenjo-daro like these other places were first
established at least 18,000 years ago when the North Pole was in Hudson Bay.

Kalibangan
A significant find at Kalibangan was the discovery of a pre-Harappan (i.e., pre-Indus Valley
Civilization) settlement below the remains of the Harappan citadel (Thepar 2015):

The occupation endured through five structural phases, rising to a height of 1.6 m.
above the natural soil, when it was brought to a close by a catastrophe (perhaps
seismic), as evidenced by the occurrence of displaced (faulted ?) strata and subsided
walls in different parts of the excavated area. Thereafter, the site seems to have
been abandoned, though only temporarily, and a thin layer of sand, largely infertile
and wind blown, accumulated over the ruins. During this period the peripheral
portions of the mound, particularly on the east and west, seem to have been badly
eroded and gullied.

Also organized in a grid pattern, Kalibangan, like Harappa, appears to be aligned to the
Hudson Bay pole. Thepar estimates the earlier settlement existed perhaps a century or two
before the Harappan city. We propose the earlier settlement was built over even older
structures that were aligned to the Hudson Bay pole (Figure 5).

Table 2 summarizes the alignments of Indus Valley sites examined in this paper. Recurring
references to the direction of the Hudson Bay pole suggests that many of these sites were
first established before the Indus Valley Civilization.

Sacred Sites
Dwarka is in the province of Gujarat, south of the Indus Valley. The search for underwater
ruins off the coast of India was inspired in the 1960s at Dwarka by the discovery of pottery
shards that were once underwater and later buried in the sand for two thousand years. In
the cleared remains of a building next to the Dwarkadhish Temple, Rao (1990) discovered
three temples built over one another with the oldest dated to the middle of the second
millennium BCE. These discoveries led to the realization that Dwarka had been rebuilt
many times over as a result of sea-level rise. Thought to be the Dwarka of the Mahabarata
the possibility that an even older city lies submerged off the coast of modern-day Dwarka
led to a series of expeditions in the 1980s (Gaur et al 2004) including those further south in
the Gulf of Cambay (Badrinaryan 2010).

Figure 6 shows two of three temples in Dwarka that are aligned to the Hudson Bay pole, the
Dwarkadhish Temple, which was mentioned above, and the Samudra Narayan Temple at
the confluence of the river Gomti and the Arabian Sea. A third temple, the Nageshvara
Jyotirling Temple, is discussed below.

Benaras
According to a famous quote by Mark Twain, “Benaras is older than history, older than
tradition, older even than legend and looks twice as old as all of them put together.”
Artifacts at several sites in Benaras, also known as Varanasi or Kashi, have been dated to
1800 BCE.2 Benaras is located in north-central India, and like Mohenjo-daro, which is more
than 1500 kilometers to the west, the orientation of one of the sites (Figure 7) is aligned in
solstice directions relative to the Hudson Bay pole. Approximately two miles east of this site
is the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple. The temple, which is located just west of the Ganges
does not face the river but is aligned in the direction of the Hudson Bay pole (Figure 8).

The Twelve Jyotirlinga Temples

The Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Benaras and the Nageshvara Jyotirling Temple in
Dwarka are two of twelve Jyotirlinga, which are devotional temples and shrines devoted to
Shiva.3 In examining the alignments of all twelve Jyotirlinga, which are located throughout
India, three are aligned to the cardinal directions, one to solstices, and five to previous
locations of the North Pole in Hudson Bay and Greenland (Table 3). The Nageshvara
Jyotirling is aligned in the same direction as the two other temples in Dwarka discussed
above. The alignment of these temples to previous locations of the North Pole suggests the
possibility that the original sites were established tens of thousands of years before
becoming Hindu temples.

Bojjannakonda
Bojjannakonda is a hillock in southeastern India that contains numerous rock-cut shrines
known as stupas. Based on recovered artifacts, archaeologists date the site to between the
2nd and the 9th century CE. However, its alignment to the Hudson Bay pole suggests
Bojjannakonda could be much older (Figure 9).

Sanchi Stupas
The Great Stupa at Sanchi in central India is believed to be one of the oldest stone structures
in India, built under the rule of Ashoka in the 3rd century BCE. Rao (1992) proposes that the
Buddhist stupas of Sanchi including the Great Stupa were oriented towards moonrise and
sunset on the day of Buddha Purnima when they are thought to have been built, around 2nd
century BCE. Like Mohenjo-daro and Benaras, its alignment to solstices relative to the
Hudson Bay pole (Figure 10) suggests another possibility – that the original site was first
established tens of thousands of years when the North Pole was in Hudson Bay and later co-
opted by Ashoka as a sacred site. A similar argument has been proposed to explain the
orientation of the Parthenon and other structures atop the Acropolis in Athens relative to
the Greenland pole as an alternative to the existing explanation that the Parthenon was
aligned in the direction of sunrise on the date of Athena’s birthday (Carlotto 1999b). If
Athena’s birthday was established based on the pre-existing alignment of the Acropolis to

2 See https://www.business-standard.com/article/specials/how-old-is-banaras-

114051501029_1.html
3 See http://www.allabouthinduism.info/2015/02/17/shiva-legend-jyotirlinga/
the Greenland pole then perhaps the date of Buddha Purnima was similarly established
based on pre-existing alignments at Sanchi.

Analysis of Site Alignments

Tables 2-4 summarize the alignments of sites in the Indus Valley, the twelve Jyotirling
temples, and other sites examined in this paper. The orientation of some sites could not be
determined either due to limited resolution, visible features, or lack of consistent
alignments of structures within the site. The majority of Indus Valley sites are aligned to
previous locations of the North Pole, as are the majority of the Jyotirling temples. The
alignment of other sites in India to previous locations of the North Pole suggests the
alignment direction was not just another characteristic of the Harappan (Indus Valley)
culture but was more widespread.

Figure 11 compares the distribution of site alignments to poles for the sites examined in this
article (India) and in a previous article (Central Asia). Recognizing that this is only a
sampling of a much larger body of sites that need to be examined, the curves show that
while the number of sites in Central Asia decreases dramatically after the last pole shift,
those in India increases. The lack of sites in Central Asia aligned to the current pole suggests
the Hudson Bay-era civilization in this part of the world did not survive the last pole shift
perhaps due to subsequent climate changes. Notice also in both curves that there are almost
no sites that reference the Norwegian Sea pole. We leave this for a future paper.

Discussion
Evidence of widespread trading with neighboring regions including Mesopotamia and
Central Asia (Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex) suggests the Indus Valley was at
one time part of a larger civilization in this part of the world. According to Bakry (2006)

Due to the big amount of Indian or Indian related objects discovered in Central
Asian sites (more than Central Asian in India), one can say that the Indus people
were the initiators for these relations at their initial stage, or the direction of
relations was more from India to Central Asia. Later on, after the formation of BMAC
in Central Asia, such relations took direction more from Central Asia to India. This
happened especially when Harappan civilization started to decay in the beginning of
the second Mill. BC, as if BMAC peoples sensed a vacuum in the Indus Valley region
and moved in to fill it.

We propose that the Indus Valley Civilization and the BMAC were the descendants of an
even earlier civilization. Badrinaryan (2010) sums it up:

So, from the foregoing it is very evident the prehistoric civilization that matured and
developed in the present day Gulf of Cambay was the forerunner and model to the
subsequent advanced Harrapan civilization known to history. This wonderful twin
prehistoric metropolis of Cambay lasted from about 13000 BP to about 3000 BP
making it the most ancient and largest city civilization not only in Asia but in the
entire world. It is seen to be at least 7500 years older than the oldest Mesopotamian
city civilization. However strong evidence supports the presence of humans from at
least 31000 BP who were evolving and developing and formed a great hitherto
 unknown civilization that were submerged by the flood, giving credence to local and
global flood myths.

The alignment of numerous archaeological sites in this part of the world to previous
locations of the North Pole supports Badrinaryan’s discoveries in the Gulf of Cambay. In his
opinion, the sudden appearance of a technically advanced civilization in this part of the
world suggested that there was a “missing link between the ancient hunter gatherer group
of people and ‘Harappan’ civilization. In India, there were many Paleolithic, Mesolithic and
Neolithic stone-age cultures. But none of them have any remote resemblance of the type of
civilization found in the Harappan sites.” He goes on to suggest that

It is possible that the missing link between the two is either under cover or has been
submerged due to major sea level rise caused by melting of ice-sheets.

Perhaps it is both. Complementing Badrinaryan’s discoveries under the Gulf of Cambay we
believe that the alignments of Indus Valley and other sites in India to previous locations of
the North Pole is the other half of this missing link that together can lead to a better
understanding of the origin of early civilizations in this part of the world.

Appendix
Awaiting Gaffney’s publication we present a preliminary version of a timeline of previous
locations of the North Pole based on his interpretation4 of mammalian biostratigraphy data
in Britain (Currant and Jacobi 2001) that can be summarized as follows: The Joint Mitnor
mammal assemblage-zone dated 130,000-111,000 years BP is when the North Pole was in
the Bering Sea and is the time of the Eemian interglacial period. The Bacon Hole assemblage
zone dated 110,000-80,000 years BP is when the North Pole was in Greenland. The
Banwell Cave assemblage zone dated 79,000-50,000 years BP is when the North Pole was in
the Norwegian Sea and is the time of the European Ice Age. The Pin Hole and Dimlington
assemblages dated 49,000-11,600 years BP are when the North Pole was in northern
Canada and is the time of the North American Ice Age. Figure 12 correlates this sequence
against global sea-level data over the past 200,000 years and adjusts the dates to
correspond to significant sea-level change events to yield the estimated pole shift timeline
in Table 1.

References
Charles H. Hapgood (1958) Earth’s Shifting Crust: A Key to Some Basic Problems of Earth
Science, Pantheon Books.

B. K. Thapar (1979) “Kalibangan: A Harappan Metropolis beyond the Indus Valley,” in
Ancient Cities of the Indus (Gregory L. Possehl, ed.), Vikas Publishing House.

Anthony Aveni (1980) Skywatchers of Ancient Mexico, Austin and London: University of
Texas Press.

Arthur Cotterell (1980) “The Indus Civilization,” in The Penguin Encyclopedia of Ancient
Civilizations (Arthur Cotterell, ed.), Penguin Books.

4 Private communication, February 3, 2020.

M. Jansen (1984) “Preliminary results on the ‘forma urbis’ research at Mohenjo-Daro,” In
Interim Reports on Fieldwork Carried out at Mohenjo-daro 1982-83, Vol. 2, (M. Jansen and G.
Urban, eds.).

H. Wanzke (1984) “Axis systems and orientation at Mohenjo-Daro,” ibid.

S. R. Rao (1990) “Excavation of the legendary city of Dvaraka in the Arabian Sea,” Marine
Archaeology, Vol. 1: 59-98.

George F. Dales and Jonathan Mark Kenoyer (1991) “Summaries of Five Seasons
of Research at Harappa (District Sahiwal, Punjab, Pakistan), 1986-1990” in Harappa
Excavations 1986-1990 - A Multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism
(Richard H. Meadow ed.)

N. Kameswara Rao (1992) “History of Astronomy - Astronomy with Buddhist stupas of
Sanchi,” Bull. Astr. Soc. India, Vol. 20:87-98.

Andrew Currant and Roger Jacobi (2001), “A formal mammalian biostratigraphy for the
Late Pleistocene of Britain,” Quaternary Science Reviews, Vol. 20:1707–1716.

A. S. Gaur, Sundaresh and Sila Tripati (2004) “An ancient harbour at Dwarka: Study based
on the recent underwater explorations,” Current Science, Vol. 86, No. 9.

S. Badrinaryan (2010) “Gulf of Cambay Cradle of Ancient Civilization,” in Lost Knowledge of
the Ancients (Glenn Kreisberg, ed.). See also:
https://en.dharmapedia.net/wiki/Marine_archeology_in_the_Gulf_of_Khambhat

Subhash Kak (2010) “Visions of the Cosmos: Archaeoastronomy in Ancient India,”
Journal of Cosmology, Vol. 9: 2063-2077.

A. Bakry (2016) “Prehistoric Contacts between Central Asia and India,” Transactions of
Margiana Archaeological Expedition, Vol. 6:422-565, Moscow.

Marsha R. Robinson (2018) Disobedient Histories in Ancient and Modern Times: Regionalism,
Governance, War and Peace, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Carlotto, M. J. (2019a). “Archaeological dating using a data fusion approach,” Signal
Processing, Sensor/Information Fusion, and Target Recognition XXVIII, Baltimore MD.

Mark Carlotto (2019b) “New Models to Explain the Alignments of Greek Temples,”
https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3501950.

Mark Carlotto (2020) “Ruins in the ‘Stans: Evidence of a Lost Civilization in Central Asia,”
Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3677452.



 Table 1 Location and chronology of previous geographic north poles.

Pole Latitude Longitude Date

Hudson Bay 59.75° -78° 63,000 – 16,000 BCE
Greenland 79.5° -63.75° 83,000 – 63,000 BCE
Norwegian Sea 70° 0° 130,000 – 83,000 BCE
Bering Sea 56.25° -176.75° < 130,000 BCE


Table 2 Alignments of ancient sites in the India River valley relative to the current (AR) and previous
hypothesized locations of the North Pole in Hudson Bay (HB), the Norwegian Sea (NS), Greenland (GR),
and the Bering Sea (BS). Key to alignments: equinox (E), solstices (S), and zenith passages (Z).

Site Latitude Longitude AR HB NS GR BS

Bhir 33.742967 72.821192
Dholavira 23.887158 70.213383 E
Ganeriwala 28.492171 71.061152
Harappa 30.629257 72.863947 E
Kafir Kot 32.503274 71.335526 E
Kalibangan 29.474096 74.130746 E
Lothal 22.522495 72.249025
Mohenjo-daro 27.325335 68.13293 S
Taxila 33.757431 72.829523 E

Table 3 Alignments of Jyotirlinga temples and shrines. Same key as above.

Site Latitude Longitude AR HB NS GR BS

Shree Somnath Jyotirlinga 20.888028 70.401389
Mallikarjuna Jyotirlinga 16.074167 78.868056 E
Mahakaleshwar Jyotirlinga 23.182778 75.768333
Omkareshwar Temple 22.245583 76.151056
Kedarnath Temple 30.735194 79.066917 E
Bhimashankar Temple 19.072 73.536 E
Kashi Vishwanath Temple 25.310775 83.010614 E
Trimbakeshwar Shiva Temple 19.932222 73.530833 E
Baidyanath Temple 24.4925 86.7 S
Nageshvara Jyotirling 22.335971 69.086996 E
Ramanathaswamy Temple 9.288106 79.317282 E
Grishneshwar Temple 20.024972 75.169917 E


Table 4 Alignments of other ancient sites in India. Same key as above.

Site Latitude Longitude AR HB NS GR BS

Anuradhapura 8.351576 80.40365 E
Benares (Varanasi) 25.277485 82.976596 S
Bojjannakonda 17.710091 83.015945 E
Dwaraka 22.23537 68.964974 E
Kodungallur 10.206326 76.198336 E
Lalitgiri 20.590288 86.252378 E
Maya Devi 27.469433 83.275808 E
Ratnagiri 20.642289 86.335904 E
Sanchi Stupa 23.479478 77.739241 S
Sigiriya 7.957204 80.759942 Z


Figure 1 Side-scan sonar image of submerged structures in the Gulf of Cambay. The feature shown is 40 x
19 meters in area and 2-3 meters in height. Courtesy National Institute of Ocean
Technology/Government of India.

Figure 2 Early aerial view of the Citadel Mound at Mohenjo-daro (looking south). Courtesy
Harappa.com.5

5 See https://www.harappa.com/slide/aerial-view-mohenjo-daro-107a
 o 1 meter N
t-l
I ! QO

I I I I I I I N1320
'""l
N l::l

, l::l
p • / .... / mudbrick platform t'Tl
•• I
partially excavated >-<
.-"6 \\
;
".
I
\
"-
C pit in rubble area l,\,)
[110b]

/.:
(')
l::l
<:::!
\ , I;
l::l
.....
r'
.... \ \,
.-
"
... I 1 , o'
!£!. \ '
C \ \ \ N1319 ;::

( 00
\ CIl
",
'\ Jl 1.0
" 0". \ ( \
{ Q!
00
\ \ - ," I 0\
I
01 \
I \._-1. (
1.0
"8 \ (' \0 " "
.....
t..", j
rubble [77] 1.0
<:::>
\"
l
'\"3
r- \', " .
I rubble [77] L.."' ......
unexcavated
mudbrick platform
'. • : "unexcavated
N1318
\ $;
, 'U
' ',H.. .: ' ' -
;:::
.....

J
---..
(ii'
lJ baked brick (')

cut ' foundation

;::
In wall " \ l::l
for access to :".n trench ..... N1317

, > g,
-- \'\
\ /,

, \
/,
[1331..
\ ':.9
1\
,
mudbrick platform '""l
C
brick rubble removed l::l

";:
(')

Harappan debris
on slope
\
'5
'
•
0'--I) '
,,'d'
=
""" Q '01
;
'0
<:; _1-6
tJ,,'-. 05-. §
,g N1316
._,0
Lot 1002 (132) Early Harappan debris

----------.I-------,-I.:.-------,-I--------rl-------I
and ash layers

Figure 3 Alignment of baked brick pavements and retaining walls within Mound E at Harappa to the
f-I

E2080 E2081 E2082 E2083 E2085

Hudson Bay pole. Site plan courtesy Meadow (1991).
E2084 E2086

Figure 13.24: Harappa 1988: Mound E, northwestern slope: plan view of walls and revetment.

Figure 4 Structures atop the “acropolis” at Mohenjo-daro are aligned in the direction of the winter
solstice sunrise/summer solstice sunset relative to the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.

Figure 5 Kalibangan archaeological site is aligned to the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.

Figure 6 Samudra Narayan Temple (left) and Dwarkadhish Temple (right), both at Dwarka, are aligned
to the Hudson Bay pole. Google Earth.


Figure 7 Excavated sites at Varansi aligned in the direction of the winter solstice sunrise/summer
solstice sunset relative to the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.

Figure 8 Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple (above and to the right of the crosshairs) in Benaras is aligned to
the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.


Figure 9 Bojjannakonda is aligned to the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.

Figure 10 Buddhist stupas of Sanchi including the Great Stupa are aligned in the direction of the winter
solstice sunrise/summer solstice sunset relative to the Hudson Bay pole. Apple Maps.
 0.5

0.4

0.3
India

0.2 Central Asia

0.1

0
AR HB NS GR BS

Figure 11 Distribution of site alignments to poles in India and Central Asia.

Figure 12. Sequence and timing of geographic pole shifts based on new climate evidence. Base graphic
courtesy University of Toledo.6

6 See https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth107/node/1496