An Atlantis in the Indian Ocean
(Review of Stephen Oppenheimer's Eden in the East)
Koenraad Elst
One of the many
insulting epithets thrown at AIT disbelievers is that they are no better
than "Atlantis freaks". Actually, this is not entirely untrue. Some AIT
skeptics who have applied their minds to reconstructing ancient history,
have indeed thought of centres of human habitation in locations now well
below sea-level. When Proto-Indo-European was spoken, the sea level was
still recovering from the low point it had reached during the Ice Age,
about 100 metres lower than the present level. It was in the period of
roughly twelve to seven thousand years ago that the icecaps melted and
replenished the seas, so that numerous low-lying villages had to be
abandoned.
After all, it is a safe
bet that more than half of mankind lived in the zone of less than 100 m
above sea level. In the context of the present debate on global warming,
it is said that a rise in sea level of just one metre would be an immense
catastrophe for countries like Bangla Desh or the Netherlands. The
Maledives would completely disappear with a rise of only a few metres. But
more importantly, most big population centres today are located just above
sea level: Tokyo, Shanghai, Kolkata, Mumbai, London, New York, Los Angeles
etc. If the sea level would rise 100 m, most population centres including
entire countries would become a sunken continent, a very real Atlantis.
Consequently, there is nothing far-fetched in assuming the existence of
population centres and cultures, 10 or 15 thousand years ago, in what are
now submarine locations on the continental shelf outside our coastlines.
In a recent book, Eden
in the East: the Drowned Continent of Southeast Asia (Phoenix paperback,
London 1999 (1998)), Stephen Oppenheimer has focused on one such part of
the continental shelf: the region between Malaysia, Sumatra, Java, Borneo,
Thailand, Vietnam, China and Taiwan, which was largely inhabitable during
the Ice Age. Thinking that this was then the most advanced centre of
civilization, he calls it Eden, the Biblical name of Paradise (from
Sumerian edin, "alluvial plain"), because West-Asian sources including the
Bible do locate the origin of mankind or at least of civilization in the
East. In some cases, as in Sumerian references, this "East" is clearly the
pre-Harappan and Harappan culture, but even more easterly countries seem
to be involved.
Oppenheimer is a
medical doctor who has lived in Southeast Asia for decades. He is clearly
influenced by Marxism, e.g. where he dismisses religion as a means to
"control other people's labour", with explicit reference to Karl Marx's
Das Kapital (p.483). His book is based on solid scientific research
(genetic, anthropological, linguistic and archaeological), and is in that
respect very different from the numerous Atlantis books which draw on
"revelations" and "channeling".
The most airy type of
evidence, in its massiveness nonetheless quite compelling, is comparative
mythology: numerous cultures, and especialy those in the Asia-Pacific
zone, have highly parallel myths of one or more floods. These are not
opaque allusions to Freudian events in the subconscious but plainly
historical references to the catastrophic moments in the otherwise
long-drawn-out rise of the sea level after the Ice Age. For, indeed, this
rise was not a continuous process but took place with occasional spurts,
wiping out entire tribes living near the coast. The last such sudden rise
took place ca. 5500 BC, after which the sea level fell back a few metres
to the present level.
According to
Oppenheimer, the Southeast-Asian Atlantis, provisionally called Sundaland
because it now is the Sunda shelf, was the world leader in the Neolithic
Revolution (start of agriculture), using stones for grinding wild grains
as early as 24,000 ago, more than ten thousand years older than in Egypt
or Palestine. Before and especially during the gradual flooding of their
lowland, the Sundalanders spread out to neighbouring lands: the Asian
mainland including China, India and Mesopotamia, and the island world from
Madagascar to the Philippines and New Guinea, whence they later colonized
Polynesia as far as Easter Island, Hawaii and New Zealand.
Oppenheimer aligns with
the archaeologists against the linguists in the controversy about the
homeland of the Austronesian language family (Malay, Tagalog, Maori,
Malgasy etc.): he locates it in Sundaland and its upper regions which now
make up the coasts of the Southeast-Asian countries, whereas most
linguists maintain that southern China was the land of origin. Part of the
argument concerns chronology: Oppenheimer proposes a higher chronology
than Peter Bellwood and other out-of-China theorists. My experience with
IE studies makes me favour a higher chronology, for new findings (e.g.
that "pre-IE" peoples like the Pelasgians and the Etruscans, not to speak
of the Harappans, turn out to have been earlier "Aryan" settlers) have
consistently been pushing the date of the fragmentation of PIE back into
the past.
Another reason for not
relying too much on the theories of the linguists is that Austronesian
linguistics is a very demanding field, comprising the study of hundreds of
small languages most of which have no literature, so the number of genuine
experts is far smaller than in the case of IE, and even in the latter case
linguists are nowhere near a consensus on the homeland question.
Linguistic evidence is very soft evidence, and usually the data admit of
more than one historical reconstruction, so I don't think there is any
compelling evidence against a Sundaland homeland hypothesis. Conversely,
archaeological and genetic evidence in favour of the spread of the
Austronesian-speaking populations from Sundaland seems to be sufficient.
It is quite certain
that some of these Austronesians must have landed in India, some on their
way to Madagascar, some to stay and mix with the natives. Hence the
presence of some Austronesian words in Indian languages of all families,
most prominently ayi/bayi, "mother" (as in the Marathi girls' names
Tarabai, Lakshmi-bai etc.), or words for "bamboo", "fruit", "honey". More
spectacularly, linguists like Isidore Dyen have discerned a considerable
common vocabulary in the core lexicon of Austronesian and Indo-European,
including pronouns, numerals (e.g. Malay dva, "two") and terms for the
elements. Oppenheimer doesn't go into this question, but diehard
invasionists might use his findings to suggest an Aryan invasion into
India not from the northwest, but from the southeast.
But he does mention the
legend of Manu Vaivasvata saving his company from the flood and sailing up
the rivers of India to settle high and dry in Saptasindhu. Clearly, the
origins of Vedic civilization are related to the post-Glacial flood,
probably the single biggest migration trigger in human history.
The Tamils have a
tradition that their poets' academy or Sangam existed for ten thousand
years, and that its seat (along with the entire Tamil capital) had to be
moved thrice because of the rising sea level. They also believe that their
country once stretched far to the south, including Sri Lanka and the
Maledives, a lost Tamil continent called Kumarikhandam. If these legends
turn out to match the geological evidence quite neatly, our academics
would be wrong to dismiss them as figments of the imagination. But the
Indian or Kumarikhandam counterpart to Oppenheimer's book on Sundaland has
yet to be written. This indeed is probably the most important practical
conclusion to be drawn from this book: extend India's history by thousands
of years with the exploration of now-submarine population centres.
Another language family
originating in some part of Sundaland was Austro-Asiatic, which includes
the Mon-Khmer languages in Indochina (its demographic point of gravity
being Vietnam) but also Nicobarese and the Munda languages of Chotanagpur,
at one time possibly spoken throughout the Ganga basin. It is the Mundas
who brought rice cultivation from Southeast Asia to the Ganga basin,
whence it reached the Indus Valley towards the end of the Harappan age
(ca. 2300 BC). In this connection, it is worth noting that Oppenheimer
confirms that "barley cultivation was developed in the Indus Valley"
(p.19), barley being the favourite crop of the Vedic Aryans (yava). Unlike
the Mundas who brought rice cultivation from eastern India and ultimately
from Southeast Asia to northwestern India, and unlike the Indo-European
Kurgan people whose invasion into Europe can be followed by means of
traces of the crops they imported (esp. millet), the Vedic Aryans simply
used the native produce. This doesn't prove but certainly supports the
suspicion that the Aryans were native to the Indus Valley.
Concerning the
political polemic, the usual claim that the caste system with its sharp
discrimination was instituted by the invading Aryans to entrench their
supremacy is countered by the finding that even the most isolated tribes
on India's hills turn out to have strict endogamy rules, often guarded
with more severe punishments for inter-tribal love affairs than exist in
Sanskritic-Hindu society. Here, Oppenheimer confirms that in the
Austro-Asiatic and Austrone-sian tribal societies, where many of India's
tribals originate, inequality is deeply entrenched: "Yet the class
structure which cripples Britain more than any other European state, is as
nothing compared with the stratified hierarchies in Austronesian
traditional societies from Madagascar through Bali to Samoa. (...) This
consciousness of rank is thus clearly not something that was only picked
up by Austronesian societies from later Indian influence." (p.484) Social
hierarchy is not a racialist imposition by the Aryans, but a
near-universal phenomenon especially pronounced among Indo-Pacific
societies including most non-Aryan populations.
Stephen Oppenheimer
makes a very detailed and very strong case for the importance of the
culture of sunken Sundaland for the later cultures in the wide
surroundings. India too certainly benefited of certain achievements
imported from there. What is yet missing is a similar study for the
equally important and likewise neglected culture of the sunken lands
outside India's coast.
© Dr. Koenraad Elst,
2002.