where did the first south asian civilization develop?
465118
The first South Asian civilization develop in Indus River Valley (present date India) some 5000 years ago
1068422
Hi\n\nIndia's extraordinary history is intimately tied to its geography. A meeting ground between the East and the West, it has always been an invader's paradise, while at the same time its natural isolation and magnetic religions allowed it to adapt to and absorb many of the people who penetrated its mountain passes. No matter how many Persians, Greeks, Chinese nomads, Arabs, Portuguese, British and other raiders had their way with the land, local Hindu kingdoms invariably survived their depradations, living out their own sagas of conquest and collapse. All the while, these local dynasties built upon the roots of a culture well established since the time of the first invaders, the Aryans. In short, India has always been simply too big, too complicated, and too culturally subtle to let any one empire dominate it for long. \nThe first group to invade India were the Aryans, who came out of the north in about 1500 BC. The Aryans brought with them strong cultural traditions that, miraculously, still remain in force today. They spoke and wrote in a language called Sanskrit, which was later used in the first documentation of the Vedas.\n\nSo with so many cultures driving their roots, we have a diversity of tradition, culture and history.\n\nhope this helps
1178795
Pinpointing the absolute beginnings of agriculture is problematic because the transition away from purely hunter-gatherer societies, in some areas, began many thousands of years before the invention of writing. Nonetheless, Archaeobotanists/Paleoethnobotanists have traced the selection and cultivation of specific food plant characteristics, such as a semi-tough rachis and larger seeds, to just after the Younger Dryas (about 9,500 BC) in the early Holocene in the Levant region of the Fertile Crescent. Limited anthropological and archaeological evidence both indicate a grain-grinding culture farming along the Nile in the 10th millennium BC using the world's earliest known type of sickle blades. There is even earlier evidence for conscious cultivation and seasonal harvest: grains of rye with domestic traits have been recovered from Epi-Palaeolithic (10,000+ BC) contexts at Abu Hureyra in Syria, but this appears to be a localised phenomenon resulting from cultivation of stands of wild rye, rather than a definitive step towards domestication. By 8000 BC, farming was in practice in Anatolia. By 7000 BC it reached Mesopotamia, by 6000 BC the Nile River, and by 5000 BC, it had spread to India. Around the same time, agriculture was developed independently in China. Maize was first domesticated from teosinte in the Americas around 3000-2700 BC. In these contexts lie the origins of the eight so-called founder crops of agriculture: firstly emmer and einkorn wheat, then hulled barley, peas, lentils, bitter vetch, chick peas and flax. These eight crops occur more or less simultaneously on PPNB sites in this region, although the consensus is that wheat was the first to be sown and harvested on a significant scale. There are many sites that date to between ca. 8,500 BC and 7,500 BC where the systematic farming of these crops contributed the major part of the inhabitants' diet. From the Fertile Crescent agriculture spread eastwards to Central Asia and westwards into Cyprus, Anatolia and, by 7,000 BC, Greece. Farming, principally of emmer and einkorn, reached northwestern Europe via southeastern and central Europe by ca. 4,800 BC (see, among others, Price, D. [ed.] 2000. Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press; Harris, D. [ed.] 1996 The Origins and Spread of Agriculture in Eurasia. UCL Press).\n\n \nA tractor ploughing an alfalfa fieldThe reasons for the earliest introduction of farming may have included climate change, but possibly there were also social reasons (e.g. accumulation of food surplus for competitive gift-giving). Most certainly there was a gradual transition from hunter-gatherer to agricultural economies after a lengthy period when some crops were deliberately planted and other foods were gathered from the wild. Although localised climate change is the favoured explanation for the origins of agriculture in the Levant, the fact that farming was 'invented' at least three times, possibly more, suggests that social reasons may have been instrumental.\n\n \nSumerian Harvester's sickle, 3000 BCE. Baked clay. Field Museum.Full dependency on domestic crops and animals did not occur until the Bronze Age, by which time wild resources contributed a nutritionally insignificant component to the diet. If the operative definition of agriculture includes large scale intensive cultivation of land, mono-cropping, organized irrigation, and use of a specialized labour force, the title "inventors of agriculture" would fall to the Sumerians, starting ca. 5,500 BC. Intensive farming allows a much greater density of population than can be supported by hunting and gathering and allows for the accumulation of excess product to keep for winter use or to sell for profit. The ability of farmers to feed large numbers of people whose activities have nothing to do with material production was the crucial factor in the rise of standing armies. The agriculturalism of the Sumerians allowed them to embark on an unpreceden
1069463
This was the specific route taken by the traders going over to China for Trading Silk.\nThe route is throught china tibet through India and the Kandahar pass on to Pakistan and then up through Afghanistan and there after.\nThe first silk fabrics were woven specifically in China.Untill somebody stole their mulberry and catterpillars and started silk breeding in their areas.
96220
No one knows for certain. The oldest civilized archaeological sites are in the Sumerian region and also in Nigeria. Not sure which is older. Nor am I sure that they were the "first".
712933
thousands of years ago, it was first discover in persia.
9565
The origins of Chinese civilization started back more than 3500 years ago.
128384
The origin of Aurveda is in India And the foundation was laid by a Number of rishis such as Charaka and Susruta and Chavyanya thousands of years ago.
1157589
India is Asian country
578134
That's a tough question.\nThe Romans controlled most of the known world for approximately 700 years.\n\nChina did control most of Asia under the Khan Dynasty.\n\nOf course, as noted, Britain did control much of the world in the 18th and 19th century, including India and large parts of Africa.\n\nThe best book on this topic is by a historian named Paul Kennedy, called "The Rise and Fall of Great Powers". A good examination of how nations build huge empires, only to watch them collapse as the cost of supporting them destroys them internally.\n\nHere is an example of the book:\nhttp://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/kennedy-risefall.html
257297
Good question!\nI don't think there is actually a moving "center of civilization". It seems to me an oversimplification of schoolboks.\nTake China, for example. Its empire has been at the technological edge until a few centuries ago, then it had a decay and today is emerging back, but not after (or caused by) Japan development as your theory seems to go.\nThen, take India. You say it is rising after China, but note that India it is already a nation more "civilized" than China if you intend this term with respect to democracy, legality and civil rights.\n\nUnderstanding the historical forces driving the civilization process is a complex and extremely interesting challenge. To probe further, I suggest reading "Guns, Germs, and Steel", the wonderful Pulitzer Prize-winning book of the biologist and geographer Jared Diamond.
59054
"No golden tombs, no fancy ziggurats. Four thousand years ago city builders in the Indus Valley made deals, not war, and created a stable, peaceful, and prosperous culture."\n"No golden tombs, no fancy ziggurats. Four thousand years ago city builders in the Indus Valley made deals, not war, and created a stable, peaceful, and prosperous culture."\n\n\nThe railway linking Lahore to Multan in Pakistan is 4,600 years old. In truth, the rails were laid down in the middle of the nineteenth century, but to build the railway bed, British engineers smashed bricks from crumbling buildings and rubble heaps in a town called Harappa, halfway between the two cities. Back in 1856, Alexander Cunningham, director of the newly formed Archeological Survey of British India, thought the brick ruins were all related to nearby seventh-century Buddhist temples. Local legend told a different story: the brick mounds were the remnants of an ancient city, destroyed when its king committed incest with his niece. Neither Cunningham nor the locals were entirely correct. In small, desultary excavations a few years later, Cunningham found no temples or traces of kings, incestuous or otherwise. Instead he reported the recovery of some pottery, carved shell, and a badly damaged seal depicting a one-horned animal, bearing an inscription in an unfamiliar writing.\n\nThat seal was a mark of one of the world's great ancient civilizations, but mid-nineteenth-century archaeologists like Cunningham knew nothing about it. The Vedas, the oldest texts of south Asia, dating from some 3,500 years ago, made no mention of it, nor did the Bible. No pyramids or burial mounds marked the area as the site of an ancient power. Yet, 4,600 years ago, at the same time as the early civilizations of Mesopotamia and Egypt, great cities arose along the flood plains of he ancient Indus and Saraswati rivers in what is now Pakistan and northwest India. The people of the Indus Valley didn't build towering monuments, bury their riches along with their dead, or fight legendary and bloody battles. They didn't have a mighty army or a divine emperor. Yet they were a highly organized and stupendously successful civilization. They built some of the world's first planned cities, created one of the world's first written languages, and thrived in an area twice the size of Egypt and Mesopotamia for 700 years.\n\nTo archeologists of this century and last, Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro, a neighboring city some 350 miles to the southwest, posed an interesting, if unglamorous puzzle. Excavations revealed large, orderly walled cities of massive brick buildings, with highly sophisticated sanitation and drainage systems and a drab, institutional feel. The streets of Harappa, remarked British archeologist Mortimer Wheeler, "however impressive quantitatively, and significant sociologically, are aesthetically miles of monotony." The archeologist and popular author Leonard Cottrell, a contemporary of Wheeler's, wrote in 1956, "While admiring the efficiency of Harappan planning and sanitary engineering, one's general impression of Harappan culture is unattractive... One imagines those warrens of streets, baking under the fierce sun of the Punjab, as human ant heaps, full of disciplined, energetic activity, supervised and controlled by a powerful, centralized state machine; a civilization in which there was little joy, much labor, and a strong emphasis on material things."\n\nSuperior plumbing and uniform housing, no matter how well designed, don’t fire the imagination like ziggurats and gold-laden tombs. "But there's more to society than big temples and golden burials," argues Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, an archeologist at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. "Those are the worst things that ancient societies did, because they led to their collapse. When you take gold and put it in ground, it's bad for the economy. When you wast
1082742
Check this site:\nhttp://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=ancienthistory&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.activemind.com%2FMysterious%2FTopics%2FAtlantis%2Findex.html
508425
The Incan civilization lived in the Andes mountains of South America, from Colombia to Bolivia. They had many cities in between, most notably "Machu Pichu", in Peru. \nThey were sun worshippers.
801762
The most ancient name was Aryavarta (Abode of the noble or excellent ones or abode of the aryans). But this did not cover the complete present day borders of India, it had a significant boundary.\n\nThen at a later stage it was named as Bharat, after a king.\n\nAt a more later stage when the persians arrived they named it Hindustan, after the river sindhu.\n\nThen the british called it India, after the indus (sindhu) river.
149801
Well as far as I can remember, the first civilization in the world is Mesopotamia and now it is called Iraq which is in the Middle East.
221398
nuthin. Egypt was the only civilization at that time.