Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana (My paper published in IKS)

My research paper, "Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana," has been published as a chapter in the IKS Publication. This chapter offers fresh insights into the chronology of these epics, presents a critical analysis of existing research, and provides compelling evidence on Ram Setu supported by recent ISRO-NASA findings.

Title: 

Historical Timelines of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana

Abstract

The Ramayana and the Mahabharata, India's two seminal epics, have been integral to Indian culture, spirituality, and identity for millennia. However, the historical timelines associated with these epics have been subject to diverse interpretations, with numerous researchers proposing varying dates, that not only confuse people but also lead to fragmented scholarship, misrepresentations in popular culture, and challenges in establishing a clear cultural and archaeological context. This lack of consensus can undermine traditional beliefs and create ongoing debates within both academic and public spheres. A closer examination of the epics reveals that they include inherent chronological indicators that have been overlooked by researchers thus far. This chapter emphasizes the inherent chronological clues in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, explaining why the existing dates are inaccurate. It also offers a revised chronology based on these indicators, which is corroborated by modern scientific evidence.

Keywords: Krishna, Gāndhārī, Kali yuga, comet-hit, GISP2, Hancock, ISRO, Sea-level, Ram Setu

Introduction

The Mahabharata and Ramayana are considered authentic accounts, as they are classified as 'Itihāsa', meaning 'it happened thus'. These epics were composed by contemporary sages who were also characters within the narratives, making them reliable primary sources for dating purposes. The texts were recited in the presence of the authors and, in the case of the Ramayana, even in the presence of Rāma, the main hero. This ensures the authenticity of the texts, which have been revered for centuries.

Notably, the dates of these epics can be determined through historical dating methods, utilizing Pancānga features like tithi and star positions, as well as planetary combinations mentioned within the texts themselves. Although methods like archaeology, hydrology, and carbon dating are limited in establishing precise dates, they can offer valuable corroborative evidence to validate the exact dates determined through other means. The Mahabharata presents a well-defined timeline, anchored to the historically significant event of Lord Krishna’s departure from the physical world. This event marks the beginning of the Kali Yuga era, which has been continuously tracked in India to calculate important dates in Indian history, as corroborated by numerous inscriptions found across the subcontinent.

In the words of the renowned epigraphist Dr. R. Nagaswamy, "Every aspect of life in this land, from administration and education to judiciary, has been meticulously documented" until the East India Company's takeover in the 18th century (News report: The Hindu, June 06, 2019). These records employed calendar elements of Kali Yuga or its current sub-period, namely the Śaka era. Although the Gregorian calendar has gained widespread use these days, the Kali-Śaka time scale remains an integral part of India's religious practices.

In the context of the Kali Yuga's initial year, which marks Krishna's departure, the date of the Mahabharata war—occurring somewhat earlier—can be determined through internal references within the epic itself. Furthermore, a distinct temporal gap exists between the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, which predates it. By examining these key features, it becomes evident that internal evidence from both epics exposes the flaws in the various proposed dates put forth by researchers, rendering these dates untenable. The chapter begins with an exploration of Mahabharata’s dating, followed by an analysis of the Ramayana's timeline, ultimately providing a comprehensive understanding of the historical sequences within these two ancient epics.

Krishna's departure: A historical anchor for the Kali Yuga era

There are several textual references linking the arrival of Kali Yuga to Krishna’s departure. Some of them are listed here. In Harivamśa (1.53.59), Vyasa states that Māheśwara Yuga began when Krishna left the world¹. Although some may argue that Māheśwara Yuga is distinct from Kali Yuga, multiple scriptures concur that a new Yuga commenced upon Krishna’s exit. Initially, Vyasa characterized this new Yuga as Rudra Yuga or Māheśwara Yuga, marked by the manifestation of 'Raudram'.

However, in Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (SB)² Vyasa repeats that Kali Yuga fully manifested upon Krishna’s departure (SB: 1.15.36). The text describes:

"When Lord Kṛṣṇa left the earth, Kali, who had partially appeared, became fully manifest, creating inauspicious conditions for the ignorant."

The subsequent verses (SB: 1.15.37 and 1.15.45) reveal that Yudhiṣṭhira and the younger Pāṇḍava-s, recognizing the advent of Adharma and Kali Yuga, chose to leave the earth.

Further, the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam provides firsthand testimony from Krishna himself about the onset of Kali Yuga. In his conversation with Uddhava (SB 11.7.4-5), Krishna states:

"I will soon abandon this earth, and Kali Yuga will overwhelm it, stripping it of piety."

"Once I leave, you should not remain on this earth, for in Kali Yuga, people will be addicted to sinful activities."

Krishna’s words indicate that his physical presence on earth delayed its onset and Kali yuga manifested fully after he left.

This perspective is consistently echoed across various Puranas:

Vishnu Purana (5.38.8) states that upon Hari's departure from the earth, the dark age of Kali descended.

Brahma Purana (2.103.8), Matsya Purana (271.51-52), and Bhāgavata Purana (1.18.6) all concur that Kali Maha Yuga commenced precisely at the moment of Krishna’s physical departure from the world.

These ancient texts collectively affirm the synchronicity of Krishna’s exit and the onset of Kali Yuga.

Year of Krishna’s departure

By simple calculation, the starting point of the Kali Yuga can be traced back to 3101 BCE, given that as of the year 2024 CE, 5125 years of the Kali Yuga have elapsed. For astronomical verification, the reputed Vedic astronomer Bhāskara-II estimated the start date to be 3179 years before the commencement of the Śālivāhana Śaka era (Siddhānta Śiromaṇi: 1-28)³. Given that the Śālivāhana Śaka began in 78 CE, this places Krishna’s exit in 3101 BCE, marking the end of the Mahabharata era.

This significant year marks Krishna’s departure, the Pāndava-s' abdication of the throne, and the ascension of their offspring, Parīkshit, who initiated the Kali Yuga kingly list. In 1957 CE, the Indian Calendar Reform Committee mistakenly recommended 78 CE, the start of the Śālivāhana Śaka, as the beginning of India's timekeeping system, perpetuating a misconception that India's calendar system is only around 1946 years old, thereby overlooking the country's incredibly rich and ancient epic heritage.

This oversight has led to a significant knowledge gap among the current generation, leaving many unaware of the Kali Yuga tradition and its historical significance, marked by Krishna’s departure. This lack of understanding is evident in numerous research studies on the Mahabharata's date, which demonstrate that researchers were largely uninformed about the historicity of the Kali Yuga's beginning.

The Gāndhārī curse: A clue to Krishna’s departure

A crucial piece of internal evidence within the Mahabharata (MB)⁴ that helps establish its timeframe is the curse of Gāndhārī, the mother of the Kaurava-s. After the devastating war that claimed the lives of all her sons, Gāndhārī rushed to the battlefield, overcome with grief. As she mourned the loss of her children and the defeat of the Kaurava-s, her anguish turned to anger, and she blamed Krishna for the immense tragedy that had befallen both the Kaurava-s and the Pāṇḍava-s. With a heavy heart, she reproached Krishna for not preventing the war and bringing peace between the warring cousins. In a fit of rage, Gāndhārī cursed Krishna, proclaiming that 36 years hence, Krishna’s own clan, the Vrishni-s, would meet a similar fate, destroyed by Krishna himself (MB: 11-25-41). Accepting the curse, Krishna acknowledged the inevitability of the tragedy that would befall his own kin.

According to the Mahabharata, when the 36^th year arrived, King Yudhiṣṭhira observed ominous signs (MB: 16-1-1). Vaiśampāyana stated that a great calamity befell the Vrishni-s in that 36^th year following the Mahabharata war (MB: 16-2-2). Upon witnessing inauspicious omens, Krishna realized that the 36^th year had arrived, marking the fulfillment of Gāndhārī’s curse, which she had uttered in grief over the loss of her children (MB: 16-3-18, 19). The Mahabharata thus references the demise of the Vrishni-s and Krishna in four distinct contexts.

The 36^th year, which corresponds to Krishna’s departure, is forever etched in the Kali Yuga calendar as 3101 BCE. From this, the year of the Mahabharata war can be calculated as 36 years prior to 3101 BCE, which yields 3136 BCE. In essence, there is a 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure, a detail well-established within the Mahabharata itself.

Researchers seeking to date the Mahabharata can readily utilize these two crucial features – the year of Krishna’s departure and the 35-year gap between his departure and the war – to pinpoint the year of the Mahabharata war. However, it is noteworthy that researchers have not adequately leveraged these details in their investigations.

Neglecting internal chronology: A shortcoming in the Mahabharata studies

A review of the dates proposed for the Mahabharata war by various researchers reveals a glaring omission: none of them have considered the crucial internal evidence of the 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure. The dates given by them are as follows:

1.     Nilesh Oak – 5661 BCE (2560 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

2.     Vedveer Arya – 3162 BCE (61 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

3.     Dr. M.L. Raja – 3143 BCE (42 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

4.     Dr. Saroj Bala – 3139 BCE (38 years before Kṛṣṇa left)

5.     Chandru Ramesh – 3101 BCE (Mahabharata war and Kṛṣṇa’s exit at the same time)

6.     Prof. Narahari Achar – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

7.     Dr. Manish Pandit – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

8.     Dr. DK Hari & Dr. Hema Hari – 3067 BCE (34 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

9.     Jijith Nadumuri Ravi – 1793 BCE (1308 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

10.  Pushkar Bhatnagar – 1793 BCE (1308 years after Kṛṣṇa left)

The failure of researchers to accurately date the Mahabharata war can be attributed to their oversight of the four pivotal verses highlighting the 35-year gap between the war and Krishna’s departure, a crucial aspect of Gāndhārī's curse. Internal evidence is paramount when dating historical events, and in the case of the Mahabharata, Gāndhārī's curse serves as a primary chronological anchor. Any planetary alignments or other evidence should be used to corroborate this date, rather than supersede it.

Scientific evidence of a comet-hit before Mahabharata war

A unique and remarkable celestial event, detailed with precision in the Mahabharata, offers strong scientific evidence for determining the exact year of the Mahabharata war as 3136 BCE, which is 35 years prior to 3101 BCE, the year Krishna departed from his mortal form. This extraordinary event is referenced as a series of ominous 'nimitta-s' (omens) that unfolded over 13 days, commencing from the moment Krishna embarked on his journey from Upaplavya to Hastinapura, in the month of Kārtika, in a last-ditch effort to negotiate peace and prevent the impending war.

These omens included 48 terrestrial, 12 atmospheric, and 20 planetary anomalies, foreshadowing a catastrophe from the sky. The initial impact was calamitous, causing water to flow in the opposite direction in seven rivers, including the River Sindhu (MB: 5.82.6). Karna described meteors (Ulkā) falling from the sky with deafening noise (MB: 5.141.10), while Vyasa provided a more vivid account: “dhūmaketur mahāghoraḥ puṣyam ākramya tiṣṭhati” (A terrible and ominous comet appeared, enveloping the Pushya constellation) (MB: 6.3.12).

This cosmic impact precipitated a rare premature Amavasya (No-Moon Day) on the 13^th tithi (MB: 6-3-28), which has been immortalized in collective memory as Bodhayana Amavasya. This event altered the Earth's orbit, causing a delay in Uttarāyaṇa (winter solstice), forcing Bhīṣma to wait on the arrow bed. The delayed Uttarāyaṇa is commemorated as Ratha Saptamī (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Shift of moon into dotted orbit by the comet-hit (illustrative)

Picture credit: Self

The premature Amavasya resulted in the loss of a tithi which changed the tithi-star alignment once for all. This altered alignment persists to the present day, manifesting as a discrepancy in dates preceding the impact, such as the birth date of Rāma, which will be examined in further detail subsequently.

The tithi loss presupposes a change in the Moon's orbit causing a change in the lunar nodes (Rahu and Ketu), which is indeed recorded in the Mahabharata (MB: 5-141-10 & 6-3-11). Another peculiar observation is also found in the Mahabharata. During Krishna’s private conversation with Karna after his peace mission, Karna remarks, "somasya lakṣma vyāvṛttaṃ" (MB: 5.141.10). This same phrase is repeated by Vyasa to Dhṛtarāṣṭra on the eve of the war: “vyāvṛttaṃ lakṣma somasya” (MB: 6.2.32). The literal translation of this phrase is, “The mark (sign) of the moon became separated or parted with.”

This observation holds significant importance. Following the catastrophic impact on Pushya day in the month of Kārtika, Karna and Vyasa reportedly observed the lunar surface that night, which was the 6^th day of the waning moon.  (Ṣaṣṭhī Tithi). To determine the location of the moon where fresh marks could have been observed, this writer observed the 6^th waning tithi in a Kārtika month. The observation revealed that while most of the visible lunar surface was covered with dark marks, known as 'Maria', a plain region called ‘Highlands’ was partly visible on the side of Maria. These two regions on the lunar disc on Full Moon Day are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Location of Maria and Highlands on the lunar disc

Picture credit: space.com

Karna and Vyasa must have seen fresh marks on the plain ‘Lunar Highlands’ region, leading them to remark that the spots on the moon had shifted places. Figure 3 photographed from Chennai in South India, depicts the Moon's appearance on the 6^th day of its waning phase – the day deduced from the description in the Mahabharata. Notably, a part of the Highland is visible where new features could have emerged on that fateful night⁵.

Figure 3: Waning phase of the moon with the lunar mark shifted (indicated by the white arrow)

Photo credit: Dr. Bharani (Nature photographer)

The Mahabharata's description of shifting lunar spots implies that an impact took place on the Lunar Highlands. It appears that the same comet, which fragmented over Earth, also struck the Moon, altering its orbit and causing an unusually early Amavasya (new moon). The details can be found in my book, where I provide a comprehensive explanation⁶.

A research article published on NASA's website (August 19, 2021)⁷ by Dr. Quanzhi Ye et al.⁸ reveals that a comet disintegrated near Mercury's orbit approximately 5,000 years ago. According to the study, the comet was visible from Earth. While the research suggests that the fragmented pieces escaped the solar system, the Mahabharata describes a more complex scenario, wherein numerous fragments struck the Earth and Moon over a 13-day period, with particularly severe impacts occurring on days 1 and 9 (Pushya day).

The lunar impact likely ejected rocks into space, with some escaping the Moon's gravitational pull. This scenario is substantiated by the recent discovery of an asteroid in Earth's orbit, which was confirmed to be of lunar origin. The recently discovered asteroid 2024 PT5 was found to have been ejected from the Moon due to an impact a few thousand years ago. It was subsequently captured by Earth's orbit and has been traveling alongside it (Figure 4).

Figure 4: The asteroid 2024PT5 of lunar origin

Picture credit: https://www.businesstoday.in/visualstories/news/nasa-finds-a-mini-moon-agency-finds-a-10-meter-lunar-fragment-hiding-in-plain-sight-205132-26-01-2025

Researchers Theodore Kareta et al. (2025)⁹ made a profound observation in their paper published in The Astrophysical Journal that the lunar fragment appears to have originated from the Lunar Highlands. Notably, this is the exact region identified in the Mahabharata as the impact site, providing a striking correlation between ancient scripture and modern scientific discovery.

GISP2 ice core data reveals a significant drop in global temperature in 3136 BCE, consistent with the expected climate disruption caused by a cosmic impact. (Figure 5). Mahabharata’s account of a comet impact in the same year provides a compelling explanation for this previously unidentified event.

Figure 5: Rapid temperature-drop in 3136 BCE

Graph credit: Joachim Seifert, Climatologist.

A key indicator of a meteor impact is the release of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), causing red clouds, bloody rains, and discoloration of water bodies. The Mahabharata describes these exact conditions as ominous signs (nimitta-s), suggesting a strong connection to the meteor impact described in the epic.

Fragments of the comet likely hit the Sindhu region, where mysterious skeletons were found in Mohenjo-Daro's Lower Town (Figure 6). Initially attributed to massacre victims (suggesting Aryan Invasion Theory), the remains show radiation evidence of intense heat and rapid cooling. The aligned “massacre” sites suggest a meteor shower, supporting Mahabharata’s account of a comet impact (Brian: 2020).¹⁰

Figure 6: Impact sites in Mohenjo-Daro (Sindhu region)

Picture credit: Hemphill Brian¹⁰

Thus, the Mahabharata provides compelling internal evidence that points to 3136 BCE as the year of the epic war. This date is corroborated by a convergence of scientific and archaeological evidence, including the comet impact and corresponding findings at Mohenjo-Daro.

The Rama date conundrum: A tithi-star mismatch

The Valmiki Ramayana (VR)¹¹ provides Pancānga and planetary details that aid in determining the specific dates of various events in the Ramayana. However, the dating of Rama's birth has long been a subject of debate due to a seeming incompatibility between his birth star, Punarvasu, and his birth tithi, Śhukla Navamī, in the month of Mesha (Aries). Astronomically, this combination is impossible in Aries, as Punarvasu is not aligned with Śhukla Navamī in this month. This discrepancy has led many researchers to question the historicity of the Ramayana, dismissing its astronomical features as mythical.

Researchers attempting to date Rama overlooked the discrepancy in tithi-star positions, likely due to their reliance on Western astronomy simulators, which cannot accurately replicate ancient Indian tithi-star configurations.

To align Rama's birth star, Punarvasu, with his birth tithi, Śhukla Navamī, in the Mesha month (Aries), the Amavasya must have occurred in Pūrva Bhādrapada. However, calculating from Pratipat, the moon would be in Punarvasu on the 9^th day, i.e., Śhukla Navamī, but the sun would have only moved 9 degrees, and be in Uttara Bhādrapada (Pisces), making this alignment impossible. Valmiki's account of this combination at Rama's birth poses a puzzle. Upon exploring different permutations, it's found that only when there's an Adhika Caitra Māsa followed by Nija Caitra Māsa can Rama's birth tithi-star alignment be replicated, albeit with one tithi less.

A similar instance of twin months (Adhika and Nija) occurs during the Rama-Ravana war. Hanuman found Sita on Māgha Full Moon, but by the time Rama's army reached Lanka, it was Phālguna. The Ramayana specifically mentions Indrajit's death on Krishna Caturdaśī, likely in Phālguna (VR: 6-92-66). The next day marked the beginning of Caitra and the war between Rama and Ravana. However, Rama returned to Bharadvāja Āśrama in Prayāga by Caitra Pancamī, leaving only five days between Indrajit's death and Rama's arrival. The Ramayana describes the war with Ravana after the death of Indrajit as lasting ‘Sapta Rātraṃ’ (seven nights) (VR: 6-107-65), which researchers have struggled to reconcile, leading some to label it an interpolation.

According to the astrology simulator, Indrajit's death occurred in Adhika Phālguna, followed by the war in Nija Phālguna, which concluded on Śhukla Ṣaṣṭhī, allowing ample time for subsequent events and Rama's onward journey to Prayāga. None of the previous researchers were able to accurately reconstruct these chronological sequences.

Rama’s birth date

Valmiki's descriptions of tithi, star, and planetary positions throughout the Ramayana were verified using an astrology simulator (Jhora), revealing a remarkable consistency from Rama's birth to his coronation. Specifically, Rama's birth date corresponds to January 9, 5114 BCE, in the Gregorian calendar, aligning with Nija Caitra month, Śhukla Aṣṭamī (one tithi less), Punarvasu, on a Monday in the year Parābhava¹².

Notably, all planetary positions described by Valmiki matched this date, with Saturn showing a minor deviation of just one degree, potentially attributable to rotational anomalies over the past 7,000 years. Alternatively, this one-degree drift into the next sign can be astrologically interpreted as Saturn having shifted to the previous sign (Libra) because it was in retrogression, being opposite to Sun at Rama’s birth. According to Jyotiṣa, this extraordinary convergence of planetary and Pancānga factors is unlikely to recur within 4,32,000 years.

Internal evidence for Ramayana date

The Valmiki Ramayana mentions the Pāndya kingdom in the South as a contemporary kingdom, providing internal evidence for its period. Sugrīva instructed the Vānara-s to search for Sita after crossing the Tāmraparani river, specifically in the Pāndya's Kavātam (VR: 4-41-19). Notably, Kavātam was the second Tamil Sangam capital, established around 5550 BCE according to Nakkīrar’s text ‘Irayanār Agapporul’¹³. This date serves as the upper limit for Ramayana’s date, providing a significant historical anchor.

A corroboration of the Pāndya king's story can be found in the Sinnamanur copper plate inscriptions, which reveal that Ravana purchased peace with the Pāndya king, fearing the Brahmāstra in the king's possession¹⁴. This incident is also echoed in Kālidāsa's Raghu Vaṁśa (6^th sarga, verses 59-65)¹⁵, where the Pāndyan king is described as wielding the formidable Brahma Śiro Astra, obtained from Lord Shiva. This powerful weapon allegedly prompted Ravana, the Lankādhipati, to seek peace with the Pāndya king, lest his people suffer the consequences of this extraordinary astra.

The internal evidence from the Ramayana, specifically the reference to the Pāndyan capital, corroborates the date of 5114 BCE, further validating the findings of this research.

Verifying the Ramayana date: The Puranic king list of the Ikṣvāku dynasty

The Purana-s provide a crucial checkpoint for dating the Ramayana through the Ikṣvāku king list, extending from Rama to Brihadbala. A comparative analysis of this list across several Purana-s reveals a consistent, sequential lineage with minor discrepancies. With a maximum of 32 kings and an average reign of 60 years, the time gap between the Ramayana and the Mahabharata is estimated to be less than 2000 years, providing a vital clue for establishing the historical timeline of the Ramayana.

The table in Figure 7, prepared from Vishnu Purana (4-22), Vāyu Purana (2-26), Bhāgavata Purana (9-12) and Shiva Purana (5-39) reveals a consistent list of 32 kings following Rama, without interruption. Other Purana-s, including Skanda Purana, Agni Purana, Padma Purana, and Brahma Purana, also provide lists of kings between Rama and Brihadbala, with fewer than 32 names. Collectively, these Puranic accounts suggest a relatively consistent 2000-year gap between the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Figure 7: The King-list of Ikṣvāku dynasty from Rama to Brihadbala

Flaws in previous Ramayana dating theories

Despite the presence of internal evidence, such as the reference to the Pāndyan capital providing an upper limit for the Ramayana’s date, and the Puranic list indicating a less than 2000-year gap between the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, researchers have either inflated or downplayed the date. The following list presents the proposed dates by various researchers:

1.     Nilesh Oak – 12,209 BCE

2.     Vedveer Arya – 5674 BCE

3.     Pushkar Bhatnagar – 5114 BCE (10^th January)

4.     Dr. Saroj Bala – 5114 BCE (Replicated Bhatnagar’s)

5.     Dr. DK Hari & Dr. Hema Hari – 5114 BCE (Replicated Bhatnagar’s)

6.     Jijith Nadumuri Ravi – between 1950 BCE and 1850 BCE

These researchers relied on astronomy simulators that utilize the shifting zodiac, rather than the fixed sidereal zodiac employed by Vedic society. Astronomy simulators are not designed to pinpoint the Pancānga features such as tithi and star or Adhika māsa and Nija māsa. Furthermore, their studies were marred by several critical errors:

Ø  Failure to address the tithi-star mismatch

Ø  Inaccurate planetary positions at Rama's birth

Ø  Incorrect calculation of Rama and Sita’s ages at marriage

Ø  Misinterpretation of the asteroid hit before war with Khara as a solar eclipse

Ø  Inability to accurately recreate the 21-day war period as given by Valmiki

Notably, Pushkar Bhatnagar incorrectly identified the asteroid hit described in the Ramayana as a solar eclipse. Ironically, this very asteroid hit provides a crucial scientific corroboration for the date of the Ramayana, offering a significant breakthrough in verifying the epic's historical timeline.

Scientific evidence for the date of the Ramayana

Similar to the Mahabharata, the Ramayana also references nimitta-s (ominous signs) in various contexts. Notably, it describes the effects of an asteroid hit in 18 verses of the 23^rd chapter of Aranya Kanda, specifically in the context of the war with Khara. Unfortunately, Pushkar Bhatnagar misinterpreted this event as a solar eclipse.

The corresponding year being 5078 BCE, it was found imprinted in the GISP2 graph indicating a cosmic impact that is accompanied by a decrease in global temperatures (Figure 8).

Figure 8: GISP2 graph showing a steep decline on 5078 BCE

Graph credit: Joachim Seifert, climatologist

The steepness of the decline suggests that the impact was catastrophic. This scientific evidence corroborates Ramayana’s account of an asteroid hit, providing a remarkable verification of the epic's historical narrative. The Ramayana narrative indicates that the asteroid hit was audible to Rama and Khara in Panchavati (present-day Nashik). This suggests that the impact region was in close proximity. A search revealed impact craters near the Trimbakeshwar temple, within a 40 km radius of the proposed site of the Rama-Khara war (Figure 9).  This event has been recorded in the international Catalogue of Impact Structures, mentioning three meteor craters near Trimbakeshwar tempe¹⁶. Despite the catalogue suggesting a likely date of 3100 BCE, additional geological analysis is warranted, as the site’s features align with descriptions in the Ramayana and corroborate the GISP2 graph indicating an impact event.

Figure 9: Probable impact craters (indicated by black arrows) near Trimbakeshwar temple

Picture credit: Google map

Sea level maps reveal timing of Ram-Setu inundation

Further evidence supporting the historicity of the Ramayana comes from sea level maps related to Ram-Setu. These maps indicate that the Setu, a natural land bridge connecting India and Lanka, was inundated approximately 7000 years ago. This timing suggests that during Rama's era, the land bridge was inundated necessitating the construction of a bund to facilitate crossing. This is revealed in the sea level maps created by Glenn Milne published by Graham Hancock.¹⁷

Figure 10 shows the maps found in Hancock’s book (Underworld, p. 262-263). The land connection remained above sea level until around 7700 years ago, after which it began to submerge gradually over the next 800 years, becoming fully submerged by 7000 years ago.

 

Figure 10: Sea level maps

Picture credit: Hancock (2002)¹⁷

This serves as one of the pieces of evidence supporting the dating of Rama’s period to around 7000 years ago.  Further corroboration comes from ISRO scientists, led by Dandabathula, who utilized NASA's ICESat-2 satellite to map the waterway's depth¹⁸. Their findings reveal a maximum depth of merely 3 meters, with breaches in the bund at 11 locations. This supports Al Beruni's description of Setubandha as “isolated mountains between which the ocean flows,”¹⁹ during his time about 1000 years ago.

The illustration in Figure 11, from the ISRO research paper, provides a visual representation of Ram Setu. Figure a in the illustration displays the satellite image of the visible portions, while Figure b presents the elevation map, where '0' denotes the sea surface. The map reveals scattered landmasses above the sea surface, intersected by narrow channels with a maximum depth of 3 meters, likely caused by erosion from seawater. The extent of erosion could have been less pronounced when Rama attempted to traverse this section.

Figure 11: Illustration of Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) by ISRO scientists

(a)  Satellite image showing the exposed sand banks along the Adam’s Bridge crest line.

(b)  The Elevation profile along Adam’s Bridge’s crest line shows narrow channels up to a depth of 3 m.

Picture credit: Figure 5 in Dandabathula et al. 2024¹⁸

Further cross-validation was conducted using global sea level maps prepared by scientists at Pennsylvania University²⁰, as illustrated in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Sea level map

Picture credit: The Pennsylvania State University²⁰

Sea level rise maps prepared by the scientists of The College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University for the period of last 20,000 years, reveal that the sea level was 3 meters lower than today's level precisely 7,000 years ago. This finding is corroborated by Graham Hancock’s Sea level maps. The data suggests that the necessity for constructing a bund between India and Lanka emerged approximately 7,000 years ago, remarkably aligning with the Ramayana's estimated timeline.

Conclusion

The dating of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana has long been a subject of debate, but a clearer understanding is emerging as the Mahabharata provides definitive internal evidence, especially through four verses referencing the 35-year gap between the Mahabharata war and Krishna's departure from the world. This evidence, retained in collective memory and reflected in the native Kali Yuga calendar, firmly anchors the date of the Mahabharata at 3136 BCE. A crucial element in this dating is the loss of a tithi due to a simultaneous impact on both the Earth and the Moon, a factor that must be accounted for to reconcile the mismatch in the star-tithi of Rama's birth. Further examination of the internal reference to Pāndya’s Kavātam establishes a limiting date for the Ramayana. By addressing the shortcomings of previous researchers’ dates, the birthdate of Rama is firmly set at January 9, 5114 BCE, as determined by the Pancānga features of an astrology simulator. Additional evidence, such as the asteroid impact preceding the Khara war and the depth of Ram Setu, offers further validation. These insights, thoroughly analyzed in my upcoming book¹², contribute to the understanding of the chronological framework of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana and pave the way for a deeper appreciation of their place in history.

References

1. Harivamśa. (Trans). Chapter 53. An account of Santanu’s family.

2. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam. The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, Inc. https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/

3. Wilkinson, L. (Trans). (1861). Siddhānta Śiromaṇi. The Baptist Mission Press. Calcutta.

4. Ganguli, K.M. (Trans). (1883 - 1896). The Mahabharata. https://sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm  

5. Saranathan, D.J. (2021). Did the Cosmic impact described in the Hindu Epic Mahabharata cause the Piora Oscillation? Academia Letters, Article 1385. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL1385

6. Saranathan, Jayasree. Dr. (2021). Mahabharata 3136 BCE: Validation of the Traditional Date. Rathna Offset Printers. Chennai. ISBN: 978-93-5779-786-3

7. NASA Hubble Mission Team. (2021). Comet Atlas May Have Been a Blast from the Past. https://science.nasa.gov/missions/hubble/comet-atlas-may-have-been-a-blast-from-the-past/  

8. Quanzhi Ye et al. (2021). Disintegration of Long-period Comet C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS). I. Hubble Space Telescope Observations. AJ 162 70. DOI 10.3847/1538-3881/abfec3

9. Kareta, T., et al. (2025). On the lunar origin of near-Earth asteroid 2024 PT5. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 979(L8). https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ad9ea8

10. Hemphill, Brian. (2020). Who Were the 'Massacre' Victims at Mohenjo-daro? A Craniometric Investigation. 10.2307/j.ctv19vbgkc.18.

11. Rao, D. H. (Trans). (1998). The Valmiki Ramayana. https://www.valmikiramayan.net/     

12. Saranathan, Jayasree. Dr. (2024-25). Ramayana 5114 BCE. ISBN: 978-93-340-8461-0 (Unpublished)

13. Nakkīrar. Irayanār Agapporul. (Tamil Sangam text). Sarada Publications. Chennai.

14. South Indian Inscriptions: Vol IV, copperplates from Sinnamanur, Tirukkalar, and Tiruchchengodu. (1929). p.451. https://archive.org/details/dli.csl.7342/page/n12/mode/1up

15. Rao, D.H. (Trans). (2010). Raghu Vaṁśam. https://sanskritdocuments.org/sites/giirvaani/giirvaani/rv/sargas/06_rv.htm  

16. Mikheeva, A. V. The Complete Catalog of the Earth's Impact structures. (Last update: 2025) http://labmpg.sscc.ru/impact/index1.html

17. Hancock, G. (2002). Underworld: The Mysterious Origins of Civilization. Crown edition.

18. Dandabathula, G., Ghosh, K., Hari, R. et al. (2024). Physical features of Adam’s Bridge interpreted from ICESat-2 based high-resolution digital bathymetric elevation model. Sci Rep 14, 14896 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65908-2

19. Sachau, Edward. C. (1910). Al-Biruni’s India: An Account of the Religion, Philosophy, Literature, Geography, Chronology, Astronomy, Customs, Laws, and Astrology of India about 1030AD. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd, London. p.209.

20. The College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ )