Quick wins for a faster PC:
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →
ThatPainter is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn More
A carved slab from Burzahom in Kashmir shows a hunting scene beneath two bright forms. Some researchers have proposed that the forms record a supernova, but the carving has not been established as the oldest depiction of one. Other interpretations read the forms as a double-star system or as two suns marking stages of a hunt.
What does the Burzahom carving show?
The UNESCO/ICOMOS–IAU heritage study describes a carved stone slab measuring 48 × 27 cm, associated with an archaeological phase dated to 2125 BC. It depicts a hunting scene with two bright forms above it. The scene and forms are visible features; what they mean is disputed.
The slab is associated with Burzahom, an archaeological site in Kashmir. Its setting matters to the debate: the figures can be read as celestial objects, but they also appear within a scene that may carry its own symbolic narrative.
Why have some researchers proposed a supernova?
A 2018 report by The Indian Express attributed a supernova interpretation to researchers led by Hrishikesh Joglekar. The report gives their proposed observation date as around 4,500 BC. On that reading, the two bright forms are part of a record of an unusual celestial event.
#1 Best Overall
- New
- Mint Condition
- Dispatch same day for order received before 12 noon
- Guaranteed packaging
- No quibbles returns
That proposal is not a settled identification. The report is secondary coverage, and its account does not provide the primary paper or detailed methods needed to assess how the proposed event was matched to the carving. It is therefore more accurate to say the slab could depict a supernova than to call it a confirmed supernova record.
What are the other interpretations?
A double-star system
The UNESCO/ICOMOS–IAU study says the two objects have been assumed to represent a double-star system. That is a celestial reading, but it does not by itself identify a supernova or establish that the carving records a particular astronomical event.
Two suns in a hunting story
An IGNCA-hosted discussion interprets the forms as two identical suns. In this reading, they symbolize the beginning and culmination of a hunt that involved two days. This explanation treats the forms as elements of the hunting scene’s symbolism rather than as a record of a specific astronomical event.
These interpretations are not equally demonstrated conclusions. The available accounts establish that different readings have been proposed, but do not provide enough primary research detail to decide conclusively whether the forms represent celestial bodies, symbolic suns, or something else.
Rank #3
How old is the carving?
The date most securely attached to the slab in the heritage study is 2125 BC, the date of an archaeological phase associated with it. That is a contextual phase date, not a direct date for the engraving itself. The around-4,500 BC date in the supernova report is a proposed observation date attributed to Joglekar and colleagues, not an independently verified date of the carved slab.
The two dates should not be merged into a single established chronology. The available sources do not resolve why the proposed observation date is earlier than the archaeological phase associated with the slab, or whether either date directly dates the act of carving. A 2013 Journal of Archaeological Science article about a different Indian petroglyph site noted, in its own publication context, that no Indian rock-art image had then been directly and accurately dated using radiometric techniques. That observation is not direct evidence about Burzahom, but it underscores why site chronology and direct dating of an image should not be treated as interchangeable.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What would settle the question?
To distinguish the proposed readings, researchers would need to establish how the shapes relate to the carving’s scene and whether the celestial interpretation fits the proposed event and chronology. The evidence summarized in the available sources does not settle those points. In particular, a contextual date for an archaeological phase cannot on its own confirm the date of the carving, and identifying two bright shapes as celestial does not alone demonstrate that they depict a supernova.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
