Vanaras in Ramayana was in fact an Neanderthal men?

Vanaras are one of the most important characters in Ramayana. As described in Ramayana, Vanaras are special species that looked like monkeys. But Ramayana never mentions Vanaras as monkeys. These species were dominant in the southern part of India and rules South India including Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia Indonesia, etc.

What does Vanara mean?
Vanara is a Sanskrit word having two-part “Van” means “Forest” and “Nara” which means “Human” so the literal meaning is “humans who lived in the forest”. Vanaras were definitely not monkeys since the monkey is called Vankapi / Kapi or Markata in Sanskrit.

Why finding evidence of Neanderthal man is difficult in India?
Archaeological and Scientific Revolutionary studies say Neanderthal was a species that inhabited Europe, Africa, and Western Asia starting some 2,30,000 years ago. Neanderthal man had hyoid bones, which enable them to speak and look like humans very closely. Though some evidence of Neanderthal man was found in Indus Valley Civilization. As Indians follow a very long cultural tradition of burning bodies after death, no matter, if they were animals finding any solid evidence of ancient times is not so easy. Besides, bones in the Indian peninsula decay in a few thousand years, which makes it even more difficult to find traces of Neanderthal man in India.

The description mentioned in Ramayana matches with the anthropological modern-day descriptions of Neanderthals accepting the features of the tail. Both Vanaras and Neanderthal have sloping foreheads, hairy bodies, protruding jawbones, etc. The reason why modern-day anthropologists didn't find the tail was because the tail of Vanaras was boneless and hence decomposed within a few years. If you read the description of Vanaras Kingdom, Kishkindha, then you will find that it clearly resembles a network of connected underground mountain caves. This is what the modern-day anthropologist say about Neanderthal men who lived in caves. Obviously, Vanaras were physically different than Manavas, that is human. But definitely, they were not monkeys.

Actually, the issue with most historians and anthropologists is that, because Vanaras don't exist in present times, they are trying to visualize Vanaras in terms of something they know or have seen and have compared them with Homo Erectus and Neanderthals man. Maybe they were a different species altogether. Evidence from Ramayana that Vanara was a Neanderthal man. According to Ramayana Vanaras existed all around the world but were dominant in the Kishkindha kingdom, near Hampi in Karnataka.

The head of Vanaras, kings Sugriva summons Vanaras from all over the world to join Lord Rama. When Rama decided to attack Lanka Vanaras came from regions like Himalayas Vindhyas in Madhya Pradesh, Meru in Tibet, etc. Valmiki also explicitly stated that Vanaras came from far places where the sun always shines or is always set which is the Polar region. Since no evidence of Vanaras was found anywhere in the world. Valmiki clearly stated that Vanaras have traits of monkeys. He referred to members of Vanaras army as Kapi Kunjra which in Sanskrit means elephant size monkeys. He also said that Vanaras were not like the normal small monkey but a different species of monkey, having a strong physique and traits of monkeys like the neanderthal man.

Ramayana also says about the bear-like man, Yetis. In Ramayana, there is a mention of a bear-like man Jambavan who is similar to Yetis in other parts of the world. Yetis are also known as snowmen and said to be found in the icy regions of the world. there are many stories based on such characters, though no fossils had been found to prove their presence. In Sanskrit, a bear is called Bhaluka and hence Jambavan was definitely not a bear but resembles very closely bears just like Vanaras resemble monkeys.