Irwanto’s research methodology on Sundaland, Atlantis, The Land of Punt, Taprobana and Aurea Chersonesus is multidisciplinary and data-driven, combining geographic information system (GIS) mapping, bathymetry, topography, and paleo-environmental reconstructions. He generates maps of Sundaland during different periods of the Last Glacial Maximum and Younger Dryas by analyzing sea-level changes, river flow patterns, watershed boundaries, sedimentation, and coastal processes. This involves reconstructing ancient landscapes and river systems from elevation data (such as GTOPO30 grids), geological history, and underwater topography.

He also incorporates archaeological, paleontological, and genetic data to trace human migration and the rise of early civilizations in the region. Irwanto uses legends, linguistic studies, and mythology to complement scientific data, decoding cultural archetypes and linking them with physical evidence. His approach includes fieldwork, hydro-engineering principles, and semiotics in analyzing ancient civilizations, integrating both natural phenomena and human history to build a comprehensive picture of Sundaland as the cradle of civilization.

This methodological framework allows Irwanto to propose timelines, reconstruct ancient settlements, and connect geological events with mythological narratives like Atlantis.

Irwanto uses a research methodology that incorporates semiotics, linguistics, orders of signification, and reconstruction models to analyze and decode ancient historical narratives like Atlantis. He employs a multidisciplinary framework that combines historical texts, semiotic analysis, and linguistic studies to interpret signs, symbols, and mythological references embedded in ancient sources.

His approach aims to move beyond literal readings by understanding the layers of meaning (signification) within myths and historical accounts, reconstructing possible realities and cultural contexts behind symbolic expressions. This semiotic and linguistic framework is integrated with geological and archaeological data to create a comprehensive historical reconstruction model.

Irwanto’s recent work explicitly elaborates on this methodology, proposing analytical models that systematically decode the “signs of the past” to reconstruct lost civilizations like that of Atlantis in the Java Sea region.

The core steps in Irwanto’s semiotic methodology for historical texts, as outlined in his recent research, include the following:

1. Collection of Primary Sources: Gathering myths, legends, ancient texts, inscriptions, archaeological artifacts, and symbolic records.
2. Semiotic Decoding: Applying semiotic models such as Peirce’s triadic model (representamen, object, interpretant), Saussure’s dyadic model (signifier and signified), and Jakobson’s communication functions to decode narratives and symbolic structures.
3. Barthesian Orders of Signification: Analyzing texts and symbols on three levels—denotation (literal meaning), connotation (cultural/emotional meaning), and myth (broader ideological meaning)—to uncover layered cultural meanings.
4. Cross-validation: Triangulating the semiotic interpretations with archaeological, linguistic, ethnographic, climatological, and geographic evidence to validate findings.
5. Reconstruction Models: Using models like Potsherds (fragmentary evidence), Anastylosis (partial restoration), and Puzzle (synthesis of dispersed data) to rebuild coherent historical narratives.
6. Iterative Refinement: Continuously refining interpretations based on convergence of multi-disciplinary evidence (principle of consilience) to strengthen the robustness and reliability of the reconstruction.

This framework treats myths and ancient texts as structured sign systems preserving historical memory, using semiotic and linguistic decoding combined with scientific evidence to transform symbolic narratives into plausible historical realities.

Summary table of semiotic frameworks applied:

This semiotic-linguistic integration allows for a rigorous interdisciplinary approach to decode and reconstruct ancient civilizations such as Atlantis and Sundaland.

Irwanto decides between potsherds, anastylosis, and puzzle models based on the nature and completeness of the available evidence:

• Potsherds model is used when evidence is fragmentary and scattered, like broken pottery shards or isolated archaeological finds. It involves piecing together these small, dispersed clues to infer a larger historical picture.
• Anastylosis model applies when partial but substantial remains exist, allowing partial restoration or reconstruction of a site or artifact, akin to reassembling a monument or structure from its surviving pieces.
• Puzzle model is employed when various types of evidence—archaeological, linguistic, geological, mythological—are dispersed and diverse, requiring synthesis to form a coherent historical narrative.

Irwanto’s choice depends on how direct, complete, and diverse the data sets are. When evidence is highly fragmented, the potsherds approach is appropriate; when remains are more intact, anastylosis fits; and when multiple evidence types must be integrated for holistic reconstruction, the puzzle model is used. This flexible methodology allows him to adapt to different research situations and richness of available data to reconstruct ancient civilizations and histories.

Irwanto handles conflicting evidence between models through a process of cross-validation and iterative refinement, where conflicting data from different models or sources are carefully examined for reliability and context. He weighs the completeness, consistency, and support from multidisciplinary evidence—archaeology, linguistics, geology, mythology—when deciding which model or interpretation has stronger support.

Conflicts are not discarded outright but become opportunities for deeper analysis, prompting reevaluation of assumptions or incorporation of additional data. This process is aligned with the principle of consilience, seeking convergence from independent evidence. When conflicts are significant, Irwanto may use an integrative approach to synthesize different viewpoints or indicate uncertainties rather than forcing a single interpretation.

This methodology ensures transparency and robustness by balancing different lines of evidence, prioritizing triangulated data, and acknowledging ambiguities that need further research or validation. Irwanto handles conflicting evidence between models by carefully weighing the reliability, completeness, and multidisciplinary support of each piece of evidence. Instead of discarding conflicts, he treats them as opportunities for deeper investigation and refinement of hypotheses. He applies cross-validation with data from archaeology, linguistics, geology, mythology, and other fields to seek convergence and consistency (principle of consilience).

When conflicts persist, he may synthesize differing perspectives or explicitly highlight uncertainties rather than forcing a single conclusion. This iterative and integrative approach ensures transparency, robustness, and adaptability in reconstructing historical narratives from incomplete or contradictory evidence.

Contextual stratigraphy is fundamental in Irwanto’s research as it provides the geological framework to correlate sedimentary layers with timelines and environmental changes in Sundaland. It helps him understand the sequence of land formation, sediment deposition, and subsequent flooding events which are essential to reconstructing when and how ancient civilizations thrived and were eventually submerged.

Using stratigraphic data, Irwanto can:

• Situate archaeological sites and cultural layers within a precise temporal context.
• Integrate geological events like tectonic movements and sea-level changes with human history.
• Cross-validate historical reconstructions with sedimentary and fossil evidence.
• Refine his models of Sundaland’s evolution by comparing stratigraphic layers and fossil records across the region.

Thus, contextual stratigraphy guides Irwanto’s choice of reconstruction models and supports his proposals linking geological and cultural developments in Sundaland’s history, ensuring that interpretations remain consistent with the region’s complex geotectonic and sedimentary record.