New thread on Aryans in Central Asia

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,379
Australia
It is about Aryans in Central Asia. Taittiriya Samhita/Aranyaka/Brahmana were basically written in Central Asia prior to 2,000 BCE, - it is mentioned that the rains came there around Autumnal equinox and not in July an August as it happens in India.
They were IE people and knew themselves as Aryans. The Greek branch took the name west, lost the intervening 'r', and became 'ionians'. 'Aryan' - 'r' = 'Ayan'.
Yes, before the coming of IE people, many regions had their own cultures like Cucuteni-Trypillia culture in Moldova.

'The region' I was referring to is Central Asia and the cultures there . It doesnt include C-T or Moldova . I do realise that IE people did not bring the first culture to Central Asia :rolleyes: in fact, I think I eductaed YOU on that subject ?
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,739
New Delhi, India
Specul8, don't say IVC. By the time Aryans came into India, IVC had folded up in Punjab and had moved East.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,739
New Delhi, India
I think I educated YOU on that subject ?
Did you? If the IE were migrants to Central Asia (IMV, from Astrakhan, Seroglazovka culture, Volga delta, oldest IE culture mentioned in Wikipedia, 7,000 BCE), naturally, they would have displaced/influenced the local cultures.
Then you would have to show how Aryans existed in Russia.
Arkeim and Minusinsk are supposed to be IE cultures, but that came at a very late stage (extensions of Samara culture). During the ice-age, IE people may have come down from Kama/Volga valleys.

 
Last edited:

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,379
Australia
Specul8, don't say IVC. By the time Aryans came into India, IVC had folded up in Punjab and had moved East.
Yes, I should have said, " Your map shows an ingress from BMAC into IV ( and establishing 'Rigvedic Tribes there) .
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,379
Australia
Apparently not . :D


If the IE were migrants to Central Asia (IMV, from Astrakhan, Seroglazovka culture, Volga delta, oldest IE culture mentioned in Wikipedia, 7,000 BCE), naturally, they would have displaced/influenced the local cultures.Arkeim and Minusinsk are supposed to be IE cultures, but that came at a very late stage (extensions of Samara culture). During the ice-age, IE people may have come down from Kama/Volga valleys.

You are calling IE, Aryans ...again . (That was the point of my original comment, that you responded to with the above ^ )

IE peoples that came in from the north interacted with cultures already formed in the south (mostly with Iranian and Mesoptamian roots) both influenced each other making new cultures at various times. Out of that mix IN central Asia the concept of Aryan formed.
 
May 2019
51
Earth
Apparently not . :D




You are calling IE, Aryans ...again . (That was the point of my original comment, that you responded to with the above ^ )

IE peoples that came in from the north interacted with cultures already formed in the south (mostly with Iranian and Mesoptamian roots) both influenced each other making new cultures at various times. Out of that mix IN central Asia the concept of Aryan formed.
while Aryans who entered into India were certainly mixture of these groups their ancestral groups were from volga basin and they most likely looked like ancient people of volga basin.
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,569
USA
"There are many passages in the Taittirlya Sanhita, the Taittiriya Brahmana and other works where the Krittikas occupy the first place in the list of the Nakshatras. In the Taittiriya Brahmana (i. 1, 2, 1) it is distinctly stated one should consecrate the (sacred) fire in the Krittikas; .. the Krittikas are the mouth of the Nakshatras."

"Krittikasvagnimadadheeta l .. l Mukham va etannakshatranam l yat krittikaha l"

This shows that the first place given to Krittikas in the list of nkshatras is not accidental and we must at least suppose that the Krittikas were the "mouth of Nakshatras," in the same way as Vasanta or Spring was the "mouth of Seasons" or the Plahguni full moon the "mouth of the year." The phrase is the same in all places and naturally enough it must be similarly interpreted. .."

Taittirya Brahmana (11.2.6): "Mukham va etadritunam yadvasantah"
Taittirya Samhita (vii.4.8)

This is a preview of Tilak's discussion on Taittirya Samhita/Aranyaka/ Brahmana. I am not quoting the whole of it. But if you not just interested in debunking theories which differ from yours and want to investigate why Tilak dated these books around 2,000 BCE, then you are welcome to read his book, "Orion or researches into the Antiquity of Vedas" (page 39 onwards). It is a small book. The book can be down loaded in PDF format from The Orion : Tilak, Bal Gangadhar : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive.
I am not interested in debunking theories that differ from my view, but interested in debunking moronic theories such as Tilak's Arctic Aryans, AIT, so on and so forth.

Yes the mouth of the nakshatras was Krittika at one point of time and some other at some other time. All that was certainly relevant to India. What is Tilak's argument about this?
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,739
New Delhi, India
You are calling IE, Aryans ..again. (That was the point of my original comment, that you responded to with the above ^ )
IE peoples that came in from the north interacted with cultures already formed in the south (mostly with Iranian and Mesoptamian roots) both influenced each other making new cultures at various times. Out of that mix IN central Asia the concept of Aryan formed.
Yes, the Aryans were a branch of the IE people.
You are confused between the two migrations. 1. The older one, perhaps 12,000 years ago to escape the ice-age which took them to Kurgan region and Volga delta, 2. The later migration to North/East - Samara/Sintashta/Aral, that was some 3-2,000 years ago.
No mostly. IE (now Aryans) interacted with all people they encountered, Mesopotamians (Mittani), Indians and Iranians.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,739
New Delhi, India
Yes the mouth of the nakshatras was Krittika at one point of time and some other at some other time. All that was certainly relevant to India. What is Tilak's argument about this?
That was prior to 2,000 BCE. That establishes the antiquity of Taittiriya Samhita (Tilak differed here from the Indologists like Max Muller who claimed the 1,500 BCE date for Vedas).
As per archaeology of the region, Aryans probably came to India around 1,500 BCE. That is the date of Yaz Depe culture. They could not have come much earlier than that. Secondly, the beginning of the wet season around Autumnal equinox, which happens in Central Asia and not in India.
You have to connect one fact with another in historical research.

"The Yaz culture (named after the type site Yaz-depe, Yaz Depe, or Yaz Tepe, near Baýramaly, Turkmenistan, was an early Iron Age culture of Margiana, Bactria and Sogdia (ca. 1500–500 BC)."
Yaz culture - Wikipedia

 
Last edited: