While I agree to your first statement. Following Tilak, I think RigVeda goes to ice-age period. But it it was composed in India, it should not have mentioned: 1. 30-day dawns, 2. Seven suns and the eighth born unformed, 3. Navagwahas and Dashagwahas (priests completing their sacrificial cycle in nine or ten months) and 4. 'Ati-Ratra' (Greater Night), still forming a part of Hindu rituals.
I may also add that no auspicious marriage dates are available in August and September 2019 (Tara dooba). Taking into consideration the slippage of seasons due to precession of equinox, that probably indicates the Arctic night period, when our Aryan forefathers too considered it inauspicious. Grandpa Bhishma waited for the month of Magha to come before he chose to die. And Ahur Mazda asked his people to preserve the body of the dead in a ditch before continuing the death rights when spring came. Of course, the seasons have changed since then. But, unfortunately, all these things do not matter to OIT people. You need to read and understand Tilak.
Man, give me a break from your thirty-day dawn repetition. It is not a thirty days worth of dawn. On numerous occasions I told you that this is a total butchering of text, and the actual meaning is repeating dawns (remember the word Shashwathha?). What has slippage of seasons to do with any Arctic? The astronomical phenomenon of slipping of seasons is totally applicable to a country like India where the entire Rig Veda was composed.
The more I know about Tilak's fantasies from you, the clearer it is that he butchered our revered texts.
there are dravidian adivasis, again why? since dravidians were actually from indus civilization and moved south
there are indo aryan adivasis practicing animism, again why? indo aryan were supposed to be of vedic heritage, there are both indo aryan adivasis in the north, for instance kalash people, and south india for example warli people.
there are austroasian adivasis, again, Austronesian are said to have originated in taiwan or east asia not india.
not to mention there are tibeto burman adivasis from nagaland, again why? arnt they suppose to have arrived few hundred years ago?
in srilanka there are adivasis who speak supposedly indo european language or language isolate, not dravidian, not Austronesian etc
my question is if slowly indo european converted into iranian or indo aryan moving east, how did tocharians ended up in east central asia, why not europe?
there is also another branch of indo iranian called Nuristani branch, again, if indo aryan were vedic, and iranian were zoroasterian and both of them had scriptures, what about niristani people, what scriptures did they have?
there are iranian people called Ossetians and have completely diff religion which doesnt allign with any iranian religion like zoroasterian, there are also Yezidis who are not related to any iranian religions.
when it comes to srilanka, again i think there has been no migration, Sinhalese branch is considered part of southern indo aryan, this branch is geographically connected if we connect maldives, lakshadweep and konkan coast, it makes sense how sinhalese is part of srilanka. The BS that sinhalese came from east bengal is debunked by the language categorization alone, which is southern indo aryan. We also have andhra people who were indo aryan, i dont know what is the prakrit categorization of andhra/ satavahana people
there are so many linguistic factors alone which have the potential to completely dump this BS migration theory.
.. and so, the 'NEW' thread on Central Asia fades into obscurity as it was actually only about the same old arguments with the same old people holding the same old opinions.
Curious thing is, it happened before ;
Same wrong info was surfacing (about Central Asia ), I challenged it , I was dismissed about that as it didnt fit in with some prejudices. So I put up the proof, and 'admonished' some a bit. The response was ; okay, its not like I know everything, I am still learning .
So I was slightly admonished . And accepted that.
But months later, it all starts again .. same old stuff again. Now, I mention that at least some progress was made last time, as the info I posted was accepted into the 'knowledge framework' of the subject. But now, all of a sudden , it has been 'forgotten' .
So I post the info again (last page ) .... and the result ?
No comment .
This part of the forum isnt really about history is it ? Come on guys ...... you know it !