since when Indo-Aryans started to burning their Dead instead of burying ?

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,525
Australia
Ho-hum ... I guess I will have to explain it step by step to you ;

What did you find strange in my response?
That I asked you what you thought

and your response was "When did I say that ?"

I never said that you said anything , I was asking what you thought .

If you dont know whats wrong with that .... :eek:

Split? My son remained in India, my nephew went to US. Wherever their livelihood took them
Good for them ! Now, about the 'Indo-Iranian split ' .....
. Indian Aryans were not even aware of what was happening back in Central Asia.
So ? I was asking about BEFORE there where ' Indian Aryans ' , they where 'Indo- Iranians' and they lived in Central Asia
There is no mention of Zoroaster's monotheism in any of the Indian scriptures.
Why would they be ? Its Immaterial to my question anyway .
The non-violent 'Great war of Religions' in India was between Vedic religion and indigenous beliefs.
But I am not talking about that, I was talking about the Great war of religion which was violent that the Zoroastrians note.

I think the issue is that you guys in India see everything as Indian. Again, I cite academic opinion Deva / Daeva

Daeva, the Iranian language term, should not be confused with the devas of Indian religions. While the word for the Vedic spirits and the word for the Zoroastrian entities are etymologically related, their function and thematic development is altogether different. The once-widespread notion that the radically different functions of Iranian daeva and Indic deva (and ahura versus asura) represented a prehistoric inversion of roles is no longer followed in 21st century academic discourse

and I cite this especially for you , because ..... its from Wiikipedia
The indigenous beliefs won without a single drop of blood being spilled. Yes, they had overwhelming numerical superiority. I do not really differ from your last statement in the above post. But remember, the IE mythology and language did not come just to India and Iran. It spread all over Europe. Therefore, it must have been prior to all splits (therefore, the Kurgan or Arctic theories). It was not something that came up in Central Asia. Central Asia was not the IE Urheimat.
I agree, but you find it in RigVeda (+/-1,000 BCE).
"The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?"
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.
I should have known all this was about trying to worm your way back to the Arctic .
 
Last edited:

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,525
Australia
Just check wiki properly, please

BMAC ranges from 2300 to 1700 BC whereas Sintashta Arkaim is 2100 to 1800 BC

Very clearly BMAC started before Sintashta

I've no idea why you keep pushing the opposite idea that is simply not correct

Just because you're devoted to Tilak's idea doesn't mean real evidence lines up with his theory. It simply doesn't
This is curious isnt it ?

Many a time I have pointed out to our dear Aupy that BMAC is a culture that evolved there in that area, it wasnt a culture transported from the Arctic, the Steppe or anywhere else. It was a blend of indigenous Central Asians, Iranaian migrating tribes and, I believe, some IVC input. I also stated that when people from the north came into Central Asia and encountered and melded with BMAC culture WHICH WAS ALREADY THERE , (it is postulated that ) this blending created the 'Indo-Iranian Aryan' culture . (I realise the terms are not good and somewhat confusing for some , in this case, there already was some Iranian and Indian Influence but no 'Aryan ' influence when BMAC was first was formed .

Many people play this type of lineal 'hop-scotch', especially where human migrations are considered ; Arctic ... Sintasha ... Andronovo .... BMAC ... these are cultures, not just locations of 'a people' on the move. A more realistic view is a to and fro, give and take blending of cultures and people .

AND ... I berated Aupy for not knowing this about BMAC and he mildly chastised me for it, saying he was still learning about it . So, I thought he now knew and accepted this , but now he seems to be 'back on the horse' .... or polar bear , it may seem .

Wait ! Maybe that explains how the IE migrated all over the place BEFORE they had the horse ? ... especially to Russia !


:)



1548973019970.png
 
Last edited:
Likes: Kadi
Jul 2017
510
Sydney
This is curious isnt it ?

Many a time I have pointed out to our dear Aupy that BMAC is a culture that evolved there in that area, it wasnt a culture transported from the Arctic, the Steppe or anywhere else. It was a blend of indigenous Central Asians, Iranaian migrating tribes and, I believe, some IVC input. I also stated that when people from the north came into Central Asia and encountered and melded with BMAC culture WHICH WAS ALREADY THERE , (it is postulated that ) this blending created the 'Indo-Iranian Aryan' culture . (I realise the terms are not good and somewhat confusing for some , in this case, there already was some Iranian and Indian Influence but no 'Aryan ' influence when BMAC was first was formed .

Many people play this type of lineal 'hop-scotch', especially where human migrations are considered ; Arctic ... Sintasha ... Andronovo .... BMAC ... these are cultures, not just locations of 'a people' on the move. A more realistic view is a to and fro, give and take blending of cultures and people .

AND ... I berated Aupy for not knowing this about BMAC and he mildly chastised me for it, saying he was still learning about it . So, I thought he now knew and accepted this , but now he seems to be 'back on the horse' .... or polar bear , it may seem .

Wait ! Maybe that explains how the IE migrated all over the place BEFORE they had the horse ? ... especially to Russia !


:)



View attachment 15314
Wow! The polar bear looks hilarious :D
 
May 2013
1,600
The abode of the lord of the north
Just check wiki properly, please

BMAC ranges from 2300 to 1700 BC whereas Sintashta Arkaim is 2100 to 1800 BC

Very clearly BMAC started before Sintashta

I've no idea why you keep pushing the opposite idea that is simply not correct

Just because you're devoted to Tilak's idea doesn't mean real evidence lines up with his theory. It simply doesn't
Actually I don't think people consider BMAC to be entirely indo-iranian from the beginning. It's a local culture. Its later stages are associated with Indo-Iranian presence
 
Likes: specul8
May 2013
1,600
The abode of the lord of the north
I think the issue is that you guys in India see everything as Indian. Again, I cite academic opinion Deva / Daeva

Daeva, the Iranian language term, should not be confused with the devas of Indian religions. While the word for the Vedic spirits and the word for the Zoroastrian entities are etymologically related, their function and thematic development is altogether different. The once-widespread notion that the radically different functions of Iranian daeva and Indic deva (and ahura versus asura) represented a prehistoric inversion of roles is no longer followed in 21st century academic discourse
Few people actually believe a sect of tribe split from vedic religion during the late vedic times and created the entire old iranian religion. I know the split is more older and basic in nature than Talageri wants it to be. However, if there is one thing the genetics has been asserting all these while, it is that people have been moving around always. It is thus possible that there might have been multiple migrations into and from India to Iran even during the established vedic culture, influencing each other. It doesn't mean people from one civilization branched out and created the other entirely. In fact I apologize if I ever made it sound like that.
 
Likes: specul8

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
4,990
New Delhi, India
I think the issue is that you guys in India see everything as Indian.
No, I don't see the Indo-Iranians who remained in Central Asia as Indians. Only those Indo-Iranians/IE people, who crossed the Suleiman mountains and settled in India became Indians (you see, not all people might have come through Khyber pass. After all, till the time of Alexander the whole Afghanistan area was known as Ariana. Alexander established Alexandia Arianne near Herat. Indo-Iranians were around Kandhar and Lashkargah also. They named Argandhab as Harahvaiti. They might have come through the other passes - Bolan, Gomal, Tochi, etc.).
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,525
Australia
Few people actually believe a sect of tribe split from vedic religion during the late vedic times and created the entire old iranian religion. I know the split is more older and basic in nature than Talageri wants it to be. However, if there is one thing the genetics has been asserting all these while, it is that people have been moving around always. It is thus possible that there might have been multiple migrations into and from India to Iran even during the established vedic culture, influencing each other. It doesn't mean people from one civilization branched out and created the other entirely. In fact I apologize if I ever made it sound like that.
I was speaking generally to people who did not realise this . Even Viktor Sarianidi, made some wrong assumptions ; he thought he found some mixing bowls and implements, remarkably intact with dried substances in them, which he said was soma residue, proving the Aryan connection.

But much later they where tested and they showed they where some other substance .
 
Likes: Ajathashatru
May 2013
1,600
The abode of the lord of the north
I was speaking generally to people who did not realise this . Even Viktor Sarianidi, made some wrong assumptions ; he thought he found some mixing bowls and implements, remarkably intact with dried substances in them, which he said was soma residue, proving the Aryan connection.

But much later they where tested and they showed they where some other substance .
In fact, it will be hard to conclude the presence of Aryans just from archaeological sources using their religious POV. They didn't build temples or likewise permanent structures for prayers.


See this documentary. It was shot on 1976, in my district, where an ancient vedic practice called 'Atiratram' still survives. Watch as they destroys everything related to the ritual at the end of it. Even Altars would be removed afterwards IIRC.
 
Likes: specul8

Similar History Discussions