> --- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> >as is the fact that nearly all the major rivers of Afghanistan
flow
> >into Hamun-e Helmand, which therefore fully deserves the
designation
> ><samudrá-> 'the meeting of waters' (*som-udró-).
VA: Really? Harirud does not flow into the Hamum. Nor does the only
LARGE RIVER of Afghanistan, the Oxus.
There is no reason why the IA would cross Sindhu, Asikni, Vitasta,
Vipas (earlier name ' Urunjira' per tradition), Purushni
(later 'Iravati'), Devika (an dried up rtibutary of Purushni),
Sutudri (later renamed to 'Satadru' after it braided into multiple
channels)...before they would find a river that they could finally
name as Sarasvati.
Is the 'Sarasvati' attestation earlier or is Haraxvaiti earlier?
What are the 'Aryan' features of the culture in Helmand basin? Except
for one report that mentions horse bones (just a mention), ALL OTHER
EXCAVATION reports clearly state that no horses are found in the
region at those archaeological levels.
And when compared to even Ravi (the smallest river of the Indus
system, contributing only 3.5% of the total water flow of the
system), even Helmand is a stream.
BTW, why would Indo-Iranians wait to reach Helmand before coining the
word 'Samudra', when Ural Sea, Caspian, Balkash were much
larger 'samudras'?
And, don't you think that going from Central Asia to Helmand (on
Iran/Afghanistan border), and then move up the Helmand valley, and
then make a right turn through Bolan into forbidding Baluchi areas,
cross the trans Indus desert, and then cross Indus, and then manage
to transform all language X speakers over an area of 2 millions sq
km, without leaving any proof, or even a mention in their religious
corpus, is asking for too much??
Sincerely, Vishal