Prem Kumar wrote:1) Is AV the only observation that gives a 4000 BCE or earlier date range for MB? You'd mentioned that some other observations in Bhishma Nirvana also independently push MB date to "no later than 4000 BCE"
No, AV is not the only observation that puts lower limit of 4508 BCE on the timing of Mahabharata War.
Set of observations (23+) related to Bhishma Nirvana also puts a lower limit of 4700 BCE on the timing of Mahabharata war.
i.e No Mahabharata war anytime after 4508 BCE!
2) This is a question of semantics rather than astronomy. If MB date was 5561 BCE, then A was walking ahead of V continuously for 5000+ years prior to that. So, why would this be called an "anomaly" or a "bad omen"?
People calling AV observation 'anomaly' or 'bad omen' is due to one of the following reasons...
A: Sheer idiocy, careless and casual statement without bothering to do their homework, blind repetition of what some other researchers have said, which in turn (by other researchers) for the following reasons
B. To hide their inability to explain AV observation
C. To push their own claim for the year of MBH war, in spite of their failure to explain not only AV but numerous other astronomy observations.
D. Envious that someone else figured it out, while they were busy pushing their false dates on gullible indic crowd for years..
E. Many more along these lines. I can go all the way to Z, based on direct personal experience.
On the other hand, MBH text is not saying anything of the effect that "Suddenly A has started walking ahead of V" at the time of MBH war.
All it is doing is listing numerous astronomy observations (very ordinary - phases and positions of the moon, eclipses - positions of planets -Saturn (3 descriptions), Jupiter (3 descriptions), Mars (6 descriptions), Venus (3 descriptions), Mercury (3 descriptions), descriptions of seasons and what not.
The word employed is 'Nimitta" means signals, signs, omens etc.
What you asked above is FAQ and I have addressed it numerous times in multiple places....
Only as an illustration....https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02 ... habharata/
You will find many more articles at my blog site (the link above)
3) As far as "later interpolations" are concerned, is it possible that the "A walking before B" observation was passed on as "tribal knowledge" from say 4500 BCE till say 3000 BCE. Say MB happened in 3500 BCE. And MB story was composed around 3000 BCE (I am just making dates up). Is it possible that Vyas (or someone later), introduced this "A walking before B" as a bad omen warning to Dhritharasthra because they remember the "tribal knowledge" and inserted it into the story?
Of course, anything is possible. But then, someone has to make it possible. There is so much that will (and does) go against such a possibility, that if someone is willing to build such a hypothetical case and a theory and a proposal, I would be happy to shred it into pieces in no time. I hope someone takes this seriously and does it.
BTW, many have asked me this question before and I have encouraged them to build their theory/proposal along these lines. So far, no takers.
You may want to read (you may have already read it) my response to Shri A Gupta ji few pages where I mention that I have entertained 'back calculations' possibility (What you are suggesting is carrying old memories and using them in the future.. memories of 5561 BCE in 3000 BCE).
Either of such possibilities have so many problems associated with it (based on evidence from ....you name the field....archaeology, astronomy, anthropology, geology, hydrology, oceanography, climatology......etc.) that it would be real fun, if truly someone takes on such a challenge.
BTW, these challenges are in addition to numerous other challenges that would come from textual evidence of additional ancient narratives (Harivamsha, other Puranas, numerous references of Mahabharata text, beyond 215+ astronomy references not taken into account until now...because there was no need for it).
Hope this helps...