The hypothesis of OIT is not of ONE migration - but that there were repeated migrations Westward and inconsequential conquests Eastward post-facto:According to the Book of Veles, in the 10th century BC ("thirteen hundred years before Ermanaric"), pre-Slavic tribes lived in the "land of seven rivers beyond the sea" (possibly corresponding to Semirechye, southeastern Kazakhstan). The book describes the migration of the Slavs through Syria and eventually into the Carpathian mountains, during the course of which they were briefly enslaved by the king "Nabsur" (Nabonassar?). They settled in the Carpathian mountains in the 5th century BC ("fifteen hundred years before Dir"). Several centuries appear to pass without much commotion. The 4th century is described in some detail: during this time the Slavs fought a number of wars with the Goths, Huns, Greeks, and Romans. Many references to Ermanaric and his relatives are present (placing this section of Book of Veles in the same historical context as the story of Jonakr's sons, referenced in numerous European legends and sagas). The Slavs eventually emerged victorious. The period of the 5th to 9th centuries is described briefly; Khazars and Bulgars are mentioned.
1. Sumerians and other Mesopotamians talkin of knowledge coming from the east - myth carried on to the three 'wise guys'' Maggi for infant jesus....
2. That the route was by both land and sea - the Middle East was more accessible by sea than by land due to not only geographic and climate related reasons, but also due to warring tribes and human greed and lawlessness in the badlands.
3. The history of migrations of the Dom, Lom and Roma - this is an area that GoI needs to pick up as there is lot of political benefits in doing so... but for this topic, these migrations are more recent sometimes in the late medieval period and should be documented and researched more than it has been...
4. These multiple migrations/conquests have occurred without the current religious, political and nationalistic overtones that has hindered real academic research. For example if a person from Patna migrates to Chennai or to Peshawar that is not a migration, but a resettlement in the Indian sub-continent. Whereas if the Iranians say they migrated from many lands, they are talking not or one person or one place, but having come from multiple places in droves to populate Iran. When the Slavs talk about migration, they are taking about people moving in droves alon earlier migrations that influenced the Greeks later.... see for example the close relation between the Greek myths and the Slavic myths. Another note here is the difference between the Slav/Greek and the Indian. For example Varuna (Orunos) is not castrated, etc. in the Indian version (please correct if there is some account of this that I am not familiar with...) However, there is reference to Indra having usurped power from him but need to juggle my brain/notes to get to it.