<b>The Proto-Vedic Continuity Theory of Bharatiya (Indian) Languages</b>
<b>S. Kalyanaraman and Mayuresh Kelkar</b>
(October 2005, Yugabda 5106, Deepavali)
<b>http://protovedic.blogspot.com/</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But the Greeks clearly distinguished themselves from both northern and southern barbarians [17] and the evidence from the Greek physiognomists cannot be used to postulate preference for a "northern European physical type", especially when we read that (Polemon, Physiognomica, 8.11-13): Blond [CANQH=] and whitish [U(PO/LEUKOS] hair, like that of Scythians signifies stupidity [SKAIO/THTA], evilness [KAKO/THTA], savagery [A)GRIO/THTA] And when we read (Pseudo-Aristotle, Physiognomica): The people whose eyes are light blue-grey [GLAUKOI/] or white [LEUKOI/] are cowards [DEILOI/] " (Posted on May 24, 2005 msg# 4398 on Yahoogroup Austronesian, by Oppenheimer)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->According to Beekes (1995, p. 45), "Linguistic information offers us no basis for determining the moments of time at which the Indo-European peoples began to inhabit the areas which would later become the areas where they settled. Evidence for this must come from archaeology (as related by Smit 2001).â <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Archaeological evidences point to the continuity of the Vedic civilization from deep antiquity in the landmass that referred to by historians as Greater India (Akhanda Bharatam). âOn the other hand, there is a clear case of cultural continuity, not only at Mohenjoâdaro but also at other Harappa Culture sites. Commenting on this issue, Lord Colin Renfrew (UK) avers: âIf one checks the dozen references in the Rigveda to the Seven Rivers, there is nothing in any of them that to me implies invasion. ⦠Despite Wheelerâs comments, it is difficult to see what is particularly nonâAryan about the Indus Valley Civilization.ââ
http://www.geocities.com/ifihhome/articles/bbl002.html
Archaeologist Kenoyer (2005) notes:
âSome of the technologies, architecture, artistic symbols and aspects of social organization that characterized the first urban centers of the Indus Civilization have continued up to the present in the urban setting of traditional South Asian cities.
âSome of these misconceptions are that the Indus urban society was the result of colonization from Mesopotamia to the west (in modern Iraq); that it appeared suddenly from unknown origins; that is was a strictly uniform culture ruled by a priest-king from two major capitals; and then disappeared, leaving no influence on later cultural developments.â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The lingua franca used in the discourses of great savants, Mahavira and Gautama the Buddha in Ardhamagadi (or Suraseni Apabhramsâa) and Pali which are variant dialects of Prakrit (or mleccha) also attest to the parallel phases of evolution of spoken dialects together with the language used in vedic texts. Mleccha (Meluhha) is attested as a language in the Mahabharata, wherein Yudhishthira and Vidura converse in this language discussing the technical details of non-metallic and other killer devices of the laakshaagriha. A language substitution of the imagined scale by invading or migrating âaryanâ pastoral tribes is clearly unlikely given the stage of evolution of bharatiya languages which were the vehicles for expressing profound aadhyaatmika thought and expounding on sanatana dharma (or what the Buddha called esha dhammo sanantano). There is a possibility that there was a continuity of mleccha-samskr.tam in a cultural continuity from Paleolithic to metal ages (both bronze on Sarasvati-Sindhu river basins and iron smelting on Ganga river basin). This continuity is the generally accepted pattern of history. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Talageri (2000) has convincingly shown that the contact between Indians and Iranians has occurred on the Indian subcontinent only.
âThe evidence of the hymns of the Early Period of the Rigveda, as we have already seen, locates the Indo-Iranians further east: i.e. in the area from (and including) Uttar Pradesh in the east to (and including) the Punjab in the west. It is not, therefore, Central Asia, but India, which is the original area from which the Iranians migrated to their later historical habitats (Talageri, 2000).â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is also the weighty evidence that Dardic is original to Kashmir in India with secondary spread east into the hindu kush . Also the only explanations for presence of Bangani, Sinhala, and Tukharian is as remants from earlier outmigrations.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Section 9.10: What language did the neolithic-chalcolithic people of Bharat speak?
While substantial linguistic analytical work needs to be done to identify the language of Paleolithic times, it may be possible to arrive at Proto-Vedic language patterns based on a comparative study of the proto-versions of present-day languages of sapta sindhu region. Some archaeological leads are available related to Neolithic times. Archaeologist BB Lal has provided some archaeological perspectives related to the saptasindhu region (which he calls northwest South Asian region), starting from Neolithic times, from seventh millennium BCE:
"The evidence from the excavations at Mehrgarh (Jarrige) has demonstrated that the north-western part of the Indian subcontinent had reached a Neolithic, i.e. settled agricultural stage, by the seventh millennium BCE. Here it may also be emphasized that the Mehrgarh Neolithic complex stands in marked contrast to that of Western Asia. For example, whereas in the West Asian Neolithic there is the domination of sheep and goat amongst the domesticated animals and of wheat amongst the cultivated cereals, in the Mehrgarh context the cattle dominated over other animals and barley over other cereals. Thus, the Mehrgarh Neolithic has its own identity, having no generic relationship with its West Asian counterpart. In other words, the Mehrgarh people were the "the sons of the soil".Further, there is a continuous story from the succeeding chalcolithic level onwards, taking us through various evolutionary stages to the Early Harappan from which there emerged the Harappan Civilization itself, around the middle of the third millennium BCE. Again, after a thorough study of the human skeletal remains, Hemphill and his colleagues (1991) have shown that there was a biological continuity right from 4500 BCE to 800 BCE. A question may now be posed: "What language did these chalcolithic people speak?" Though the Harappan script has not yet been deciphered, in spite of so many tall claims, we have yet another way of tackling the issueâ¦an in-depth study of the literary-cum-archaeological-cum-hydrological-cum-radiocarbon evidence duly establishes that the Rigveda (which, to recall, speaks of the Sarasvati as a mighty river) must antedate ca 2000 BCE. By how many centuries, it can be anybody's guessâ¦Putting together the various parts of this jigsaw puzzle, it would mean that if the Vedas reflect the literary counterpart of the Harappan archaeological complex, the Harappans spokes a language called Sanskrit. And since the Harappan Culture had its roots going deep at least into the fifth millennium BCE, it would imply that the Sanskrit-speakers were there in this area as early as that. âFurther, had the Sanskrit-speaking people not been the original inhabitants of this region, we would have got evidence thereof in terms of a substratum language, which we really do not have. The presence of a few Dravidian words in the Vedas can be explained by an adstratum and not necessarily by a substratum. As xplained elsewhere by the present author (in press), the Harappans came in lateral contact with the
Southern Neolithic people who, in all probability, were speakers the Dravidian languageâ¦
ââ¦another homeland has been suggested, âsomewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdianaâ by Johanna Nichols (1997, a and b). From this homeland, Nichols holds, there was a spread of the Proto-Indo-European language to the area surrounding the Aral Sea and on to the Caspian. From there a two-fold spread has been envisaged: a major one to the areas lying to the north of the Caspian and Black Seas and thence to Europe, and a comparatively minor one along the southern side of these seas, also reaching Europe via Anatolia, from the southern end. However, a more noteworthy point in Nicholsâ schema is that there was only a language-spread and not a migration of peopleâ¦Nicholsâ model, proposed only recently, has yet to be fully evaluated by linguists.â [Excerpt from Chapter V 'The homeland of indo-european languages and culture' in: B.B. Lal, 2005, The homeland of the aryans, evidence of rigvedic flora and fauna and archaeology, Delhi, Aryan Books international, pp. 63 to 84, [Based on Paper presented at a seminar organized by the Indian Council for Historical Research on the same theme in Delhi on 7-9 January 2002].
Malloryâs observation is apropos: âOne does not ask âwhere is the Indo-European homeland? But rather âwhere do they put it now?â â
The possibility of Bactria-Sogdiana being the center from which Proto-Vedic languages differentiated into Avestan, and many European languages/dialects, Vedic, Samskr.tam, Prakrit (Mleccha, Munda, Dravidian) has to be studied further by following up on the studies which indicate a Munda (Austric) presence in the region west of Sarasvati Civilization on Sarasvati-Sindhu doab.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The discontinuity at 4500 BC is known to be due to a change in internal subsistence patterns (diet, etc), according to Vishal Agarwal.
<b>S. Kalyanaraman and Mayuresh Kelkar</b>
(October 2005, Yugabda 5106, Deepavali)
<b>http://protovedic.blogspot.com/</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But the Greeks clearly distinguished themselves from both northern and southern barbarians [17] and the evidence from the Greek physiognomists cannot be used to postulate preference for a "northern European physical type", especially when we read that (Polemon, Physiognomica, 8.11-13): Blond [CANQH=] and whitish [U(PO/LEUKOS] hair, like that of Scythians signifies stupidity [SKAIO/THTA], evilness [KAKO/THTA], savagery [A)GRIO/THTA] And when we read (Pseudo-Aristotle, Physiognomica): The people whose eyes are light blue-grey [GLAUKOI/] or white [LEUKOI/] are cowards [DEILOI/] " (Posted on May 24, 2005 msg# 4398 on Yahoogroup Austronesian, by Oppenheimer)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->According to Beekes (1995, p. 45), "Linguistic information offers us no basis for determining the moments of time at which the Indo-European peoples began to inhabit the areas which would later become the areas where they settled. Evidence for this must come from archaeology (as related by Smit 2001).â <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Archaeological evidences point to the continuity of the Vedic civilization from deep antiquity in the landmass that referred to by historians as Greater India (Akhanda Bharatam). âOn the other hand, there is a clear case of cultural continuity, not only at Mohenjoâdaro but also at other Harappa Culture sites. Commenting on this issue, Lord Colin Renfrew (UK) avers: âIf one checks the dozen references in the Rigveda to the Seven Rivers, there is nothing in any of them that to me implies invasion. ⦠Despite Wheelerâs comments, it is difficult to see what is particularly nonâAryan about the Indus Valley Civilization.ââ
http://www.geocities.com/ifihhome/articles/bbl002.html
Archaeologist Kenoyer (2005) notes:
âSome of the technologies, architecture, artistic symbols and aspects of social organization that characterized the first urban centers of the Indus Civilization have continued up to the present in the urban setting of traditional South Asian cities.
âSome of these misconceptions are that the Indus urban society was the result of colonization from Mesopotamia to the west (in modern Iraq); that it appeared suddenly from unknown origins; that is was a strictly uniform culture ruled by a priest-king from two major capitals; and then disappeared, leaving no influence on later cultural developments.â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The lingua franca used in the discourses of great savants, Mahavira and Gautama the Buddha in Ardhamagadi (or Suraseni Apabhramsâa) and Pali which are variant dialects of Prakrit (or mleccha) also attest to the parallel phases of evolution of spoken dialects together with the language used in vedic texts. Mleccha (Meluhha) is attested as a language in the Mahabharata, wherein Yudhishthira and Vidura converse in this language discussing the technical details of non-metallic and other killer devices of the laakshaagriha. A language substitution of the imagined scale by invading or migrating âaryanâ pastoral tribes is clearly unlikely given the stage of evolution of bharatiya languages which were the vehicles for expressing profound aadhyaatmika thought and expounding on sanatana dharma (or what the Buddha called esha dhammo sanantano). There is a possibility that there was a continuity of mleccha-samskr.tam in a cultural continuity from Paleolithic to metal ages (both bronze on Sarasvati-Sindhu river basins and iron smelting on Ganga river basin). This continuity is the generally accepted pattern of history. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Talageri (2000) has convincingly shown that the contact between Indians and Iranians has occurred on the Indian subcontinent only.
âThe evidence of the hymns of the Early Period of the Rigveda, as we have already seen, locates the Indo-Iranians further east: i.e. in the area from (and including) Uttar Pradesh in the east to (and including) the Punjab in the west. It is not, therefore, Central Asia, but India, which is the original area from which the Iranians migrated to their later historical habitats (Talageri, 2000).â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is also the weighty evidence that Dardic is original to Kashmir in India with secondary spread east into the hindu kush . Also the only explanations for presence of Bangani, Sinhala, and Tukharian is as remants from earlier outmigrations.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Section 9.10: What language did the neolithic-chalcolithic people of Bharat speak?
While substantial linguistic analytical work needs to be done to identify the language of Paleolithic times, it may be possible to arrive at Proto-Vedic language patterns based on a comparative study of the proto-versions of present-day languages of sapta sindhu region. Some archaeological leads are available related to Neolithic times. Archaeologist BB Lal has provided some archaeological perspectives related to the saptasindhu region (which he calls northwest South Asian region), starting from Neolithic times, from seventh millennium BCE:
"The evidence from the excavations at Mehrgarh (Jarrige) has demonstrated that the north-western part of the Indian subcontinent had reached a Neolithic, i.e. settled agricultural stage, by the seventh millennium BCE. Here it may also be emphasized that the Mehrgarh Neolithic complex stands in marked contrast to that of Western Asia. For example, whereas in the West Asian Neolithic there is the domination of sheep and goat amongst the domesticated animals and of wheat amongst the cultivated cereals, in the Mehrgarh context the cattle dominated over other animals and barley over other cereals. Thus, the Mehrgarh Neolithic has its own identity, having no generic relationship with its West Asian counterpart. In other words, the Mehrgarh people were the "the sons of the soil".Further, there is a continuous story from the succeeding chalcolithic level onwards, taking us through various evolutionary stages to the Early Harappan from which there emerged the Harappan Civilization itself, around the middle of the third millennium BCE. Again, after a thorough study of the human skeletal remains, Hemphill and his colleagues (1991) have shown that there was a biological continuity right from 4500 BCE to 800 BCE. A question may now be posed: "What language did these chalcolithic people speak?" Though the Harappan script has not yet been deciphered, in spite of so many tall claims, we have yet another way of tackling the issueâ¦an in-depth study of the literary-cum-archaeological-cum-hydrological-cum-radiocarbon evidence duly establishes that the Rigveda (which, to recall, speaks of the Sarasvati as a mighty river) must antedate ca 2000 BCE. By how many centuries, it can be anybody's guessâ¦Putting together the various parts of this jigsaw puzzle, it would mean that if the Vedas reflect the literary counterpart of the Harappan archaeological complex, the Harappans spokes a language called Sanskrit. And since the Harappan Culture had its roots going deep at least into the fifth millennium BCE, it would imply that the Sanskrit-speakers were there in this area as early as that. âFurther, had the Sanskrit-speaking people not been the original inhabitants of this region, we would have got evidence thereof in terms of a substratum language, which we really do not have. The presence of a few Dravidian words in the Vedas can be explained by an adstratum and not necessarily by a substratum. As xplained elsewhere by the present author (in press), the Harappans came in lateral contact with the
Southern Neolithic people who, in all probability, were speakers the Dravidian languageâ¦
ââ¦another homeland has been suggested, âsomewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdianaâ by Johanna Nichols (1997, a and b). From this homeland, Nichols holds, there was a spread of the Proto-Indo-European language to the area surrounding the Aral Sea and on to the Caspian. From there a two-fold spread has been envisaged: a major one to the areas lying to the north of the Caspian and Black Seas and thence to Europe, and a comparatively minor one along the southern side of these seas, also reaching Europe via Anatolia, from the southern end. However, a more noteworthy point in Nicholsâ schema is that there was only a language-spread and not a migration of peopleâ¦Nicholsâ model, proposed only recently, has yet to be fully evaluated by linguists.â [Excerpt from Chapter V 'The homeland of indo-european languages and culture' in: B.B. Lal, 2005, The homeland of the aryans, evidence of rigvedic flora and fauna and archaeology, Delhi, Aryan Books international, pp. 63 to 84, [Based on Paper presented at a seminar organized by the Indian Council for Historical Research on the same theme in Delhi on 7-9 January 2002].
Malloryâs observation is apropos: âOne does not ask âwhere is the Indo-European homeland? But rather âwhere do they put it now?â â
The possibility of Bactria-Sogdiana being the center from which Proto-Vedic languages differentiated into Avestan, and many European languages/dialects, Vedic, Samskr.tam, Prakrit (Mleccha, Munda, Dravidian) has to be studied further by following up on the studies which indicate a Munda (Austric) presence in the region west of Sarasvati Civilization on Sarasvati-Sindhu doab.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The discontinuity at 4500 BC is known to be due to a change in internal subsistence patterns (diet, etc), according to Vishal Agarwal.