Tayi and Bayi

When I was going through the article on Swati Tirunal (see my previous post), what surprised me was the association of 'bai(bayi)' with the females of royal family. The term 'bai' is commonly found among Marathis. I guess the popularity or influence of the Maratha kingdom where the royal females had 'bai' attached to their name probably made this Malayali royal family to adopt the term as a honorific.

However, even though Marathi is an Indo-Aryan language, the root of 'bai' appears to be Dravidian (not a surprise as majority Marathis plausibly lapsed Dravidians). The term 'ayi' means she/mother. The masculine term is aya (Te: na+aayana -> my father). The masculine term for 'bai' is 'bua'/'bava'. I guess 'ua'/'ava' is more likely -ava/aya another Dravidian term for he/father.

In Kannada, aayi is mostly used in the formal term for mother, tayi -> tan (self) + aayi (mother). But what does the prefix 'ba' in Marathi mean? It doesn't seem Dravidian. Could it be some Indo-Aryan term meaning  self or my?

Update:
In Kannada and Telugu, the term 'bava' means cousin(male)/brother-in-law. What does the prefix 'ba' mean in Kannada and Telugu?

Sri in Malayalam and my great-great grandmother

Sri, the honorific addressing term in Sanskrit (equivalent to Mr/Ms in English), has its own forms in different Indian languages. In Tulu and Kannada, it's 'siri' though not used as a honorific (Sri is used instead), it's used in compound terms. In Tamil, it's 'tiru'. I was wondering about the equivalent in Malayalam.

My maternal great-great grandomother's -whose mtDNA and maternal lineage I carry- name was supposedly Chirudeyi (from an official record), where 'sri' is part of the compound name. However, her descendants remember her name as Chiridevi(Skt: Sridevi).

Now if I ask the Malayalis who speak the standard dialect they claim neither chiru nor deyi is part of Malayalam. I couldn't find any references online (where most of them use Sri).

One example I could refer was the name Swati Tirunal. Now, is that 'tiru' a Tamil import or part of Malayalam? If latter is the case, how about 'chiru'? If we consider my other relatives' pronunciation, chiri, which sounds closer to Tulu term 'siri' and the other part 'deyi' which is the same as Tulu equivalent of devi (devi -> deyi) then we can conclude that Malayalam 'tiru' became 'chiru' in region closer to Tulu. But my relatives use the Sanskrit term 'devi' instead. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Malayalm equivalent of 'devi'.

Gorakhanatha - a blast from the past

After I wrote “Tragedy of Mangale”, coincidentally, a person connected to the Natha cult is now in this region. The Gorakhnath Math is supposedly named after Gorakhanatha, the disciple of Machchendranatha, who spread the Natha cult in coastal region. Though as an independent movement it isn’t visible (I’ve heard there are few families part of this cult live in Tulu region), it’s supposed to have influenced Hinduism in this region(Malabar + Tulu). But what also fascinated me was how many religions and cults influenced this region in the past.

Like most of the regions in India or South India in particular, the dominant native cultural and religious trait of this region was spirit worship and fertility cults. But the literate superstitions of Hinduism, Jainism, Islam and Christianity soon dominated the illiterate superstitions of the Dravidian tribes subsequently also giving them different identities.

The most dominant religion, Hinduism, assimilated and made the spirits subordinate to their superior gods. The fertility goddesses were sometimes identified with the superior goddesses and at the same time were used to spread the patriarchal propaganda of ‘finding good husbands’. The core of Hinduism was imposition of the caste system, so it never had to confront the faceless cults of the local tribes.

Islam, which is the second biggest religion, didn’t really assimilate the local worship but turned blind eye to the spirit worship practices of the converts. Probably, the rise of fundamentalist Islam has moved the Muslims away from these traditions nowadays but in earlier times many of them used to be active participants. 

Jainism basically accommodated the spirit worship. It’s said that the “atheist” Jinaism had no issue with the worship of Yaksha-s and Yakshini-s (basically spirit worship). I don’t have much idea about this. 

The Dravidian Christianity is a very recent phenomenon in Tulu and northern Malabar region, so, I do not know much about them. But generally, Christianity frowned upon illiterate superstitions of the “pagans” and preferred their own literate superstitions.

Basically, two north Indian and two west Asian religions determine the religious identity of the people of this region. I wonder if that’s always the case with the spirit worshipping regions around the world.

I’ve read mostly about other Asian countries. It appears spirit worship in Mongolia, China and Japan lived along with Buddhism. However, in China the spirit worship tradition could become a literate superstition in the form of Taoism. Basically, Taoism includes the illiterate traditions along with philosophies. It looks like Chinese became literate and developed a philosophical tradition without any outside influence and that is reflected in their religious tradition too. 

Considering all four religions didn’t have to use force (though the caste system was imposition but the tribal chieftains/kings had typically invited the Brahmins), I wonder if there had been a literate tradition of the spirit worship whether there would have been a population with an independent identity like Taoists. Also, in spirit worship the priest/ess isn’t special or his/her position isn’t exalted. He/She’s just a medium for the spirit to communicate. This is unlike the position of the priests in literate religions. As literate followers, I wonder, how this idea of a commoner priest would have affected society in general.

Anyway, now north India’s literacy advantage is no longer there. So, any kind of overawe that the Dravidian tribes of the yesteryears felt is no longer the case. In fact, in literacy rate, the spirit worshipping and fertility cult regions of Tuluvas and Malayalis fare far better than the North. However, there are many ways to influence people. I wonder Adityanath’s chances in leaving a lasting impression here like the legendary Machchendra and Gorakha even though for entirely different reasons.

Blunders of Dravidian Movement

I think the Dravidian movement failed because of the following reasons.

1. Tamil centric political movement
     The movement didn't even spread to all the Dravidian regions and was confined to Tamil Nadu only. Instead of getting into politics, it should have become a social movement.

2. Lack of broader vision
     The Dravidian identity in those times was not just a linguistic identity but also was an ethnic identity. In this sense, it should have been pan-Indian movement encompassing all of the lower castes (OBCs and Dalits) of North India.

3. Misguided self-respect
    As long as self-respect meant rejecting humiliations heaped upon the castes by the purity-pollution rules, it was fine. However, when it became taking pride in your caste and thus developing a kind of tribal identity it became dangerous. The self-respect has turned into caste pride which has undermined homogenization process of Dravidian castes.

4. Quasi-patriarchal
     The leader of the Dravidian movement, E V Ramasamy, sent mixed signals on women's role. But it's still radical in those days. However, it doesn't seem to have changed much in case of Tamil society.

Notes on Dravidian Words - viii

Bathukamma is supposedly a unique festival of Telangana region. The term 'bathuku' refers to 'life' in Telugu. The equivalent Kannada word is 'baduku'. And here lies the mystery.

The native Dravidian terms that start with 'b' in Kannada should start with 'v' in Telugu. I wonder why baduku is an anomaly here.

The aspects of the festival are starkly patriarchal and resemble Indo-Aryan festivals like 'Karva Chauth' or 'Raksha Bandhan', generally, not found in Dravidian lands. This festival is restricted to only a section of Telugus.

There are two strange things here.
1. The word doesn't follow regular Dravidian sound changes between Kannada and Telugu
2. The aspects of the festival appear alien to Dravidian ethos.

I wonder whether the term 'baduku' is derived from an Indo-Aryan word. Tamil and Malayalam tend to nativize the terms. However, Kannada and Telugu aren't that fastidious. But what about the festival?

Classical Status for Malayalam

I came across this rather hilarious reason that supposedly clinched the classical status deal for Malayalam.

Mahadevan’s intervention on the Edakkal engraving was decisive in a way. He proffered the reading ‘pazhama’, meaning ‘antiquity’ in Tamil and Malayalam. Coincidentally, just about then, Kerala had set up an experts’ panel to make a case for classical status. Besides litterateurs like O.N.V. Kurup, it included linguist Naduvattom Gopalakrishnan. Now, he had just what he wan­ted. Zeroing in on ‘pazhama’, he ext­ended it, saying the prefixed string was not ‘Sree’ but the Malayalam ‘Ee’ (‘this’). Most advocated caution, Varier even called it a “dangerous interpretation”. But who was to argue against the tide of provisionist history! If you’re looking to prove your antiquity, what could be more fortuitous than to come across a petroglyph that proclaims, precisely, “O! This Antiquity” and putatively joins you to Indus cultures? It’s almost pluperfect: a past that talks of an older past. One neat standing jump on an Indus Valley zebu over the 1,500-year cutoff.

In fact, the author of the article mentions Tulu being left behind. But if Malayalis say 'This Antiquity' and get Rs. 100 crores classical status, Tuluvas can say 'pirak' (archaic/old) and claim the same. In fact, some of the Tulu enthusiasts have observed the origin of the word in the Indus valley region Pirak. Thus Tuluvas are also connected to Indus culture.

Anyway,drab I don't see any reason for not giving classical status to Tulu. 

Origins of Malayalis ?.3.0

Mappilas:
Except for an exotic community, Malayali Jews, there are hardly any population genetics studies on Malayali population in general. Even though many tribes in South India have been studied extensively, non-tribes are yet to be considered. Recently there was a study on Indian Muslim population which takes into account Malayali Muslim community, Mappila.

If you read the introduction to Mappila by the authors of the study then you feel the Tamil propaganda in full flow. Therefore, it is necessary to revisit my model of Dravidian civilization and the formation of various communities in South India.

In my opinion, Dravidian languages survived in South India mainly because leadership was still Dravidian. As the Dravidian tribes in Central India made transition to sedentary life, the communities were still controlled by the Dravidian chieftains. Of course, not all. The exception you can find in the only lapsed Dravidian region, Maharashtra. In that region the Dravidian tribes were controlled by the Indo-Aryan chieftains.

Generally, ruling classes change the linguistic identity of the population they control. The examples could be found in South India too.

In Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, the ruling classes of Muslims were non-Dravidian Muslims for a long period. As a result all Dravidian converts had turned into Indo-Aryans. Even in Tamil Nadu, a short span of non-Dravidian Muslim rule was enough to shift nearly half of the Muslim population to Indo-Aryan identity. However, in Kerala, Muslims were always under either Dravidian non-Muslims or Dravidian Muslim rulers. And they have retained their linguistic identity.

That's about linguistic identity retention of Dravidians in general and Dravidian Muslims in particular. I have previously discussed about Dravidian civilization and have argued that it's a synthesis of Dravidians and Prakrits from the beginning. Malayali Muslim community is not an exception to this rule.

The earliest Prakrit entrants to the Dravidian region were herders and merchant-artisans. This is the basis for my another argument for some of the Dravidian tribes in food abundant regions to make transition to matrilineal sedentary society(Tuluvas and Malayalis). The important factor is artisan-merchants and also priests may impart cultural motifs but they would not be influential enough to change the linguistic identity of the native population. Maybe a language can get the prestigious position in a society if it's part of the power circles. Nevertheless, synthesis could be seen in the emergence of the caste system in the native Dravidian region and  in the Dravidization of the assimilated Prakrit speaking brahmins and merchant-artisans.

The earliest Prakrit migrants would be from northern and eastern Indian (present day UP and Bihar) region, the centre of the Indian civilization. One would expect a high percentage of haplogroup R1a1 among these population. This is indeed the case with Mappilas.

Many Malayali communities were formed around the artisan-merchant guilds. The guilds which were initially formed in Prakrit speaking regions continued the motifs \of the earliest guilds of North India in South India. The guilds in South India of mixed Prakrit and Dravidian speakers exhibited native linguistic identity as the time passed. The castes of guilds in Andhra spoke Telugu, in Karnataka spoke Kannada, in Tamil Nadu spoke Tamil, in Tulu Nadu spoke Tulu and of course in Kerala spoke Malayalam. The migration to coastal Tulu and Malayali regions can be from either from west coastal route (Karnataka) or from Tamil Nadu. Couple of merchant guilds, Anju Varnam and Manigramam were native to Kerala region. Whereas, Valanjiar was probably a pan-Indian guild and a proof of the Prakrit migrations. Kannada term Banajiga, Telugu term Balanja (Balija), Tamil/Malayalam term Valanji are cognates with Indo-Aryan term 'Baniya'. These Prakrit or Prakrit derived terms are cognate with Sanskrit term Vanijya(trade).

As I have discussed previously many Muslim and Christian communities were formed around these merchant guilds. Since linguistic identity of these guilds were already Malayali, the immigrant Jewish, Christian and Arab merchants who assimilated with locals did not change the linguistic identity but profoundly changed the cultural identity.

Of course, the cultural identity overwrites all other identities, therefore, the popular identity of Mappilas was Arab. We can gauge the extent of Arab influence if we check the Y-haplogroup frequencies of Mappila from that study:

H1a: 22.5% - Dravidian
H2:     5% - Dravidian
J2: 10% (Dravidian if J2b)
J*(J1): 10%  - Arab
L: 10% - Dravidian
K: 5% - Dravidian
R1a1: 32.5% - Indo-Aryan
R2: 5% - Dravidian

As you can see, the Arab ancestry accounts for 10% of the population. The rest are Indian. By my estimation, 40% of them descendants of Prakrit speaking merchant-artisans and the rest 50% are native Dravidian tribes.

Reference: 
Traces of sub-Saharan and Middle Eastern lineages in Indian Muslim populations -Muthukrishnan Eaaswarkhanth et al. 2009
European Journal of Human Genetics (2010) 18, 354–363; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2009.168; published online 7 October 2009 

Notes on Dravidian Words - v

Vowel Ending:
Among South Dravidian languages Telugu and Kannada end their words with a vowel. However, Tamil and Malayalam lack it. Which is the proto-state?

If you consider English, until 14th century the ending -e was pronounced distinctly by the English. However, the later generations dropped it. But since spellings were standardized by that time, the written language still shows the words with -e ending. But it is clear that the old forms of languages generally tend to have vowel ending. Hence Kannada and Telugu have retained the older forms.

In the case of English, the time changed vowel ending. But in the case of Dravidian languages it is geography. Though it should be noted here that North Karnataka is more at ease with vowel ending than South Karnataka.

A View from the Origin

Runoko Rashidi on Indians

Reminded me an incident, that my dark skinned friend born into Kannada Brahmin caste told me with a roaring laughter. He and his friend, an equally dark skinned Tamil born into a non-Brahmin caste, were watching a Tennis match. The Tamil commented that he would like to see a Serena Williams win as she was also dark skinned like him.

But the most uncomfortable with dark skin lable must be females of the communities that became successful as a whole within few generations. If the success is gradual accompanied by lightening of skin tone in each generation, as many of the castes show, then one can overcome the stigma of dark and successful.

Notes on Dravidian Words - iia

In my previous post I mentioned about Yadava-Ideya connection based on Ravi Mundkur's post on their etymology. I think that is a mistake.

I was reading "Caste, Society And Politics In India From The Eighteenth
Century To The Modern Age" by Susan Bayly. According to her, Yadava identity of cowherds in north/east India is a recent phenomenon. During 19th century many castes tried to have a dignified identity for themselves in colonial India. Before nineteenth century cowherds were called Goala(Govala...literally cowherd) in those areas. In caste India, the name of the occupation also carries shame and can be used as an abusive word. Whatever the reasons the name Yadava is a new identity and can't be equated with Ideyar of South India.

However, this will change nothing in my arguments on the formation of Dravidian society. South Indian herders were also known as Golla traditionally (now many of them are taking up Yadava caste name). So that still shows continuity of Golla identity from north to south just like their R1a1.

Notes on Dravidian Words -iiib

Couple of examples on r->zh formation in the region of Tamil Nadu.

An Orissan inscription uses the term Tramira. In Tamil speech it has become 'Tamizh'.

Inscriptional evidences point out that Chola was derived from Chora. Tamil's have turned it into 'Chozha'.

In both cases, we can see r->zh sound changes in historical times.

Notes on Dravidian Words - iv

Present day Dravidian languages mostly use Sanskrit or Prakrit words for 'love' and derived words*. Of course, here by 'love' I mean attraction between man and woman. I was checking for native terms at Starling database.

The striking feature of all those terms is that they are observed mostly in South Dravidian literate branches.

Because of fixed mentality on part of many Dravidian linguists a single term 'ar' meaning love or desire has found three entries in dictionary, viz., DED 0281, 0301, 0381. I think Kota 'ayl' meaning twin does not belong there. Anyway, in my opinion r, L, zh are all sound changes of alveolar approximant r.

Then there are couple of entries that look intriguing.
1. Kadala(DED 1445): This is supposedly observed in SD languages. At present only Tamil uses it heavily in movies. I was reading an old Kannada work "Vaddaradhane". There I came across its usage in a sentence "paradana kAdalise paDuva magaM"(= son loved by the merchant). According to editor's note, Kadala is derived either from Sanskirt kAtara or Prakrit kAyara meaning lover, lovable or affectionate.

Vaddaradhane is a Jain work supposedly written by Shivakotyacharya. It is an Old Kannada work dated around 950CE. Jains heavily used Jain Prakrit (Magadhi Prakrit) terms in their works. As such Kannada works do show heavy influence in the literature. Though very few of them have become part of native parlance. And Kadala isn't part of spoken Kannada vocabulary.

Was Jain influence in native life (and not only in literature) stronger in Tamil region? Or a big chunk of Magadhi Prakrit speakers became part of Tamil speakers in the past? Anyway, I need more examples and probably native terms in Magadhi Prakrit regions of East India.

2. *par (DED 3964): I think the Telugu term 'perima' is too close to Sanskrit 'prema'. Either Telugu is a wrong addition to that list or again we have to check whether it's an adstrate effect because of assimilated Magadhi Prakrit speakers. Only tribal languages part of literate SD languages show these terms.

*Okay, now it's almost always the English word.

Notes on Dravidian Words - iii

Retroflex Approximant zh:
The retroflex approximant zha is as of now still pronounced by majority of Malayalis and few Tamils (Bhadriraju Krishnamurti)*. It is a rather intriguing sound found in old literature of SD languages. Some of my observations.

1. Present day written and spoken Telugu employs retroflex Da, Kannada employs retroflex La and Tulu employs alveolar(trill or tap ... no idea) ra

2. But many Nilgiri dialects and Malayalam spoken in Kasaragod and many Tamils employ palatal ya.

3. Generally, Telugus use Da, where you find SD-I speakers use La or Ra.
eg.
kOLi(Ka)kOri(Tulu)kODi(Te)kOyi (Kasaragod Malayalam)kOzhi(Standard Malayalam) (=chicken)

4. Present day Malayalis turn 'r' sound in foreign words into 'zh' sound.
eg. 1. Parsee is written/pronounced as Pazhsee.
2. University is written as Univezhsity.


Then what could have been the original sound? I used to think, because of my Kannada background, that is basically an exotic La because 'La' is used in Kannada where Tamil/Malayalam use 'zha'. However, I was told by a linguist that *zh sound must be constructed in SD/PD as a rhotic. Of course, this was before I carefully listened to Malayali pronunciation of 'zha'. Malayali pronunciation is exotic 'r'. And according to Wikipedia this is equivalent to present American English retroflex approximant 'r'(in some places). But in my opinion, Malayali pronunciation is retroflex palatal approximant(or exotic 'rya').

It appears AE retroflex r is an allophone of alveolar approximant r (Scottish English). Last night I was listening to this "500 miles" song(which kindled this entry). I thought "Lord" was pronounced like "Loyd" with palatal approximant y.
Listen to Petey, Paul and Mayi singing with the palatal approximant.


My construction of PD sound:
The original PD sound could have been alveolar approximant r. This we can observe in Tulu where alveolar trill or tap r is used. This alveolar approximant r gave rise to retroflex approximant r(zh) (in my opinion, retroflex palatal approximant r) which in turn gave rise to palatal approximant y. Therefore, all three are allophones.

alveolar approximant r -> alveolar trill/tap r (Tulu)
alveolar approximant r/alveolar trill/tap r -> retroflex approximant r/retroflex palatal approximant r -> palatal approximant y (Malayalam,Tamil, few other SD-I tribal languages)

During SD-I and SD-II split, alveolar approximant r, might have given rise to an allophone alveolar plosive d. Which became retroflex plosive in SD-II languages. But I think this should have happened with a big chunk of SD-I speakers too.

alveolar approximant r -> alveolar plosive d -> retroflex plosive D

The influence of geography changed retroflex plosive D into retroflex plosive L in Proto-Kannada.
retroflex plosive D -> retroflex lateral L

Migration to Tamil region:
Based on the above arguments, I would say the youngest Dravidian region, Tamil Nadu, had two defining migration patterns. The Proto-Tamils were mix of Proto-Malayalis (retained in allophones zh, y) and Proto-Kannadigas (retained in L). Standardization of written script probably happened in a region where Proto-Malayali migration was dominant. This script was probably became model for Proto-Kannada script too.

* There is a hilarious story about Malayali zh and Tamil zh. A southern Malayali chieftain was troubled by an unending Tamil migration to his region. He was scared that Malayalis would become minorities in that land. However, it was tough to block the migration as there was a lot of to-and-fro movements from Malayalis too. At the entry point of Tamil/Malayalam regions he created posts and put a 'chicken' test to incoming people. Every person who wants to enter Malayalam region had to pronounce kOzhi. According to the story, Tamils would pronounce it as kOLi (like Kannadigas) and would be turned back.

Acknowledgments:
My wife(the zha Malayali) who doesn't think 'lord' is 'loyd' in that song.

The Origins of Indians: Version 9.2

Formation of Dravidian Society:

The castes in the erstwhile South Indian society might not have indulged in an exclusive occupation. However, I would consider the dominant stereotypical view of their occupation as the defining identifiers of their group. The discussion is completely restricted to caste and tribal population for obvious reasons.

Cultivators:
The biggest groups in Dravidian societies are cultivators. They are either numerically the biggest or the second biggest in all the states. They may form monolithic group as in Karnataka and Kerala or diverse groups as in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. Generally, chieftains came from this groups. They may form 15-30% of total population in any state.

Toddy tappers:
In Malayalam and Tulu region they are the biggest group. In Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh they make up sizable part of the population. I believe in Kannada region their proportion in the population is not significant compared to other Dravidian regions(I may be wrong). Though originally made up of diverse groups now overall a monolithic group.

Herders:
I don't think in any of the states they make up even 10% of total population. Mostly, a single caste but there are exceptions, I suppose.

Fishermen:
I am restricting to only sea fishermen. May not form more than 10% in any state population. May or may not be single caste depending upon the region.

Artisans:
Except weavers numerically insignificant. Even weavers' distribution is uneven across the states and in no state form 10% of the population. Weavers are diverse groups but other artisans are generally a single caste group. Though it could be argued that all these smiths(goldsmith, blacksmith, carpenter etc...) were originally a single endogamous unit that turned into multiple castes in the course of time. Tanners are relatively big in Andhra region I suppose. However, in other regions their numbers are insignificant.

Agricultural Labourers:
Agricultural labourers may form 10-15% of the population.

Other Occupational Groups:
Among hundreds of other numerically insignificant occupational groups priests may form the biggest group at around 3-4% of population followed by merchants.

Tribes:
Tribes may form 3-4% the South Indian population. They are unevenly distributed with the highest concentration in Andhra Pradesh(6%) and the lowest in Kerala/Tamilnadu (1%).

Phase 1: Sea fishermen
In the first phase few people moved away from tribal life and became fishermen. It is possible that tribes and sea fishermen might have come to South India independently. The land fishermen were part of tribes. At the end of first phase we have;
1. nomadic land tribes 2. sea fishermen

Phase 2: Broken tribals Around : 3500 BCE -3000 BCE
This is sedentary civilizational phase for a section of population. A section of population took up farming. These are independent farmers cultivating small strip of land. A section within this took up toddy tapping because of unique South Indian geogrpahy. These are interdependent groups but cut off from organized tribal society. The civilized society of sedentary life did not form fully due to uncertainty of their occupations because of unique South Indian conditions. These are broken tribals without any organization. At the end of second phase we have;
1. nomadic land tribes 2. fishermen 3. farmers 4. toddy tappers

Phase 3: Feudal farmers Around : 2000 BCE- 1500 BCE
In this phase farmers from IVC started moving to South India. These highly organized advanced farmers found easy serfs in unorganized independent farmers. For protection these feudal farmers employed the service of nomadic but tightly knit land tribes. This phase also saw sedentary life of many land tribes. The contact with IVC farmers allowed them to appreciate the sedentary life of farming. This phase saw development of village organization with tribal chiefs as the heads.

This is a significant phase in South Indian society as the society experienced master-slave divisions. The serfs were mainly from independent farmers and to a lesser extent from toddy tappers.

I have discussed about the origin of the name Holeya previously. I need to make certain corrections here. In an earlier post I had predicted that erstwhile bonded labourers in Andhra region, Mala, might have got their name because of purity-pollution concepts. My argument was that if Holeya is from a Dravidian root meaning impure then 'Mala' may also follow the same logic. Then I found Stephen Fuchs' "At the bottom of Indian society" deriving the name in the same fashion.

But I could feel my logic for these groups might have worked in other way round too. I have noticed that only Brahmins in Kannada region derive the name from the root 'impure'. All other people derive it from the root 'field'(the one who works in a field). Again, Mala may have other roots. In Karnataka it is considered as a name of a tribe. Also, Tamil equivalent Pallar were supposedly called 'Mallar' (few centuries ago) showing their affinity with Mala in Andhra region. The place where 'Mala' meaning impure is attested is an old Telugu dictionary. That probably means identification of these two names with 'impure' was the handiwork of brahmins. Since other communities associate Holeya to field (hola in Kannada) I believe they were the earliest broken tribes who ventured into sedentary farming.

At the end of phase 3 we have;
1. feudal farmers from IVC and from land tribes(chiefs) 2. tribal soldiers 3. slave farmers 4. fishermen 5. toddy tappers 6. land tribes

Phase 4: Entry of IE herders Around: 1000 BCE
This period saw IE herders moving to South India. These herders assimilated many local tribes. However, many local tribes independently took up herding.
At the end of this phase we have;
1. feudal farmers 2. tribal soldiers 3. slave farmers 4. fishermen 5. toddy tappers 6. herders 7. land tribes

Phase 5: Entry IE guilds Around: 500 BCE - 0
By this time rudimentary civilization was taking shape in South India. This allowed entry of craftsmen and merchants to this region. Many tribals joined them or started their own guilds. The society until now only class based added one more divisive philosophy, the caste system, to it.

End of this period also saw entry of priests from eastern regions.
At the end of this phase we have;
1. feudal farmers 2. tribal soldiers 3. slave farmers 4. fishermen 5. toddy tappers 6. herders 7. craftsmen 8. priests 9. merchants 10. other occupational groups

Phase 6: 0 - 1900 CE
This period saw reorganizations of various groups according to caste rules. The tribal soldiers became part of various groups. The ruling classes saw north-Indian and non-Indian additions to their ranks.

At the end of this phase we have;
1. feudal farmers 2. independent farmers 2. slave farmers 3. fishermen 4. toddy tappers 5. herders 6. craftsmen 7. priests 8. merchants 9. other occupational castes

The Origins of Indians: Version 9.1

Dravidian languages:

The legacy of pseudo-scientific anthropometric studies of the past is still deep rooted in India (at least with people who are interested in history, anthropology...others don't count anyway). Many physical anthropologists had wild and free run classifying Indians. I strongly feel the whole field is absurd.

First of all, the stature and skull shape of Homo Sapiens have never been constant. It changes because of changing food habits and changing geographical conditions. Also, if you compare the present haplogroup clans with those 'racial groups' you can clearly appreciate the futility of whole exercise.

The popular understanding is simple. India was initially inhabited by short and dark Australoid. Most of them were massacred by more robustly built also dark Mediterranean Dravidians. These Dravidians were later subjugated by light skinned Aryans from Europe.

I don't want to go on discussing about these self-sustaining myths (or science at a particular point of time). I would like to make few observations for my group, Dravidians.

If you observe Central India then it must be evident that the Dravidian tribes have in fact recognized the Austro-Asiatic tribes' religious supremacy in the regions where those tribes are dominant. The priests who officiate rituals of Dravidian tribes are from Austro-Asiatic tribes. That probably shows higher level of society belongs to Austro-Asiatics than Dravidians.

Second, there is no Dravidian marker if you go by genetic studies. In fact, there is no uniform distribution of dominant male genetic lineages among three biggest Dravidian groups like Telugus, Tamils and Kannadigas. J2b, H , R2 and L all dominate among different groups. Compare this wih Indo-Aryan speaking population and Austro-Asiatic population. There you can clearly associate R1a1 with IE and O2a with Austro-Asiatics. But not in the case of Dravidians.

This is the precise reason I believe the Dravidian languages are part of South India since the beginning. In north India you can find isolated languages like, Nahali, Burushaski and probably now extinct Bhil language. But not so in the case of South India. Therefore, in my opinion, Dravidian languages have been sustained by Dravidian females through multiple male migrations. Any words related to West Asian languages may be just loans from later arrived males.

Ravi Mundkur blogs about a new study that talks about distinct Koraga(a tribe in coastal Karnataka region) language. But by my understanding it is impossible that south Indian tribes have ever lost their languages. It should be noted here that mainstream Dravidans(along with majority of Indo-Aryans in the north) have maternal lineages that they share with these tribes and not only that nearly 30% male lineages(Haplogroup H) too.

If Dravidian languages have been imposed by the newly arrived males (probably J2b who make up 15-20% of the population and who qualify as "Mediterraneans") then I find it difficult to explain distinct Dravidian language branches among central Indian tribes. Some of these tribes(also J2b is hardly observed among Dravidian tribes) are so remote(Bison Horn Maria) and until recent times were totally cut off from mainstream.

I would propose Dravidian languages are matrilineal.

Hart's Caste System - IV

Indian anthropological arena is infested by Philologists or Folklorists whose scientific temperament is suspect. I believe my particular scientific training as an engineer gives me particular insights which a pure humanist might not have. These imaginative and ideological Philologists like DD Kosambi, George L Hart have only managed to confuse rather than offering any concrete solutions.

Frogowellian arguments:
Menstrual blood:
As I have already pointed out Hart just does not want to go beyond Tamil region to compare the similar the cultural aspects. Of course, he goes beyond Tamil region but only to cover South India when it fits to his argument. Consider his footnote on menstrual blood taboo.

Though the segregation of women during their menstrual periods must have been
universal in South India during the time of the anthologies (as it is found in all South Indian cultures today and in medieval times),

Menstrual blood taboo is part and parcel of all West Asian derived pre-Christian religions like Judaism, Yazidi, Zoroastrianism and Caste system. I still believe ritualized menstrual blood taboo was first codified in West Asia though people living in present day India might have practicing it before entry of Indo-Turks (Y-Hg-R1a1 people also known as Indo-Europeans in popular literature) and Aryans (from Iranians/Caucasian lands). As Y-Hg-J2b appears to be older than any of those migrations.

Yazidis in Georgia have haplogroups K*,F*,P*,R2 and J2*. Though some have speculated Indo-Turk influence in Yazidi religion I rather believe it is built upon old West Asian beliefs. Lack of R1a1 in this highly endogamous community with caste like structure may show the oldest haplogroup distribution in that region before the advance of R1a1. But we need to check whether that J2* is entirely J2a or mix of J2a and J2b or J2b alone.

Now consider the exact word, pole, used by Hart to put forward his arguments.

This is what I found at Hobson-Jobson's dictionary;

HULLIA, s. Canarese Holeya; the same as Polea (pulayan) (q.v.), equivalent to Pariah (q.v.). ["Holeyas field-labourers and agrestic serfs of S. Canara; Pulayan being the Malayālam and Paraiyan the Tamil form of the same word. Brahmans derive it from hole, 'pollution'; others from hola, 'land' or 'soil,' as being thought to be autochthones" (Sturrock, Man. of S. Canara, i. 173). The last derivation is accepted in the Madras Gloss. For an illustration of these people, see Richter, Man. of Coorg, 112.]

I have already argued that we should restrict ourselves to the exact meaning of the word. In one of previous posts I mentioned about Mala in Andhra Pradesh equivalent to Holeya in Karnataka. In my opinion, the idea behind their designation must be the same. Hence I proposed it could have been derived from Sanskrit malIna meaning 'polluting'. Recently I was reading "At the botton of Indian society" (author: Stephen Fuchs). There Fuchs says;

An old Telugu dictionary derives Mala from maila, dirty. This sounds more appopripriate, for the Hindus consider the Malas as ritually impure

Now let us examine the relationship between pole meaning pollution and 'pole' meaning impurity due to menstrual blood and child birth. In Tulu, the word for former is pole and the word for the latter is pile. In Tulu too the word for the outcast is Poleya or Holeya showing the connection with the first word. But I am not in a strong ground here. According to Ravi Mundkur at Tulu Research, the word pole meaning pollution does not exist. I am following this database. Let us say pile is derived from pole. But that certainly shows the outcast Poleya has much to do with pollution than the menstrual blood (the uncontrolled thing that characterizes them). If there any strong correlation between menstrual blood and outcastyism is existed then it must have appeared in Tulu outcasts' identity. It should have been pileya and not poleya.

Polemics and Red herrings:
There is this idea going around that Brahmins' position was low in the early Tamil society. I wonder if Hart is responsible for that. He discusses about 'drum' the source of power and quotes;

...at that pindam [ball of sacrificial food] hard to get raised by the high one [uyarnton] to supplicate the god [in the drum, according to the old
commentary] wont to be hard in his might with mantras [mantiram] roaring
[i.e. shouted] out.

Then he discusses about the identity of 'high one' mentioned in that poem. He concludes that it must be a drummer whose status is higher than other drummers. In the run of the argument he discards Brahmins being high ones with an unqualified statement thus;

Brahmins are generally called Antanan and Parppan, not “high ones.”

.
So? Was a Paraiyan drummer ever called 'high one' until Hart zeroed in on him? Who qualified most for that at that time? Who do you associate most with 'pinda' and 'mantra'(hymn)? Anyway, I too talk about likely scenario therefore not really a strong point.

I still don't understand the necessity of this following paragraph;

If one uses purely economic criteria, then the high position and
influence of the Brahmins in later times must be mysterious, for it is not
clear that they had any tangible economic commodity or skill to offer.

Brahmins never really lived outside the village even when Hart believes they weren't at the top of the society. That argument reminded me something I read few years back. Those were words from an African though I don't remember the exact words and am writing them from my memory.

When the Whites came we hand the land and they had the Bible. They asked us to close our eyes and pray and said miracle would happen. When we opened our eyes miracle did happen. We had the Bible and they had the land.

Of course, Hart wants Brahmin to be non-high in the early Tamil society at any cost. He needs existence of caste in Tamil society based on certain other aspect (here controlled/uncontrolled power). Even when all his arguments are likelies/pluasiblies he makes a unequivocal statement in the end based on them.

As important as the Brahmins and the Brahmanical religion were, they were not the creators of the caste system in South India. They influenced the system profoundly, no doubt, but caste is found in most of its manifestations before the Brahmins became prominent.

Controlled and uncontrolled power:

Hart's arguments are centred around controlled and uncontrolled power. There were communities not really directly involved with possession and menstrual blood. These groups like leather workers and fishermen were confined to lower rungs all over India. But Hart tries to equate them with ghostistic groups like Pulaiyan, Panan etc...

The fish eating taboo could be found in Arab regions too. According to Stephen Fuchs Bedouin tribes considered fish a low food and higher classes abstained from it. They did not marry with the communities that ate fish or involved in fish catching. I believe Bedouins might have still kept that old West Asian taboo about fish that the Aryans from that region brought to India. I have come across myths of losing once high caste status involves fish eating or get caught with fish in South India. Fish and only fish no other meat.

Konkani and Bengali Brahmin communities do eat fish. Among them there are sections that do not. What we need is proper scrutiny of their haplogroup distribution. I have observed Bengali Brahmins do not have any J2a, a West Asian lineage. They are predominantly Indo-Turks(R1a1).
From Sengupta et al (2006) study.
R1a1-72%, R2=22% and H=6%

Unwanted qualifications:
In my opinion, an objective study must keep clear of all kinds positive and negative qualifications. I found couple of them unwarranted in this paper.

For this purpose, they could offer to the king their whole tradition of sacrifice and magic, already developed for almost a millenium and extremely impressive.

In other words, the function of the untouchables no longer included serving kings—a function that must have enhanced their low status—but was limited to such mundane and undignified tasks as cutting hair, washing clothes, and catching fish.

Epilogue:
Tulu society has never really moved away from its ghostistic traditions (probably true in the case of Kodava and north Malabar societies too). But even in that society I don't believe position of Brahmin and that of Poleya was different from the Tamil society in any degree in the past. The ghost possessor can be from any non-brahmin caste in the case of Kodava and Malayali society. But in Tulu society sometimes even Brahmin took up that role.

When you look at Tulu society then in my opinion there are two things that we can observe. There were occupational groups like leather workers that were deemed untouchable or low ones (fishermen). Then there are communities that were considered low like Holeya. A tribe can become an untouchable group as it moves closer to caste society(Koragas in Tulu region). However, Holeyas have been mainstream (if the dating of anthologies are correct) for nearly 2000 years now. That is probably for the reasons related to economics (as Holeyas were slave agricultural labourers in the past in South India).

But we should also note that people involved in ghost possession or shamanic traditions were not in high position in many societies (Siberian communities). Ghost possession or experience in my opinion is generally restricted to malnourished, illiterate classes of the society (and probably women). There can be no comparison of them with literate godistic priests.

Typical to societies around the world, South India too might have developed a society with masters and slaves. When Varnashrama was applied to the society I do not think slaves could be part of zUdras as the dominant classes themselves were grouped under them. It is more likely that Holeyas because of their controlled status(by landlords) than their uncontrolled status(by Hart) were relegated to untouchable status.


Article:
Early Evidence for Caste in South India

References:
1. At the Bottom of Indian Society, Stephen Fuchs
2. MtDNA and Y-chromosome Variation in Kurdish Groups, Nasidze et al. 2005

The Origins of Indians: Version 9.0

The Dravidians:
Sengupta et al. (2006) makes an interesting comment about spread of Dravidian speakers.

A competing alternative model based on both archaeobotanical material evidence and colloquial agricultural terms, however, more parsimoniously postulates that early Dravidian has a epipaleolithic preagricultural heritage with origins near a South
Asian core region, suggesting possible independent centers of plant domestication within the Indian peninsula by indigenous peoples (Fuller 2003).

They associate Y-Haplogroup L1 with the spread of Dravidian speakers.

Though Y-Haplogroup L1 is present among both Dravidian castes and (most importantly) among Central Dravidian tribes like Koitor (Gond)s, they do not show homogeneous distribution across various agricultural castes in South India.

Also, then there is J2b with a strong presence in South India and which also has rather uniform distribution across castes.

However, R2 dominates agricultural castes (Kamma, Kapu, Reddy) of Telugu region. Also, in certain agricultural castes like Gounders in Tamil Nadu (Sahoo et al. 2006). Except H other haplogroups like, L1, R2 and J2b could be totally absent or present negligibly in some of the south Indian castes. From this point of view only haplogroup H could be associated with the spread of Dravidian languages. Though this can't be ruled out as studies have shown reduced diversity for this haplogroup in India though it is supposedly one of the oldest lineage. This probably can be explained by the scenario where the spread of agriculture increasing its numbers in the last 5000 years. The lineage might have experienced bottleneck in its tribal past.

According to Fuller(2006) agriculture in South India started around 3000BC in south-central Deccan area. I have already mentioned about a paper on spread of Dravidian languages by F C Southworth(University of Pennsylvania). The author proposes a model where Dravidian languages expand from Godavari basin as all the Dravidian branches ND, CD, SD-I,II are observed in that region.

The most important question is whether;
- Dravidian speakers really migrated from north-west of the sub-continent(from Indus valley) or
- was there a language in north-west of India/Pakistan that buffered Dravidian languages of central-south India and various languages of west Asia.

I believe in the latter scenario.

From, population genetics it is very clear that the farthest boundary that can be assigned to Dravidian lineages is east of Indus valley. The distribution of Y-Haplogroups west of Indus valley do not match with Dravidian speakers(H, L1, R2 and J2b).

But there has been speculations that some of the words in Dravidian languages could have been a borrow from west Asian languages (kudure = horse...supposedly a borrow from Elamite language).

Then there is Brahui question. Their presence in west of Indus valley has been taken as a proof for Dravidian speaking past of that region.

However, there are couple of things that I find rather strange about Brahui-s.

- Brahui-s were overwhelmingly herders until 20th century. However, Proto-Dravidian speakers at the best are considered farmers or at the worst pastorals. Therefore, there should have been higher chances that Brahui-s becoming sedentary farmers in a land that developed agriculture around 7000 BCE.

- Brahui-s share R2, L1 and H with Dravidian speakers(totally around 20%). No J2b.

These two exact facts could be used to construct the original urheimat of Dravidian speakers.

Some of the researchers have speculated about independent development of agriculture in south Asia. I would rather consider it as an west Asian extension brought about by J2b clan.

Mehrgarh farming regions around 7000 BCE were developed by J2b clan who later moved south and probably around 3500-3000 BCE brought agricultural knowledge to Dravidian speaking central Indian region. The Dravidian speakers whose major haplogroups were H, L1 and R2 now picked up the knowledge of plant domestication from J2b clan and started expanding through southern region.

However, few herder/pastoral Dravidians who didn't come across J2b clan probably moved to Indo-Iranian regions(Brahui-s as they are known now). Other north Dravidian family speakers like Kurux and Malto are still tribals who migrated to north-eastern regions.

I believe the major agriculture population during Harappan time could have been J2b in the present day Pakistan. Their language could have been closer to Elamite language.

It is said that Elamites did not have their own literary tradition and borrowed everything from their neighbours. Indus valley probably built by the people with the same illiterate cultural background. J2b is a good candidate for that.

Y-Haplogroup association with linguistic expansions:
Austro-Asiatic : O2a
Dravidian : H, R2 and L1
IE : R1a1

Unknown languages:
The language of Indus valley : J2b

Haplogroup association with languages:
Austro-Asiatic : Y-chromosome O2a
Dravidian : mtDNA M
IE : Y-chromosome R1a1

Religious symbol and Language groups or haplogroups:
phallic worship: Austro-Asiatic/Sino-Tibetan
Horse mounted deity: J2b/Dravidian tribes
Brahma and Vishnu: J2a, G2 (Sumerian/Semitic origins)
Spirits/goddesses: tribes/Dravidian tribes
male nature gods: IE speakers

References:
1. The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity (Wells et al. 2001)
2. A prehistory of Indian Y chromosomes: Evaluating demic diffusion scenarios (Sahoo et al. 2006)
3. Polarity and Temporality of High-Resolution Y-Chromosome Distributions in India Identify Both Indigenous and Exogenous Expansions and Reveal Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists (Sengupta et al. 2005)
4. Agricultural Origins and Frontiers in South Asia: A Working Synthesis (Fuller 2006)
5. Proto-Dravidian Agriculture (F C Southworth)

Note: All the references are available online.

Agriculture in South India - 2

In my previous post on the same topic, I had speculated that tapioca could have been the staple diet of tribal Malayalis. Recently, I came across a propagandist paper written by a Malayali Christian that has details about various crops introduced by the Portuguese in India. Unlike the other content of the paper, I hope that is a fairly accurate account. Of course, tapioca is also one of those crops.

Change in dietary habits:
I read the hilarious studies that talk about how dietary changes affecting modern day Indian population because of so-called western influence. Probably, they have considered the food habits of Indians in early 20th century as something that has remained unchanged for couple of millenniums. Now, let us look into South Indian food habits of the last 500 years after the entry of Portuguese.

List of crops:
Let me list out the crops from South America that have been introduced by Portuguese.

1.Chillis: This is a wellknown import. I always wondered how widespread was the usage of black pepper, a native South Indian crop, that ensured a wholehearted adoption of this spice for that 'heat' or 'pungent' sensation. Nowadays, black pepper has very limited use in South Indian cuisine.

In my opinion, our cuisine might not be very hot 500 years back. I can understand usage of black pepper in non-vegetarian dishes but usage in vegetarian dishes sounds improbable. At least, some of such traditional dishes would have continued to the present day. But I hardly see any. But chile pepper is extensively used in vegetarian dishes. That being said, it appears our popular vegetables are not what they used to be 500 years back.

2. Beans: Another very popular family of vegetables is the Portuguese introduction.

3. Gourds: This is pure propaganda, I believe. Only South American candidate in this family is 'bottle gourd', I suppose. If this is true we have changed our side dishes completely in the last 500 years.

4. Ground nut: The most common oil in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh is extracted from this nut. I wonder what oil these two regions have used 500 years back. And what oil Tamils use?

... the rest of the plants include,
cashew, sapota, yams(popular), cacao, maize(this does have some popularity in North Karnataka), pappaya, guava, sunflower, bread fruit, sweet potato, passion fruit, anona species, pine apple, tobacco along with tapioca.

Non Portuguese introductions:
I think tomato, cauliflower and cabbage were also introduced in the last 500 years.

Then what are our own vegeatables, I mean for the last 2000-3000 years? lady's fingers, probably some of the gourds like bitter gourd*, ash gourd, ridge gourd and snake gourd, gherkin, cucumber, eggplant, few leafy vegetable and few beans like red gram, black gram, horse gram etc...Of course, rice has not been replaced as the preferred cereal grain though I think our ancestors were initially wheat eaters.

Overall, though there are popular old Indian vegetables still in our cuisine(when I started to write this post, I wanted to prove almost 80-90% of the vegetables were introduced in the last 500 years), there is a strong influence of the new world vegeatables in our present cuisine. In fact, only our non-vegetarian dishes have remained unchanged. I have not come across a new animal being added to our plate.

* Bitter gourd is one of the main reasons that I suspect 'gourds' might not be one of the Portuguese introductions. One of my favourite vegetables is also part of Tulu folklore. We Tuluvas have a saying 'kaMcala ittaMDa eMcala uNNOli'. I think explanation/translation needs little background of South Indian food presentation. People have this notion that if you are having a meal then you are having rice. Or rice is the maincourse. The purpose of all other dishes(vegetable or meat) is to enable easy and sensuous intake of rice. So, you can come across statement like "If you have pickle, that is enough. I can have my meal". That Tulu saying essentially says, if bitter gourd is there then you can have your meal.

Update(7-Jun-2007):
I had a bitter dispute about sweet potato with one of the commenters of this blog. I came across this article that claims Polynesians found South America before anybody and introduced chicken there. Now the question is whether Polynesians sailed to India and introduced sweet potato and also whether they sailed to China and introduced peanut. Or is that just one of those studies?

Position of Tulu Language -II

I have already stated my doubts about Tulu being part of SD-I(Kannada family). In my opinion, it should be part of SD-II(Telugu family). Another blogger Ravi though not necessarily agreeing with me has given me few more examples of Telugu influence in this region (place names) in his comment.

Now let us explore further this region. Though Kannada is a minority language in this area, surprisingly, there are three dialects(whatever that means... or probably means if they standardise the words they would sound like standard Kannada) of Kannada. To make the matters worse at least one dialect, Havyaka, is sort of close to archaic Kannada or probably also to archaic Tamil. I do not know much about other two dialects viz.. Kundakannada (spoken in Kundapura) and Are Bhashe(spoken in Sullia). While Havyaka and Are Bhashe are community specific tongues, Kunda Kannada is a mass language.

So, how come so much diversity in Kannada in a Tulu region? Probably, this BBC report can give us some clues?

Teachers in Cameroon are concerned that the new language frananglais - a mixture of French, English and Creole - is affecting the way students speak and write the country's two official languages.

From nursery to primary and secondary schools, frananglais is fast becoming the lingua franca over Creole (pidgin English) which until recently was the best-known and widely used language across the country.

Francoise Endwin, head of the French department of the Linguistic Centre in Douala says it developed because French and English have a lot of similarities, despite their different syntax.

Jacques Towe, head of the English department of the Linguistic Centre in Douala, says: "Only time will tell what will happen to frananglais. It might develop into a new type of language"

Let us say a Proto-SD-I language was spoken initially in this region. And there was a big migration from Proto-SD-II region to this region(mostly merchants and their bodyguards etc... may be rice farming priests too!). Just as the case in Cameroon, where a Romance language mixes with a Germanic language, an SD-I language mixes with an SD-II language. Just as both English and French are IE tongues, these two are Dravidian languages. Now the question is, to which language tree this new language belongs. That we will come to know if Frananglais becomes a new independent language. But I believe considering SD-I base in this region the new language became part of SD-I family but not really related to any of the other languages in this tree. I say this because according to linguists SD-I does not start with Proto-Kannada-Tulu but with Proto-Kannada-Tamil.

I do find one example in Tulu numbers. "Eight" is enuma in Tulu and enimidi in Telugu. However, other languages in SD-I family have slightly different sound for this number (entu in Kannada, ettu in Tamil/Malayalam).

Another example is communities in this region. I have already talked about Shetty surname. Now, let us consider the community they belong to, "Banta". In Telugu region, Bantu was an erstwhile suicide squad(Now, members of this community are called Mudiraju). This suicide squad of bodyguards was a common feature in South Indian region. In Telugu region they were called Bantu, in Kannada region they were called Garuda, in Malayalam region they were called Chaver and in Tamil region they were called Tamizh. They were the last rung support in an army(or for a feudal chieftain), I believe. Curiously, a Tulu community name finds an echo in Telugu region.

Other day, a Tamil propagandist(a nice chap who helps me with many facts. Of course, I keep the rights to interpret them to myself) told me the dialect of Malayalam spoken in Mangalore region(my own dialect is very close to it) is close to archaic Tamil. Some other Tamil propagandist wrote on the web that Havyaka dialect is close to archaic Tamil. Now, I add these two together. I believe the base language in this region could have been close to Kannada considering so many varieties of it here. The Malayalam(Byari Bhashe) that the person told close to archaic Tamil sort of sounds like Tulu(but intelligible to North Malabar Malayalis). Considering that these two archaic languages are still "alive" I propose a new SD-I language tree.

The root langauge was Proto-Kannada-Malayalam which branched out of Proto-Dravidian in Maharashtra region. This clan migrated along West coastal region. Tulu branched out because of Telugu family language influence. Then Kannada branched out as it spread inland from coastal region. Then Proto-Malayalam-Tamil clan continued their journey along Kaveri river and Tamil branched out in Tamil region. However, few dialects of Kannada and Malayalam still retained their archaic nature in coastal region. I think, the standard Malayalam is in fact a new language heavily influenced by literary Tamil( see b -> v change) of first millennium.

The Tulu Tribes - II

A new blogger Ravi Mundkur discusses about evolution of Tulu language and people at his "Tulu Research". In his recent post he discusses about "Bermeru" spirit. A very interesting spirit which sort of cognates with Brahma of Hinduism and generally called Brahma in the literature. I would like to discuss some of the things that I have come across after I wrote about the Tulu Tribes.

I have already discussed that Brahman(sacred words) and Braahmana(priest) have IE roots but Brahma(the god) has Semitic root(Semitic Introgression Theory).

The Tulu god Bermeru was generally depicted as a deity mounted on a horse. However, this was an ancient god in Dravidian regions. The Tamil god Ayyanar (also a deity mounted on a horse) is very similar to Tulu spirit Bermeru. Then we have Sastha of Malayala region(later identified with popular hero god Ayyappa). But I am not sure if Sastha could be equated with Ayyanar. However, all these gods act as protectors.

Considering these facts, I would rather argue that Bermeru is the later name for this deity in Tulu region. In my opinion, it was called Brahma(ru) initially as a matter of Hinduisation(Vaisnava period?) but became Bermeru in the local lingo. However, its original name is lost permanently.