Takat vk, incised speech -- Evidence of Indus writing of

Meluhha language in Ancient Near East

S. Kalyanaraman, Sarasvati Research Center (July 2013)
Executive Summary: Hypotheses, method and testing In his Writing in Vedic Age Prof. TP Verma points to the use of the phrase takat vk used in the Rigveda as a reference to incised speech. 1 The central hypotheses of this monograph are that 1) Indus writing is takat vk , incised speech of Meluhha (mleccha) language by stone, wood, mineral and metal workers of the ancient Hindu civilization, presented as pictorial motifs and as script signs; 2) meluhha (mleccha) words are identifiable as substrates retained in lexemes of many languages of Indian sprachbund ; and 3) these words constitute the underlying rebus readings of hieroglyphs of the writing system. Thus, the writing system gets decoded as using a logo-semantic cipher method for Meluhha/Mleccha language (mentioned as

mlecchitavikalpa cipher-writing in an ancient text), comparable to the Egyptian hieroglyphs of

Narmer palette. The cipher text of Indus writing encodes Meluhha (mleccha) language identified and semantic structure outlined with glosses within the Indian sprachbund. The artisans who created the writing system (mlecchitavikalpa cipher writing) were pacakamma five artisan categories of Indian sprachbund . The validation and testing of these hypotheses using Indus writing corpora is the raison detre of this monograph. Substrtum words are likely to have been retained in more than one language of the Indian sprachbund, irrespective of the language-family to which a particular language belongs. This is the justification for the identification, in comparative lexicons, of sememes with cognate lexemes from languages such as Gujarati, Marathi, Kannada, Santali, Munda or Toda or Kota. The underlying assumption is that the substratum words were absorbed into the particular languages either as borrowings or as morphemes subjected to phonetic changes over time. There is no linguistic technique available to 'date' a particular sememe and relate it to the technical processes which resulted in naming, for example, the metalware or furnaces/smelters used to create metals and cast the metals or alloys and forge them. It is remarkable, indeed, that hundreds of cognate lexemes have been retained in more than one language to facilitate rebus readings of hieroglyphs. An example can be cited to elucidate the point made in this argument. The word attested in 1

Rigveda is ayas, often interpreted as 'metal or bronze'. The cognate lexemes are ayo 'iron' (Gujarati. Santali) ayaska 'excellent quantity of iron' (Panini), k 'tools, pots and pans of metalware' (Marathi). A blacksmith; Vj.3.5. a. [--] Going, moving; nimble. N. (-) 1 Iron ( ; ukra 4.169. $ R.8.43. -2 Steel. -3 Gold. -4 A metal in general. Ayaska 1 an iron-arrow. -2 excellent iron. -3 a large quantity of iron. __(__) 1 beloved of iron, a magnet, load-stone; 2 a precious stone; _ a loadstone; ayaskra 1 an iron-smith, blacksmith (Skt.Apte) ayas-kntamu. [Skt.] n. The loadstone, a magnet. Ayaskruu. n. A black smith, one who works in iron. ayassu. N. ay-mayamu. [Skt.] adj. made of iron (Te.) yas n. metal, iron RV. Pa. ay nom. Sg. N. and m., aya n. iron, Pk. Aya n., Si. Ya. AYACRA, AYASKA, *AYASKA. Addenda: yas : Md. Da iron, dafat piece of iron. ayaska m.n. a quantity of iron, excellent iron P. Ga. Viii.3. K [ YAS, KAA A]Si.yakaa iron.*ayaska iron hammer. [ YAS, A1] Pa. ayka, ayak m.; Si. Yakuasledge hammer, yavua (< ayka) (CDIAL

590, 591, 592). Cf. Lat. Aes , aer-is for as-is ; Goth. Ais , Thema aisa; Old Germ. E7r , iron ;Goth. Eisarn ; Mod. Germ. Eisen. aduru native metal (Ka.); ayil iron (Ta.) ayir, ayiram any ore (Ma.); ajirda karba very hard iron (Tu.)(DEDR 192). Ta. Ayil javelin, lance, surgical knife, lancet.Ma. ayil javelin, lance; ayiri surgical knife, lancet. (DEDR 193). Aduru = gan.iyinda tegadu karagade iruva aduru = ore taken from the mine and not subjected to melting in a furnace (Ka. Siddhnti Subrahmaya astris new interpretation of the Amarakoa, Bangalore, Vicaradarpana Press, 1872, p.330); adar = fine sand (Ta.); ayir iron dust, any ore (Ma.) Kur. Adar the waste of pounded rice, broken grains, etc. Malt. Adru broken grain (DEDR 134). Ma. Au thin, slender;ayir, ayiram iron dust.Ta. ayir subtlety, fineness, fine sand, candied sugar; ? atar fine sand, dust. . ayir, n. 1. Subtlety, fineness; . (__.) 2. [M. ayir.] Fine sand; . (. 92.) ayiram, n. Candied sugar; ayil, n. cf. ayas. 1. Iron; 2. Surgical knife, lancet; Javelin, lance; ayilava, Skanda, as bearing a javelin (DEDR 341).Tu. gadar a lump (DEDR 1196) kadara m. iron goad for guiding an elephant lex. (CDIAL 2711). The hieroglyph which depicts the word aya metal is ayo fish (Munda): <ayu?>(A) {N} ``^fish. #1370. <yO>\\<AyO>(L) {N} ``^fish. #3612. <kukkulEyO>,,<kukkuliyO>(LMD) {N} ``prawn. !Serango dialect. #32612. <sArjAjyO>,,<sArjAj>(D) {N} ``prawn. #32622. <magur-yO>(ZL) {N} ``a kind of ^fish. *Or.<>. #32632. <ur+Gol-Da-yO>(LL) {N} ``a kind of ^fish. #326 2.<bal.bal-yO>(DL) {N} ``smoked fish. #15163. Vikalpa: Munda: <aDara>(L) {N} ``^scales of a fish, sharp bark of a tree.#10171. So<aDara>(L) {N} ``^scales of 2

a fish, sharp bark of a tree. Indian mackerel Ta. Ayirai, acarai, acalai loach, sandy colour, Cobitis thermalis; ayilai a kind of fish. Ma. Ayala a fish, mackerel, scomber; aila, ayila a fish; ayira a kind of small fish, loach (DEDR 191) Rebus method of encoding speech Procession on Narmer palette. An artistic deployment of Egyptian hieroglyphs on a procession is seen on one side of Narmer palette. The name Nar-mer is shown as rebus reading of nr cuttle-fish + mr awl. Both these hieroglyphs are depicted in front of the Emperor Narmer who follows the procession. Similar is the logo-semantic cipher method used on Indus writing, to write ayakara metalsmith. Glosses of Indian sprachbund used on Indus writing to encode speech:

ayo fish (Mu.) aya = iron (Gujarati); ayah, ayas = metal (Sanskrit.) kru a wild crocodile or alligator (Telugu) ghariyal id. (Hindi) khr a blacksmith, an iron worker (Kashmiri) ayakra iron-smith (Pali)
Proto-phonetic forms of these lexemes which constitute the substrates of Meluhha (Mleccha) language and are likely to yield the glosses of Meluhha (Mleccha) speech of 3rd millennium BCE. Aya fish + kar crocodile, ghariyal as hieroglyphs are depicted to be read rebus as

aya metal + khara smith (in mlecccha/meluhha language). The sounds of words of
mleccha/meluhha language are the speech foundations of the Indus writing system. Many inscriptions of Indus writing are read as metalware catalogs like this ayakara metalsmith catalog item shown on one side of a Mohenjo-daro prism tablet (Corpora reference: m1429C).

Another example may be cited of a Seal impression, Ur (UPenn; U.16747); dia. 2.6, ht. 0.9 cm.; Gadd, PBA 18 (1932), pp. 11-12, pl. II, no. 12; Porada 1971: pl.9, fig.5; Parpola, 1994, p. 183; water carrier with a skin (or pot?) hung on each end of the yoke across his shoulders and another one below the crook of his left arm; the vessel on the right end of his yoke is over a receptacle for the water; a star on either side of the head (denoting supernatural?). The whole object is enclosed by 'parenthesis' marks. The parenthesis is perhaps a way of splitting of the ellipse. An unmistakable example of an 'hieroglyphic' seal. (Hunter, G.R., JRAS, 1932, 476). This water-carrier hieroglyph is normalized as a sign (Glyph 12) on Indus Writing corpora. The seal impression is read rebus as composed of three hieroglyphs: Hieroglyph 1: kui water carrier (Te.) Rebus: kuhi smelter furnace (Santali) ku f. fireplace (Hindi); krvI f. granary (Wpah.); ku, kuo house, building(Ku.)(CDIAL 3232) kui hut made of boughs (Skt.) gui temple (Telugu) Hieroglyph 2: meha polar star (Marathi). Rebus: me iron (Ho.) Hieroglyph 3: dula pair (Kashmiri); rebus: dul cast metal (Mu.) Thus, the entire composition which makes up the inscription is read as: kuhi smelter furnace (to) dul cast (metal) me iron. In an article, Written language vs. non-linguistic symbol systems, Richard Sproat (2013) 2 presents a rebuttal of an earlier work of Rajesh Rao et al (2009, 2010).3 Both Sproat and Rao et al attempt to distinguish written language or linguistic symbols from what they term as nonlinguistic symbols. Both have failed in their mathematical analyses using Markov decision processes in the context of the data sets used for distinguishing the nature of symbols on Indus Writing (also called, script). The failure occurs because both have used only signs of the writing system, ignoring the pictorial motifs and glyphic elements in pictorial motifs which are integral to the writing system. Rao et al see to make an apriori 4

underlying assumption that signs could explain the underlying phonemes as syllables. Sproat seems to attempt to justify an earlier claim made about illiteracy of Harappans. Such a claim4 has been effectively rebutted5 in an archaeological context which should be the firm foundation for determing if a symbol is linguistic or non-linguistic. To claim that the mystery of the Indus writing has been solved by Farmer, Witzel, & Sproat asserting, in a shriek, in strident tone and language, that signs are not syllabic or alphabetic and hence do not encode speech, is a tall claim indeed. Sproat rebuts the argument that the signs may not be phonemic representations but assumes hat they could just simply be non-linguistic symbols following his participation in the earlier mystery-solving claim. The failure to include the statistics of pictorial motifs with may glyphic elements embedded in such motifs renders the data sets used suspect, at best incomplete, vitiated by the absence of a falsifiable selection process to identify symbols. For example, on seals showing composite animal, many glyphic elements are used: e.g., face of a human, serpent-hood as tail, elephants trunk ligatured to the human face, zebu horns, front feet of tiger, rear feet of bovine, scarves dangling on the neck. Such a medley of ligatures cannot be attributed to chance and all the glyphs have to be explained, even assuming that the glyphs are non-linguistic symbols. In sum, the basic flaw in the analyses attempted by Sproat and Rao et al is the deployment of an arbitrary selection process for identifying symbols from the Indus script corpora. In the context of tokens and bullae used in Sumer (ancient Near East) using a bun-ingot-shaped token represents metal. One fails to see how the token shape or mountains, ficus leaves shown on cylinder seals with cuneiform writing can be brushed aside and assumed to be a non-linguistic symbols when such symbols were used together with cuneiform syllabic texts in an extensive civilization interaction area of Elam, Sumer, Mesopotamia and even in Dilmun and Magan. Sumerian cylinder seal showing flanking goats with hooves on tree and/or mountain. Uruk period. (After Joyce Burstein in: Katherine Anne Harper, Robert L. Brown, 2002, The roots of tantra, SUNY Press, p.100). This failure in the method of analyses by Sproat and Rao et al is sought to be remedied in the rebus method deployed in this monograph and relted references cited, to analyze ALL symbols whether presented as signs or as glyphic elements in pictorial motifs in the corpora in the context of Meluhha (Mleccha) language of Indian sprachbund, trating Indus writing system as a writing system which encodes Meluhha (Mleccha) speech. Indus texts are very short, generally four or five glyphs long (counting both sign and picorial motif categories). In over 200 texts of Indus inscriptions, only pictorial motifs (with embedded multiple glyphs) are deployed. It is 5

hazardous to use cryptography6 because several valid solutions may be found for each pictorial motif or each glyphic element. Unique decipherment is possible when the key is known. I suggest that the key is 1) rebus method for each glyph of Indus writing constituting the cipher text corpora -- 2) related to bronze-age artifacts attested archaeologically, using 3) glosses of Meluhha (Mleccha) language. There aint no need to get frustrated and throw out the baby with the bath water making shrieking claims of illiteracy or proto-literate (linguistically meaningless?) symbol systems for a writing system which uses nearly 500 signs and over 120 pictorial motifs (which could be broken down further into 200+ glyhs) thus making a total of nearly 700 hieroglyphs of Indus writing. The archaeological context provides the evidence needed to pin down the underlying speech forms as discussed further in this monograph. Indus Writing Cipher -- Blogposts (S. Kalyanaraman, July 2013)7
Susa pot. The pot contained the metal vessels, pans, weapons and tools shown. ca. 3rd millennium BCE. Photo courtesy: Prof. Maurizio Tosi. The 'fish' inscribed near the rim of the pot is a hieroglyph of Meluhha (Mleccha) speech. Reading: ayo 'fish' (Munda) Rebus: ayo, ayas ' 'metal' (Gujarati. Skt.)

A reconstructed drawing of 'standard device' generally shown in front of a one-horned young bull and also on a procession of hieroglyphs or on a gold pectoral or of ivory in the round.

Mohenjo-daro pectoral m1656. The pectoral shows hieroglyphs: rim of jar, jar, overflowing (liquid), one-horned young bull, pannier on bull's shoulder, standard device in front composed of: gimlet, portable furnace as top part of the device and sometimes dotted circles are shown on the bottom part of the device. All glyphics

read rebus denote the pectoral owners calling or profession. In this case, a smith working with furnace (smelting copper) workshop. Rebus readings: Hieroglyphs young bull, rings on neck, pannier: gta sack.kthul, lu m. large bag or parcel(Kashmiri) (CDIAL 3511)kha1 m. any one of the large viscera MBh. [Same as kha -2? Cf. *kttha -- ] Pa. koha -- m. stomach , Pk. koha -- , ku m.; L. (Shahpur) koh f. heart, breast ; P. koh, koh m. belly , G. koh m., M. koh m. (CDIAL 3545).koiyum rings on neck. kru-ke. [Tel.] n. A bull in its prime. [ kha ] m A young bull, a bullcalf. (Marathi) [ g a g a. [ el. n. An o . A beast. kine, cattle.( elugu) ebus : B. k to turn in a lathe; r. k n a lathe, k ib, k to turn ( Drav. Kur. k lathe) (CDIAL 3295). ko workshop (Kuwi.G.) ebus: S. koru m. istrict officer who watches crops, police officer (CDIAL 3501). Cf. khaka treasury (Skt.); khi temple treasury (WPah.); koho warehouse (G.)(CDIAL 3546). ebus: khoa ingot forge , alloy(Marathi)Allograph: ku summit of a hill(Tamil). Rebus: khof. alloy, impurity, alloye . Overflow: (B) {V} ``(pot, etc.) to ^overflow''. See `to be left over'. @B24310. #20851. Re(B) {V} ``(pot, etc.) to ^overflow''. See `to be left over'. (Munda )Allograph: loa = a species of fig tree, ficus glomerata, the fruit of ficus glomerata (Santali) ebus: lo iron (Assamese, Bengali); loa iron (Gypsy). rebus: loh metal (Skt.) ebus: loh copper (Hin i) kam , n. < ka. 1. Water; sacred water; ; kam ewer, pot . (Tamil) Thus the combined rebus reading: Ku. lokha iron tools ; H. lokha m. iron tools, pots an pans ; G. lokh n. tools, iron, ironware; M. lokh n. iron (CDIAL 11171). kha tools, pots and pans and metal-ware(Marathi) Hieroglyphs pot, dotted circle: sangaa [ khaa ] A piece, bit, fragment, portion.(Marathi) [ khat ] n Among gamesters. An ivory counter &c. placed to represent a sum of money. (Marathi) ebus: kan i bea s (Pa.)(DED 1215). kha ivory (H.)ka = a furnace,altar (Santali.lex.)khaaran, kharun pit furnace (Santali)Allographs: kaa -- m.n. joint of stalk, lump(Pali) ka a stool (Kurku); kano stool, seat (Maltese). (DEDR 1179) kaa arrow (Skt.) kaa = a pot of certain shape and size (Santali) Rebus: ka = altar, furnace (Santali) f. a blacksmith's smelting furnace (Grierson Kashmiri lex.) [Monier-Williams lexicon, p. 250,1 mf. ( Un2. i , 15), a boiler , saucepan , or other cooking utensil of iron Sus3r. Ma1lav. Comm. on Ka1tyS3r. No ule of stone ore: k stone. Ga. ( ll.) kan, (S.) kanu (pl. kankil) stone (DEDR 1298). mayponi kan whetstone; (Ga.)(DEDR 4628). () Pebbles or small stones: also stones broken up (as for a road), metal. [ kha m A small stone, a pebble. 2 A no ule (of lime &c.): a lump or bit (as of gum, assafti a, catechu, sugar-candy): the gem or stone of a ring or trinket: a lump of hardened fces or scybala: a nodule or lump gen. kraka m. projection on the si e of a vessel, han le Br. [kra -- ] Pa. kaaka -- having ears or corners ; Wg. ka ear -ring N S vii 266; S. kano m. rim, bor er ; P. kann m. obtuse angle of a kite ( H. kann m. e ge, rim, han le ); N. knu en of a rope for supporting a bur en ; B. k brim of a cup , G.

kn m.; M. kn m. touch -- hole of a gun . (CDIAL 2831) ebus: kraa n. act, ee . [kr1] Pa. karaa -- n. oing ; NiDoc. karana, karana work ; Pk. karaa -- n. instrument ; N. an -karnu toothpick , kan -- karnu ear -- pick ; B. karn, kann work, uty ; M. kar n. action, ee ; Si. karaa occupation, tra e, copulation ; -- P. karn f. mason's trowel (B. D. Jain PhonPj 116 < karaa -- ); H. karn f. mason's trowel , M. kar f. (CDIAL 2790) ebus: ebus: karaka scribe. sangaa 'portable furnace', 'gimlet (turner's apparatus)' (Marathi) Rebus: sangar 'fortification' (Pashto)ang, hang snail, mollusc; rebus: sang stone (ore). sangaa lathe, furnace. sagha = furnace (G.) Rebus: jaga entrustment articles ja:ka (nm) on approval (purchases); goods/articles on approval. (Hindi); sangaa association, guil . jangaiyo military guar who accompanies treasure into the treasury(Gujarati)sanga aam ( to accompany as such. . income of . 3. companion bh.; ) 1. Convoy, guar ; responsible Nyar gui e through foreign territories. . jas from granting such guides; grant of land to persons liable to such service . ' CG.met.

, ' TR. 2.

' CG. to send him along, to kill likewise. CC.also fem.

(C. Te. ) companion, ; friend . , . prov. . CG.; vu. TP. (Voc.) See also: V1. a small chain to which to hang keys etc. aam (Tu. , Port. Jangada). Ferryboat, junction of 2 boats. . ; ' TR. ' Bhr. also rafts. (Malayalam)Allographs: sga f. a bo y formed of two or more fruits or animals or men &c. linked together (Marathi)(CDIAL 12859).gal, ga chain (WPah.)sangaa bangles (Pali). im of jar as hieroglyph: knaka n. gol (Skt.) ka ,n. perh. . 1. workmanship; . (. . 5, 8, 3). 2. copper work; . (W.) 3. copper; . (, 5, 8, 3.) MBh. Pa. kanaka -- n., Pk. kaaya -- n., MB. kanay DBL 659, Si. kan EGS 36.(CDIAL 2717) [ kanakamu ] kanakamu. [Skt.] n. Gold. (Telugu) kaakam, n. < kanaka. 1. Gold; . (. 502, 9 (Tamil) kanaka (nt.) [cp. Sk. kanaka; Gr. knh_kos yellow; Ags. hunig=E. honey. See also kacana] gold, usually as uttatta molten gol ; sai of the colour of the skin Bu i.59; Pv iii.32; J v.416; PvA 10 suvaa).-- agga gold -- crested J v.156; -- chavin of golden complexion J vi.13; -- taca (adj.) id. J v.393; -- pabh golden splendour Bu xxiii.23; -- vimna a fairy palace of gol vA 6; PvA 47, 53; -- sikhar a gol en peak, in rj king of the gol en peaks (i. e. Himlayas): Dvs iv.30. (Pali) Vikalpa: ka copper work (Ta.) Indus Writing Cipher (S. Kalyanaraman, July, 2013) by Srini Kalyanaraman http://www.scribd.com/doc/151898973/Indus-Writing-Cipher-S-Kalyanaraman-July-2013Indus Writing Cipher (S. Kalyanaraman, July, 2013)-- Blogposts on Indus Writing

Indus writing corpora consist of nearly 7000 inscriptions and have been presented in Indus

Writing in Ancient Near East . These are veritable mineral-work, metalware and stoneware
(smith-lapidary) catalogs, readable from sets of 8000 semantic clusters of Indian sprachbund presented in an Indian Lexicon of 25+ ancient Bharatiya languages. Incision by a stylus may be an early style of writing, for example, on wooden slates or clay tokens or tablets. Such a writing method results in many ancient inscriptions incised on stone using a chisel or on palm-leaves or on copper plates. The method of writing continued on copper bolt of Rampurva capital pillar, on Sohgaura copper plate and thousands of punch-marked and cast coins.

In a ca, there is a reference to takat vk, a phrase which is interpreted as incise speech (on wood), a possible reference, for example, to an incised vase with a writing system. It is not unreasonable to draw a parallel to Indus writing on incised terracotta tablets or copper plates or seals or pottery. A parallel can also be drawn to the system of using wedge-shaped stylus to incise cuneiform writing on tablets. Some glosses: takaam ( -] Paring, cutting; cutting into wood Ms.5.115; Y.1 185. - A carpenter's adze. takan

m. [-] 1 A carpenter, wood-cutter (whether by caste or profession);

Rv.9.112.1 There are two cognate semantic clusters relatable to takat meaning chiselled; one relates to the plank which is chiseled [resulting in the word takhti, writing board (Hindi)] and the second relates to the chisel used to incise on wood or stone as in: akita -- maca -- a stone (i.e. chiselled) platform (Pali); akal -- , akaka f. mint (Sanskrit) P tatah, s.f. (3rd) A plank, a board, a stool, a bench, a bier, a sheet of paper. Pl. tatey. tatah band, s.f. (3rd) Wainscot, boarding. Pl. a. tatah po or po , s.m. (2nd) A stage, a platform, a wooden floor. Pl. ponah or po nah. P tatah-nard, s.m. (2nd) Back- gammon. Pl. tatah-nardnah. taa, s.f. (1st) An adze, a carpenter's tool. Pl. taai. See

 1, 5. P. (, , ) 1 To chop, cut off, pare, chisel, slice, split; Mb; Ak. -2 To fashion, shape, form (out of wood &c.). -3 To make, create in general. -4 To wound, hurt; Mb.6.45.18. -5 To invent, form in the mind. -6 To make one's own, appropriate. -7 To cover. -8 To peel. -9 To make thin. -With 1 to slice out of. -2 to form, create. a. (At the end of comp.) Paring, cutting &c.; also ; Bi. S.87.2,24; also q. v.; R.15.89. [ ] 1 A carpenter, wood-cutter (whether by caste or profession). -2 The chief actor in the prelude of a drama (i. e. the ). -3 N. of the architect of the gods. ( - ] Paring, cutting; Ms.5.115; Y.1 185. - A carpenter's adze. m. [- ] 1 A carpenter, wood-cutter (whether by caste or profession); Rv.9.112.1; ... iva. B.31.18; K. P. 'one not a by caste is called when he acts like or follows the profession of a (carpenter); i.12.25. -2 N. of the architect of the gods. (Skt.) kal-l-ui-t-tacca , n. < id. +. Sculptor, stone-cutter; . (W.) tacca , n. < taka. 1. Carpenter; . (. 28, 37). 2. Person of carpenter caste; . tacccriyam , n. < id. +. Status or position of a mastercarpenter; . (S. I. I. ii, 278, 17.) taccu , n. < taka. 1. Carpenter's work; . (. 14, 3). 2. Day's work of a carpenter; . taccu-viaimkka, n. < id. +. Carpenters; . (. . 393, .) paca-kammar , n. < pacanta, ka, cipa, tacca, kolla; , , , . (. .) Five artisans: goldsmith, brazier, sculptor, carpenter, metalsmith. ka , n. < . [M. kannn.] Brazier, bell-metal worker, one of the divisions of the Kamma caste; . (.) kamma, n. < Pkt. kammra < karmra. Smith, mechanic, artisan, of five castes, viz., , , ,

, ;

. (Tamil) [ paca ] m ( S q. v.) A common term for five castes--,

10

 , , , -- goldsmith, carpenter, metal-/black-smith, brazier, stone-cutter. These all wear the . (Marathi) [ksrathaa] n A tax upon braziers and banglemakers or bead-stringers. (Marathi) or (p. 567) [ balutdra or balut ] or m ( &c.) A public servant of a village entitled to . There are twelve distinct from the regular Governmentofficers , , , , (These four constitute or or the &c.; viz. first division. Of three of them each is entitled to , twenty bundles of Holcus or the thrashed corn, and the to ); , , , constitute or or , and are entitled, each, to ; , , , form or or , and have, each, . Likewise there are twelve or supernumerary public claimants, viz. , , , , , , , , , , , . Of these the allowance of corn is not settled. The learner must be prepared to meet with other enumerations of the (e. g. , - , , , , , , , , ; also as constituting the first-class , , , , , and claiming the largest division of ; next , , , as constituting the middle class and claiming a subdivision of ; lastly, , , , ; and, in the Konkan, yet another list); and with other accounts of the assignments of corn; for this and many similar matters, originally determined diversely, have undergone the usual influence of time, place, and ignorance. Of the in the Indpr pergunnah the list and description stands thus:--First class, , , ; Third, , , , , ; Second, , , , , , ; in all fourteen, but in no one village are the whole fourteen to be found or traced. In the Panharpr districts the order is:-- or (1st class); , , , , , , , or (3rd or (2nd class); , class); , ; twelve and of there are eighteen. According to , , Grant Duff, the are , , , , , , , , , , ; and the are , , , , or , , , , , , , . In many villages of Northern Dakhan the receives the of the first, second, and third classes; and, consequently, besides the , there are but nine . The following are the only or now to be found;--, , , , - , & there is much confused , , but of the 11

intermixture, the of one district being the o a other a d vice vers . (The word used above, in , , requires explanation. It means Udder; and, as the are, in the phraseology of endearment or fondling, termed (calves), their allotments or divisions are figured by successive bodies of calves drawing at the or under of the under the figure of a or cow.) *akati2 chisels. [aka -- 2] Pa. akita -- maca -- a stone (i.e. chiselled) platform; G. k to chisel, M. k. (CDIAL 5433) akal -- , akaka f. mint lex. [aka -- 1, l -- ] N. aksl, r, B. ksl, k, ek, Bhoj. aksr, H. aksl, r f., G. ks f., M. ksl, k, k, ak. -- Deriv. G. aks m. mint -- master , M. ksy m. akal -- : Brj. aks, sr m. mint -- master. (CDIAL 5434) [ akamu ] ankamu. [Tel.] n. A piece of money: a coin: a gold coin. A coin, of the value of 16 copper dubs. . A composition of copper and pewter. A stonecutter's chisel. . borax . or ankaamu. n. Borax: subborate of soda. . anka-sla. n. A mint. or the name of a certain gold coin. (Telugu) [aka] m S A stonecutter's chisel. 2 A weight equal to four [ ka ] v c ( ) To reset or rechisel; to refreshen the impressions (of a mill or grinding stone): also to chisel or face it originally. (Marathi) 1 U. (-, ) 1 To bind, tie, fasten. -2 To cover. --With 1 to scrape, scratch. -2 to bore out, pierce through. [ - ] 1 A hatchet, an axe; a stone-cutter's chisel; Mk.1.2; R.12.8; Ki.9.22. -2 A sword. 3 The sheath of a sword. A weight o silver equal to our Mas; ukra.4.179 A stamped coi . A spade, hoe. - the master of the mint. - a mint. 1 A stamped coin, especially of silver. -2 A spade, chisel. 1 A spade, hoe. A clang; K. (Skt.) Allograph: , The leg.(Skt.) The use of the phrase takat vk occurs in RV 9.97.22: . 9-097-22 Trans. (Wilson) RV 9.97.22 (i akti via) When the praise of the zealous worshipper sanctifies him as that of a noisy (crowd) in front (praises) a distinguished (prince) for the support (he affords); then the cows come to the excellent exhilarating Indu, the lord (of all, abiding) in the pitcher, eager to gratify him (with their milk). [For the support he affords: dharmai = the 12

reason (nimitta) of the praise; i.e. the duty of acquisition and preservation (or the duty of securing property), yogakema visayam karma]. Alternative translation by Griffith: What time the loving spirits' word had formed him Chief of all food, by statute of the Highest, Then loudly lowing came the cows to Indu, the chosen, well-loved-Master in the beaker. Indus script corpora, archaeo-metallurgy and Meluhha (Mleccha) The language of Indus Writing is Meluhha (mleccha) of Indian sprachbund. This monograph validates the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine which should replace the 'Aryan invasion' Linguistic Doctrine which is the ruling paradigm in language studies. What constitutes the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine? Bronze Age was a revolution in the advance of civilization in ancient Near East; the revolution was catalysed by the supply of tin as an alloying mineral to create tin-bronzes instead of depending upon scarce arsenical coppers. The alloying with minerals like tin and zinc created a revolution in metallurgy which necessitated invention of advances in language with words to specify the metallurgical processes and metallurgical components involved to facilitate trade across interaction areas of the ancient Near East which included, for example, Meluhha, Dilmun, Magan, Elam, Sumer, Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, Kyrgystan (Tocharian-speech area). The words of Meluhha (mleccha) are substrate glosses of languages of Indian sprachbund attested in 25+ language lexicons and hundreds of epigraphical evidences and numismatic evidences on punch-marked and cast coins with many hieroglyphs of Indus writing. An unresolved problem in the study of Bronze Age civilizations has been the identification of sources of tin. The use of tin as an alloying mineral with copper revlutionised the advances in Bronze Age. Naturally occurring arsenical bronzes of the millennia earlier to the 5th millennium were replaced by tin-bronzes creating a veritable metallurgical revolution in the march of civilization. John Muhly has highlighted and contributed significantly to the resolution of the problem related to the sources of tin mineral. Many cuneiform texts do point to Meluhha as the major source of tin, reaching through the transit points of Magan and Dilmun along the Persian Gulf region and west of Mehergarh. 13

A possible scenario is presented by a geologist, TM Babu (2003) in: Advent of the bronze age in

the Indian subcontinent in: Mining and metal production: through the ages, eds. P. Craddock
and J. Lang, London, British Museum Press, pp175-180. In this article, Babu starts with the traditions in ancient India of making idols for worship using pancha-loha (lit. five metals), creating an alloy of copper, tin, lead, zinc, arsenic and less commonly, silver and gold. A word in Tamil denoting this alloy is kol which also means working in iron. This lexeme is denoted by the hieroglyphs: tiger (kola), woman (kola), rice-plant (kolom). Similar rebus readings of hundreds of hieroglyphs on Indus writing point to the Indian sprachbund, a linguistic union which explains the presence, for example, Munda words in ancient Sanskrit texts. Bronze Age doctrine explains Indian sprachbund This speech (vk) area underscores a linguistic doctrine. Just as Aryan invasion theory was postulated as a linguistic doctrine to explain the Indo-European languages, advent of Bronze Age based on tin alloys, can be presented as a linguistic doctrine to explain the Indian

sprachbund. Bronze Age dawned with the inventions of tin and zinc as alloying minerals, alloyed
with copper to create tin-bronze or brass. An extraordinary search for the sources of tin and zinc resulted in the creation of an extended interaction area involving what are referred to as Meluhha, Magan, Dilmun, Elam, Sumer, Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, Tocharianspeaking regions of Kyrgystan and the Mediterranean. The interactions among various language-speakers led to the formation and evolution of Indian sprachbund with evidences of metallurgy-related lexemes in Munda, Dravidian and Indo-Aryan language groups. Thus, it is possible to reconstruct the mleccha (meluhha) language glosses treating the cognate lexemes of languages of Indian sprachbund as substrates traceable to mleccha (meluhha) Papagudem boy wearing a bangle of tin Bronze articles such as ornamental mirrors, arrowheads, pins, bangles and chisels, of both low tin and high tin content, have been recovered from Lothal, the Harappn port on the Gujarat coast, which has been dated earlier than 2200 BCE. The tin content in these articles range from 2.27% to 11.82%; however, some of the articles contain no tin. Tin is said to have been brought as tablets from Babylon and mixed with copper to make an alloy of more pleasing colour and 14

luster, a bright golden yellow. The utilization of bronze is essential only for certain articles and tools, requiring sharp cutting edges, such as axes, arrowheads or chisels. The selection of bronze for these items indicates the presence of tin was intentionalRecent discoveries of tin occurrences in India are shown inFig. 11.2. However, none of these occurrences shows evidences of ancient mining activity. This is because, unlike copper ores, the mining and metallurgy of the tin ore cassiterite is simple, and leaves little permanent tracetin ore is usually recovered by simple panning of surface deposits, often contained in gravel, which soon collapse, leaving little evidence of having once been worked. Cassiterite is highly resistant to weathering, and with its high specific gravity, it can be easily separated from the waste minerals. The simple mining and metallurgical methods followed even now by Bastar and Koraput tribals in Chattisgarh and Orissa, central India, could be an indication of the methods used in the past. These tribal people produce considerable quantities of tin without any external help, electric power or chemical agents, enough to make a modern metallurgist, used to high technology, wonder almost in disbelief. Clearly though, the technology practiced has a considerable importance for those studying early smelting practices. The history of this process is poorly known. Back in the 1880s Ball (1881) related the story of a Bastar tribal from the village of Papagudem, who was observed to be wearing a bangle of tin. When questioned as to where the metal had come from, he replied that black sands, resembling gunpowder were dug in his village and smelted there. Thus it is very likely that the present industry is indigenous, and may have a long history. That being said, neither the industry or its products appear in any historical document of any period, and thus is unlikey to have been a significant supplier of metalThe tin content of cassiterite ranges from 74.94% (mean 64.2%), showing that pebbles contain about 70% to 90% of the tin oxide, cassiteriteThe ore is localized in gravel beds of the black pebbles of cassiterite which outcrop in stream beds etc. and there are other indicators, in the vegetation. The leaves of the Sarai tree (Shoria robusta) growing on tin-rich ground are often covered in yellow spots, as if suffering from a disease. (The leaves were found to contain 700 ppm of tin on analysis!) Wherever the tribals find concentrations of ore in the top soil, the ground all around the area is dug up and transported to nearby streams, rivers or pontsThe loose gravelly soil containing the tin ore is dug with pick and shovel, and carried to the washing sites in large, shoulder-strung bamboo baskets. The panning or washing of the ore is carrie out using round shallow pans of bamboo. The soil is washed out, leaving the dense casiterite ore at the bottom of the panThe ore is smelted in small clay shaft furnaces, heating and reducing the ore using charcoal as the fuelThe shft furnaces are square at the base and of brick surmounted by a 15

clay cylindrical shaftThe charcoal acts as both the heating and reducing agent, reducing the black cassiterite mineral into bright, white tin metala crude refining is carried out by remelting the metal in an iron pan at about 250 degrees C. The molten tin is then poured into the stonecarved moulds to make square- or rectangular-shaped tin ingots for easy transportation. (Babu, TM, opcit., pp.176-179)

two late bronze age tin ingots from the harbor of Haifa, Israel contain glyphs used in epigraphs with Indus Writing of Sarasvati civilization!8 Pictorial gallery of continuing practices for sourcing tin in India Panning for cassiterite using bamboo pans in a pond in Orissa. The ore is carried to the water pond or stream for washing in bamboo baskets.

16

People panning for cassiterite mineral in the remote jungles of central India.

The ore is washed to concentrate the cassiterite mineral using bamboo pans. Base of small brick and mud furnace for smelting tin.

17

The tin is refined by remelting the pieces recovered from the furnace in an iron pan. The molten tin is poured into stone-carved moulds to make square- or rectangular-ingots. The tin ingots, each weighing about 10 kg. are made for ease of transport and handling. Such shapes are comparable to the pure tin ingots found in a shipwreck in Haifa. Meluhha were sea-faring merchants and dealers (artisans/ merchants) in tin, zinc and other bronze-age alloying minerals (attested in cuneiform texts). Almost the entire Indus writing corpora are veritable metalware catalogs. Thus many glosses of mleccha (meluhha) are retained in many languages of Indian sprachbund. This evidence facilitates rebus reading of hieroglyphs on Indus writing. As the pictorial gallery demonstrates, the entire tin processing industry is a family-based or extended-family-based industry. The historical traditions point to the formation of artisan guilds 18

to exchange surplus cassiterite in trade transactions of the type evidenced by the seals and tablets, tokens and bullae found in the civilization-interaction area of the Bronze Age. Illustrated London News 1936 November 21st. A 'Sheffield of Ancient India: Chanhu-Daro's metal working industry 10 X photos of copper knives, spears, razors, axes and dishes. The words used in the lingua franca of such tin-processing families constitute the words invented to denote the Bronze Age products and artifacts such as tin or zinc or the array of metalware discovered in the Sheffied of the Ancient East, Chanhu-daro as reported in the London News Illustrated by Ernest Mackay.

Harappa. kiln. 9. Harappa 1999, Mound F, Trench 43: Period 5 kiln, plan and section views9

Figure

Damaged circular clay furnace, comprising iron slag and tuyeres and other waste materials stuck with its body, exposed at lohsanwa mound, Period II, Malhar, Dist. Chandauli.10 Meluhha were sea-faring merchants and dealers (artisans/ merchants) in tin, zinc and other bronze-age alloying minerals (attested in cuneiform texts). 19

Almost the entire Indus writing corpora are veritable metalware catalogs.

Bronze statue of a woman holding a small bowl, Mohenjo-daro; copper alloy made using cire perdue method (DK 12728; Mackay 1938: 274, Pl. LXXIII, 9-11)

The Dancing Girl (Mohenjo-daro), made by the lost-wax process; a bronze foot and anklet from Mohenjo-daro; and a bronze figurine of a bull (Kalibangan). (Courtesy: ASI) "Archaeological excavations have shown that Harappan metal smiths obtained copper ore (either directly or through local communities) from the Aravalli hills, Baluchistan or beyond. They soon discovered 20

that adding tin to copper produced bronze, a metal harder than copper yet easier to cast, and also more resistant to corrosion. Whether deliberately added or already present in the ore, various impurities (such as nickel, arsenic or lead) enabled the Harappans to harden bronze further, to the point where bronze chisels could be used to dress stones! "Indian metallurgists were familiar several other metals, of which zinc deserves a special mention because, having a low boiling point (907C), it tends to vaporize while its ore is smelted. Zinc, a silvery-white metal, is precious in combination with copper, resulting in brass of superior quality. Sometimes part of copper ore, pure zinc could be produced only after a sophisticated downward distillation technique in which the vapour was captured and condensed in a lower container. This technique, which was also applied to mercury, is described in Sanskrit texts such as the 14th-century Rasaratnasamuccaya. There is archaeological evidence of zinc production at Rajasthans mines at Zawar from the 6th or 5th century BCE. The technique must have been refined further over the centuries. India was, in any case, the first country to master zinc distillation, and it is estimated that between 50,000 and 100,000 tons of zinc was smelted at Zawar from the 13th to the 18th century CE! British chroniclers record continuing production there as late as in 1760; indeed, there is documentary evidence to show that an Englishman learned the technique of downward distillation there in the 17th century and took it to England a case of technology transfer which parallels that of wootz steel."

21

An underground furnace at Ghatgaon (Madhya Pradesh), with a tribal smelting iron ore. (Courtesy: A.V. Balasubramaniam). "We should finally note that most of Indias metal production was controlled by specific social groups, including so-called tribes, most of them from the lower rungs of Indian society.For instance, the Agarias of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are reputed iron smiths, and there are still such communities scattered across Jharkhand, Bihar, WestBengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. Together, they contributed substantially to Indias wealth, since India was for a long time a major exporter of iron. In the late 1600s, shipments of tens of thousands of wootz ingots would leave the Coromandel Coast for Persia every year. Indias iron and steel industry was intensive till the 18th century and declined only when the British started selling their own products in India while imposing high duties on Indian products. Industrially produced iron and steel unavoidably put a final stop to most of Indias traditional production. " After the Harappans During and after the Harappan civilization, a Copper Hoard culture of still unclear authorship produced massive quantities of copper tools in central and northern India. Later, in the classical age, copper-bronze smiths supplied countless pieces of art. Let us mention the huge bronze statue of the Buddha made between 500 and 700 CE in Sultanganj (Bhagalpur district, Bihar, now at the Birmingham Museum); at 2.3 m high, 1 m wide, and weighing over 500 kg, it was made by the same lost-wax technique that Harappans used three millenniums earlier. So were thousands of statues made later (and up to this day) in Tamil Nadu, such as the beautiful Nataraja statues of the Chola period, among other famous bronzes. Of course, all kinds of bronze objects of daily use have continued to be produced; for instance, highly polished bronze mirrors are still made in Kerala today, just as they were in Harappan times." 11

22

Validating the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine

Hence, the search for the identification of the language Meluhha (mleccha) of Indian

sprachbund has to be carried out in documenting the practices of the types shown in the
pictorial gallery of tin processing and from within the cluster of over 8000 semantic clusters of the languages of the Indiansprachbund. This will be a first step in reiterating the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine. The directions of borrowings of lexemes from one language to another are secondary features. The fact that such common lexemes related to metallurgy and metalware exist in Indian sprachbund is enough to validate the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine.

Stages in the evolution of early writing systems can be traced to written records of counting in the ancient Near East. Providing an example from the Indian Hieroglyphs used in Indus Script as a writing system, a stage anterior to the stage of syllabic representation of sounds of a language, is identified. Unique geometric shapes required for tokens to categorize objects became too large to handle to abstract hundreds of categories of goods and metallurgical processes during the production of bronze-age goods. In such a situation, it became necessary to use glyphs which could distinctly identify, orthographically, specific descriptions of or cataloging of ores, alloys, and metallurgical processes. About 3500 BCE, Indus script as a writing system was developed to use hieroglyphs to represent the spoken words identifying each of the goods and processes. A rebus method of representing similar sounding words of the lingua franca of the artisans was used in Indus script. This method is recognized and consistently applied for the lingua franca of the Indian sprachbund. That the ancient languages of India, constituted a sprachbund (or language union) is now recognized by many linguists. The sprachbund area is proximate to the area where most of the Indus script inscriptions were discovered, as documented in the corpora. That hundreds of Indian hieroglyphs continued to be used in metallurgy is evidenced by their use on early punch-marked coins. This explains the combined use of syllabic scripts such as Brahmi and Kharoshti together with the hieroglyphs on Rampurva copper bolt, and Sohgaura copper plate from about 6th century BCE.Indian 23

hieroglyphs constitute a writing system for meluhha language and are rebus representations of archaeo-metallurgy lexemes. The rebus principle was employed by the early scripts and can legitimately be used to decipher the Indus script, after secure pictorial identification. Historical background of Bronze Age and Writing systems Invention of bronze-age technologies necessitated the invention and development of a writing system called Indus Script which is evidenced in corpora of about 7000 inscriptions.12 Around 7500 BCE13, tokens appeared and represented perhaps the early deployment of a writing system to count objects. Many geometric shapes were used for the tokens.14 6500 BCE. Date of the womans burial with ornaments including a wide bangle of shankha. Mehergarh. Burial ornaments made of shell and stone disc beads, and turbinella pyrum (sacred conch, ankha) bangle, Tomb MR3T.21, Mehrgarh, Period 1A, ca. 6500 BCE. The nearest source for this shell is Makran coast near Karachi, 500 km. South. [After Fig. 2.10 in Kenoyer, 1998]. ankha wide bangle and other ornaments, c. 6500 BCE (burial of a woman at Nausharo). Tracing the evolution of a writing system15, Schmandt-Besserat evalutes the next stage of keeping tokens in envelopes with markings abstracting the tokens inside and calls these abstract numbers are the culmination of the process16 This evaluation is the starting point for identifying another stage before the culmination represented by the use of syllabic representation in glyphs of sounds of a language. That penultimate stage, before syllabic writing evolved, was the use of hieroglyphs represented on hundreds of Indian hieroglyphs.17

24

The arrival of the bronze age was maked by the invention of alloying copper with arsenic, zinc or tin to produce arsenicalloys, and other alloys such as brass, bronze, pewter. These archaeometallurgial inventions enabled the production of goods surplus to the requirements of the artisan guilds. These inventions also created the imperative of and necessity for a writing system which could represent about over 500 specific categories of activities related to the artisanal repertoire of a smith. Such a large number of categories could not be handled by the limited number of geometric shapes used in the token system of accounting and documenting goods, standard measures of grains, liquids and surface areas.18 The existence of Indian sprachbund is evidenced by the concordant lexemes used for bronzeage repertoire of bronze-age artisans. These lexemes are compiled in an Indian Lexicon.19 This is a resource base for further studies in the formation and evolution of most of the Indian languages. Identifiable substrata glosses include over 4000 etyma of Dravidian Etymological Dictionary and over 1000 words of Munda with concordant semantic clusters of Indo-Aryan. That the substrata glosses cover three major language families Dravidian, Munda and IndoAryan -- is a surprising discovery which has a profound impact on delineating Meluhha (Mleccha) of the Bronze Age.

25

There are hundreds of semantic clusters included in the Indian Lexicon from over 25 languages which makes the work very large, including cognate entries of CDIAL (Indo-Aryan etyma), together with thousands of lexemes of Santali, Mundarica and other languages of the AustroAsiatic linguistic group, and, maybe, Language X. . Most glosses of the lexical archive relate to the bronze-age cultural context and possible entries are relatable rebus to Indian hieroglyphs. Many are found to be attested as substratum lexemes only in a few languages such as Nahali, Kashmiri, Kannada or Telugu or lexical entries of Hemacandras de nmaml (Prkt); thus, many present-day Indian languages are rendered as dialects of an Indus language or protoIndic lingua franca or gloss. Semantic clusters in Indian Lexicon resulting in over 8000 entries: Economic Court: Flora and Products from Flora Birds Insects Fauna Animate phenomena: birth, body, sensory perceptions and actions Visual phenomen, forms and shapes Numeration and Mensuration Economic Court: Natural phenomena, Earth formations, Products of earth (excluding flora clustered in a distinct category) Building, infrastructure Work, skills, products of labour and workers (fire-worker, potter/ smith/ lapidary, weaver, farmer, soldier) Weapons and tools Language fields Kinship 26

Social formations The identification of a particular Indian language as the Indus language has presented some problems because of the received wisdom about grouping of language families in IndoEuropean linguistic analyses. Some claims of decipherment have assumed the language to be Tamil, of Dravidian language family; some have assumed the language to be Sanskrit, of IndoAryan language family. A resolution to these problems comes from a surprising source: Manu. Mleccha, Indus language of Indian linguistic area (sprachbund). Indian linguistic area map, including mleccha and vedic (After F. Southworth, 2005; VEDIC AND MLECCHA added.) A language family, mleccha (?language X), is attested in the ancient literature of India. This is the lingua franca, the spoken version of the language of the civilization of about 5000 years ago, distinct from the grammatically correct version called Sanskrit represented in the vedic texts and other ancient literature. Ancient texts of India are replete with insights into formation and evolution of languages. Some examples are: Bharatas Natya stra, Patajalis Mahbhya, Hemacandras Denmaml, Nighanus, Paninis Adhyayi, Tolkappiyam Tamil grammar. The evidence which comes from Manu, dated to ca. 500 BCE. Manu (10.45) underscores the linguistic area: rya vcas mleccha vcas te sarve dasyuvah smth [trans. both rya speakers and mleccha speakers (that is, both speakers of literary dialect and colloquial or vernacular dialect) are all remembered as dasyu]. Dasyu is a general reference to people. Dasyu is cognate with dasa, which in Khotanese language means man. It is also cognate with daha, a word which occurs in Persepolis inscription of Xerxes, a possible reference to people of Dahistan, a region east of Caspian sea. Strabo wrote : "Most of the scythians, beginning from the Caspian sea, are called Dahae Scythae, and those situated more towards the east Massagetae and Sacae." (Strabo, 11.8.1). Close to Caspian Sea is the site of Altyn-tepe which was an interaction area with Meluhha and where three Indus seals with inscriptions were found, including a silver seal showing a composite animal which can be called a signature glyph of Indus writing.. The identification of mleccha as the language of the Indus script writing system is consistent with the following theses which postulate an Indian linguistic area, that is an area of 27

ancient times when various language-speakers interacted and absorbed language features from one another and made them their own: Emeneau, 195620; Kuiper, 194821; Masica, 197122; Przyludski, 192923; Southworth, 200524. On Munda lexemes in Sanskrit , Kuiper's brilliant exposition begins: "Some hundred Sanskrit and Prakrit words are shown to be derived from the Proto-Munda branch of the Austro-Asiatic source. The term 'Proto-Munda' is used to indicate that the Munda languages had departed considerably from the Austro-Asiatic type of language as early as the Vedic period... a process of 'Dravidization' of the Munda tongues... contributing to the growth of the Indian linguistic league (sprachbund)."25 Correlation between Austro-asiatic language speech area and bronze-age

sites correlates with bronze age sites.

es

Pinnows map of Austro-AsiaticLanguage speakers

Bronze Age sites of eastern India and neighbouring areas: 1. Koldihwa; 2.Khairdih; 3. Chirand; 4. Mahisadal; 5. Pandu Rajar Dhibi; 6.Mehrgarh; 7. Harappa;8. Mohenjo-daro; 9.Ahar; 10. Kayatha; 11.Navdatoli; 12.Inamgaon; 13. Non PaWai; 14. Nong Nor;15. Ban Na Di andBan Chiang; 16. NonNok Tha; 17. Thanh Den; 18. Shizhaishan; 19. Ban Don Ta Phet [After Fig. 8.1 in: Charles Higham, 1996, The Bronze Age of Southeast Asia, Cambridge University Press].26 The areal map of Austric (Austro-Asiatic languages) showing regions marked by Pinnow correlates with the bronze age settlements in Bharatam or what came to be known during the British colonial regime as Greater India. The bronze age sites extend from Mehrgarh-Harappa (Meluhha) on the west to Kayatha-Navdatoli (Nahali) close to River Narmada to KoldihwaKhairdih-Chirand on Ganga river basin to Mahisadal Pandu Rajar Dhibi in Jharia mines close 28

to Mundari area and into the east extending into Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Nicobar islands. A settlement of Inamgaon is shown on the banks of River Godavari. A focus on this linguistic and bronze-age area for areal linguistics will yield significant results to delineate the ancient structure and form of mleccha language. Santali and Munda lexicons and literature will be of considerable relevance with particular reference to cultural traditions and village festivals associated with the work on minerals and metals. Meluhha settlements in neighbouring interaction areas also provide evidence for Indus writing. 1. Steatite seals with the image of the short-horned bulls with lowered head from Failaka (1), Bahrein (2-3), Bactria (4), the Iranian Plateau (5). Nr. 6 comes from the surface of the site of Diqdiqqah, near Ur. Not in scale. The Melammu project (In particular, Massimo Vidale, 2004, Growing in a foreign world: for a history of the 'Meluhha villages' in Mesopotamia in the 3rd millennium BCE. The article discusses archaeological and textual evidences; Plate XIX).27 Evidence related to proto-Indian or proto-Indic or Indus language Meluhha is a reference to a language, cognate mleccha. Mleccha were island-dwellers (attested in Mahabharata and other ancientIndian sprachbund texts). Their speech did not conform to the rules of grammar and had dialectical variants or unrefined sounds in words

mleccha ha vai ea yat apaabda 1 4 | I.11 - 12

{7/8}

mlecch m bhma iti adhyeyam vykaraam

~V.118.5 - 119.12 {20/36}

mlecchitam vispaena iti eva anyatra tasmt brhmaena na mlecchitavai na apabhitavai -- Patajali explains in the context of ungrammatical
29

mleccha with apaabda. (Patajali: Mahbhya). Colin Masica proposed an unknown Language X to explain 31% agricultural and flora glosses for which etymologies could not be found from Indo-European or Dravidian or Munda.28 But, as will be demonstrated in this monograph, many metallurgical terms and processes have cognates in Indo-European (IndoAryan), Dravidian and Munda attesting to the evolution of the sprachbund during and impelled by the bronze age imperative which had a profound impact on culture, speech and language during interactions over a wide area extending from Rakhigarhi to Haifa, from Kyrgystn (Tocharian) to Gujarat (de ). Many such glosses may relate to Meluhha (Mleccha) speech. A proto-Indic language is attested in ancient Indian texts. For example, Manusmti refers to two languages, both of dasyu (daha): rya vcas, mleccha vcas. mukhabh rupajjnm y loke

jtayo bahih mlecchavcascryav cas te sarve dasyuvah smth Trans. All those people in
this world who are excluded from those born from the mouth, the arms, the thighs and the feet (of Brahma) are called Dasyus, whether they speak the language of the mleccha-s or that of the rya-s. (Manu 10. 5)] This distinction between lingua franca and literary version of the language, is elaborated by Patajali as a reference to 1) grammatically correct literary language and 2) ungrammatical, colloquial speech (de ). How to reconstruct mleccha of 4th millennium BCE Indian sprachbund? One resource for recontruction of mleccha is a work which dealt with Prkit forms.29

Prkitarpvatra literally means the descent of Prkit forms. Pischel noted:

the Prkitarpvatra is not unimportant for the knowledge of the declension and conjugation, chiefly because Simharja frequently quotes more forms than Hmachandra and Trivikrama. No doubt many of these forms are theoretically inferred; but they are formed strictly according to the rules and are not without interest. (Pischel, 1900, Grammatik der Prkit-

Sprachen, Strassburg, p.43). Pischel also had written a book titled, Hmachandra's Prkit grammar, Halle, 1877. The full text of the Vlmkistra, with gaas, dyas, and iis, has been
printed in Telugu characters at Mysore in 1886 as an appendix to the abhachandrik. A format to determine the structure of Prkit is to identify words which are identical with Sanskrit words or can be derived from Sanskrit. In this process, dyas or dyas,

provincialisms are excluded. One part of the work of Simharja is samjvibhga technical
30

terms. Another is pari bhvibhga explanatory rules. Dialects are identified in a part called aurasnydivibhga; the dialects include: aurasni, mgadh, paic, chik paic,

apabhrama.
Additional rules are identified beyond those employed by Pini: sus, nominative; as, accusative; s, instrumental; ns, dative; nam, genitive; nip, locative. Other resources available for delineation of mleccha are: The Prkita-praka; or the Prakrit grammar of Vararuchi. With the commentary Manorama of Bhamaha. The first complete ed. of the original text... With notes, an English translation and index of Prkit words; to which is prefixed a short introd. to Prkit grammar (Ed. Cowell, Edward Byles,1868, London, Trubner) On these lines, and using the methods used for delineating Ardhamgadhi language, by Prkita grammarians, and in a process of extrapolation of such possible morphemic changes into the past, an attempt may be made to hypothesize morphemic or phonetic variants of mleccha words as they might have been, in various periods from ca. 4th millennium BCE. There are also grammars of languages such as Marathi (William Carey), Braj bh grammar (James Robert), Sindhi, Hindi, Tamil (Tolkppiyam) and Gujarati which can be used as supplementary references, together with the classic Hemacandra's Dsnmaml, Prakrit

Grammar of Hemachandra edited by P. L. Vaidya (BORI, Pune), Vararuchi's works and Richard
Pischel's Comparative Grammar of Prakrit Languages.(Repr. Motilal Banarsidass, 1957). Colin P. Masica's Indo-Aryan Languages, Cambridge University Press, 1993,"... has provided a fundamental, comparative introduction that will interest not only general and theoretical linguists but also students of one or more languages (Hindi, Urdu, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujurati, Marathi, Sinhalese, etc.) who want to acquaint themselves with the broader linguistic context. Generally synchronic in approach, concentrating on the phonology, morphology and syntax of the modern representatives of the group, the volume also covers their historical development, writing systems, and aspects of sociolinguistics." Thomas Oberlies' Pali grammar (Walter de Gruyter, 2001) presents a full description of Pali, the language used in the Theravada Buddhist canon, which is still alive in Ceylon and South-East Asia. The development of its phonological and 31

morphological systems is traced in detail from Old Indic (including mleccha?). Comprehensive references to comparable features and phenomena from other Middle Indic languages mean that this grammar can also be used to study the literature of Jainism. Madhukar Anant Mehendale's Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits is a useful aid to delineate changes in morphemes over time. A good introduction is: Alfred C. Woolner's Introduction to Prakrit, 1928 (Motilal Banarsidass). "Introduction to Prakrit provides the reader with a guide for the more attentive and scholarly study of Prakrit occurring in Sanskrit plays, poetry and prose--both literary and inscriptional. It presents a general view of the subject with special stress on Sauraseni and Maharastri Prakrit system. The book is divided into two parts. Part I consists of IXI Chapters which deal with the three periods of Indo-Aryan speech, the three stages of the Middle Period, the literary and spoken Prakrits, their classification and characteristics, their system of Single and Compound Consonants, Vowels, Sandhi, Declension, Conjugation and their history of literature. Part II consists of a number of extracts from Sanskrit and Prakrit literature which illustrate different types of Prakrit--Sauraseni, Maharastri, Magadhi, Ardhamagadhi, Avanti, Apabhramsa, etc., most of which are translated into English. The book contains valuable information on the Phonetics and Grammar of the Dramatic Prakrits-Sauraseni and Maharastri. It is documented with an Index as well as a Students'. " It may be noted that Hemacandra is a resource which has provided the sememe ibbo 'merchant' which reads rebus with ibha 'elephant' hieroglyph. Sir George A. Grierson's article on The Prakrit Vibhasas cites: "Pischel, in 3, , and 5 of his Prakrit Grammar, refers very briefly to the Vibhs of the Prakrit grammarians. In 3 he quotes Mrkaya's (Intr., ) division of the Prakrits into Bh, Vibh, Apabhra a , and Paica , his division of the Vibhs into kr, Cl, bar, bhrik , and kk (not kk , as written by Pischel), and his rejection of Au hr (Pischel, O r ) and Drvi . In he says, Rmatarkavga observes that the vibh cannot be called

Apabhraa, if they are used in dramatic works and the like. He repeats the latter statement in

32

 5, and this is all that he says on the subject. Nowhere does he say what the term vibh means. The present paper is an attempt to supply this deficiency.30 "...Ganga, on the lower reaches of which were the kingdoms of Anga, Variga, and Kalinga, regarded in the Mahabharata as Mleccha. Now the non- Aryan people that today live closest to the territory formerly occupied by these ancient kingdoms are Tibeto-Burmans of the Baric branch. One of the languages of that branch is called Mech, a term given to them by their Hindu neighbors. The Mech live partly in Bengal and partly in Assam. B(runo) Lieblich remarked the resemblance between Mleccha and Mech and that Skr. Mleccha normally became Prakrit Meccha or Mecha and that the last form is actually found in Sauraseni. 1 Sten Konow thought Mech probably a corruption of Mleccha.* I do not believe that the people of the ancient kingdoms of Anga, Vanga, and Kalinga were precisely of the same stock as the modern Mech, but rather that they and the modern Mech spoke languages of the Baric division of SinoTibetan.31 Beyond the Mahbhrata incident in which Vidura is said to have alerted Yudhiira in Mleccha bh, evidence is provided on mleccha (cognate meluhha) language from ancient texts. The following note is based on: Source: MK Dhavalikar, 1997, Meluhha, the land of copper, South Asian Studies, 13:1, 275-279 (embedded document appended): Citing a cuneiform tablet inscription of Sargon of Akkad (2370-2316 BCE), Dhavalikar notes that the boats of Dilmun, Magan and Meluhha were moored at the quay in his capital (Leemans, WF, 1960, Foreign Trade in the Old Babylonian Period as revealed by texts from Southern

Mesopotamia, EJ Brill, Leiden, p. 11). The goods imported include agate, carnelian, shell, ivory,
varieties of wood and copper. Dhavalikar cites a reference to the people or sons of Meluhha who had undergone a process of acculturation into Mesopotamian society of Ur III times cf. Parpola, S., A. Parpola and RH Brunswwig, Jr., 1977, The Meluhha Village: evidence of acculturation of Harappan traders in the late Third Millennium Mesopotamia, JESHO, 20 , p.152. Oppenheim describes Meluhha as the land of seafarers. (Oppenheim, AL, 1954, The seafaring 33

merchants of Ur, JAOS, 74: 6-17). Dhavalikar notes the name given to a rga of classical Indian (Hindustani) music maluha kedr which may indicate maluha as a geographical connotation as in the name of another rga called Gujar Todi. Noting a pronunciation variant for meluhha, melukkha, the form is noted as closer to Prakrit milakkhu (Jaina Stras, SBE XLV, p. 414, n.) cognate Pali malikkho or malikkhako (Childers Pali Dictionary). Prakrit milakkhu or Pali malikkho are cognate with the Sanskrit word mleccha (References cited include Mahabharata, Patanjali). Jayaswal (Jayaswal, KP, 1914, On the origin of Mlechcha, ZDMG, 68: pp. 719-720) takes the Sanskrit representation to be cognate with Semitic melekh (Hebrew) meaning king.

athapatha Brhmaa [3.2.1(24)], a Vedic text (ca. 8th century BCE) uses the word mleccha as a noun referring to Asuras who ill-pronounce or speak an imprecise language: tatraitmapi vcamdu | upajijsy sa mlecastasmnna brhmao mlecedasuryhai v natevaia dviat sapatnnmdatte vca te 'syttavacasa parbhavanti ya evametadveda. This is a remarkable reference to mleccha (meluhha) as a language in the ancient Indian tradition. Pali texts Digha Nikya and Vinaya, also denotes milakkha as a language (milakkha bhs). Comparable to the reference in Manu, a Jaina text (Pannavana, 1.37) also described two groups of speakers (people?): rya and milakkhu. Pini also observes the imprecise nature of mleccha language by using the terms: avyaktayam vci (X, 1663) and mleccha

avyakte abde (1.205). This is echoed in Patanjalis reference to apaabda.

Dhavalikar notes: Sengupta (1971) has made out a strong case for identifying mlecchas with the Phoenicians. He proposes to derive the word mleccha from Moloch or Molech and relates it to Melek or Melqart which was the god of the Phoenicians. But the Phoenicians flourished in the latter half of the second and the first half of the first millennium when the Harappan civilization was a thing of the past. (: MK Dhavalikar, 1997, Meluhha, the land of copper, South Asian

Studies, 13:1, p. 276).

Worterbuch (St. Petersburg Dictionary), Hemacandras Abhidna Cintmai (IV.105), lexicons of Monier Williams and Apte give copper as one of the meanings of the lexeme mleccha. 34

Gudea (ca. 2200 BCE) under the Lagash dynasty brought usu wood and gold dust and carnelian from Meluhha. Ibbi-Sin (2029-2006 BCE) under the third dynasty of r imported from

Meluhha copper, wood used for making chairs and dagger sheaths, mesu wood, and the multicoloured birds of ivory. Dhavalikar argues for the identification of Gujarat with Meluhha (interpreted as a region and as copper ore of Gujarat) and makes a reference to Viu Pura (IV,24) which refers to Gujarat as mleccha country. Nicholas Kazanas has demonstrated that Avestan (OldIranian) is much later than Vedic. " 'Vedic and Avestan' by N. Kazanas In this essay the author examines independent linguistic evidence, often provided by iranianists like R. Beekes, and arrives at the conclusion that the Avesta, even its older parts (the gaas), is much later than the Rigveda. Also, of course, that Vedic is more archaic than Avestan and that it was not the Indoaryans who moved away from the common Indo-Iranian habitat into the Region of the Seven Rivers, but the Iranians broke off and eventually settled and spread in ancientv Iran."32

It is thus possible that Indian sprachbund of the times related to this Shu-ilishu cylinder seal with cuneiform text EME.BAL.ME.LUH.HA.KI (interpreter of Meluhha language), extended to contact regions with Meluhhan (Mleccha) settlers in Sumer and other settlements of Elam/Mesopotamia. A cuneiform text [Ur III (ca. 2100-2000 BC)] refers to Meluhha as a region.33 Vermaak notes34: "Although a Meluhhan village (e-duru me-luh-ha) integrated under the jurisdiction of Girsu/Lagash in southern Mesopotamia has been known since Sargonic times, it has never previously been identified with a specific place name. In this article the Meluhhan village has now, for the first time, been connected in a Ur III text with the well-known village/town of Guabba (Gu-ab-ba-ki) based on the (twice) published text MVN 7 420 = ITT 4 8024 from Ur III Girsu."

35

The polemics of Aryan Invasion/Migration or Out of India Theories need not detain us here, in this enquiry related to identification of glosses of mleccha (meluhha), the most likely Indus language, and the underlying sounds used on Indus writing of mineral work, stoneware, metalware catalogs.

The direction of 'borrowings' is a secondary component of the philological excursus; there is no universal linguistic rule to firmly aver such a direction of borrowing. Certainly, more work is called for in delineating the structure and forms of meluhha (mleccha) language beyond a mere list of metalware glosses. Excerpt from Encyclopaedia Iranica article
35

on cognate dahyu country (often with reference to

the people inhabiting it): DAHYU (OIr. dahyu- ), attested in Avestan dax iiu - , da hu- country (often with reference to the people inhabiting it; cf. AirWb. , cot. 706; Hoffmann, pp. 599-600 n. 14; idem and Narten, pp. 54-55) and in Old Persian dahyu- country, province (pl. nations; Gershevitch, p. 160). The term is likely to be connected with Old Indian dsyu enemy (of the Aryans), which acquired the meaning of demon, enemy of the gods (Mayrhofer, Dictionary II, pp. 28-29). Because of the Indo-Iranian parallel, the word may be traced back to the root das- , from which a term denoting a large collectivity of men and women could have been derived. Such traces can be found in Iranian languages: for instance, in the ethnonym Dahae (q.v., i) men (cf. Av. ethnic name [fem. adj.] dh , from d

ha - ; AirWb. , col. 7

; Gk. Dai, etc.), in

Old Persian dah the Daha people (Brandenstein and Mayrhofer, pp. 113-14), and in Khotanese daha man, male (Bailey, Dictionary , p. 155). The word daha occurs in Persepolis inscription of Xerxes...36 In Avestan the term did not have the same technical meaning as in Old Persian. Avestan

dax iiu - , dahu - refers to the largest unit in the vertical social organization. See, for example,
Avestan x atu - (in the Gathas) next of kin group and nmna - house, corresponding to Old Persian taum - family; Avestan vs - village, corresponding to Avestan v r z na- clan; 36

Avestan zantu- district; and Avestandax iiu - , dahu - (Benveniste, 1932; idem, 1938, pp. 6, 13; Thieme, pp. 79ff.; Frye, p. 52; Boyce, Zoroastrianism I, p. 13; Schwartz, p. 649; Gnoli, pp. 15ff.). The connection dax iiu , dahu - and arya- Aryans is very common to indicate the Aryan lands and peoples, in some instances in the plural: airii da huu ,airiian m dax iiun m ,

airiibii da hubii . In Yat 13.125 and 13.127 five countries (dax iiu -) are mentioned, though
their identification is unknown or uncertain; in the same Yat (13.143-44) the countries of other peoples are added to those of the Aryans: tiriia , sairima , sinu , d ha . In Achaemenid inscriptions Old Persian dahyu - means satrapy (on the problems relative to the different lists of dahyva [pl.], cf. Leuze; Junge; Walser, pp. 27ff.; Herzfeld, pp. 228-29; Herrenschmidt, pp. 53ff.; Calmeyer, 1982, pp. 105ff.; idem, 1983, pp. 1 1ff.) and district (e.g., Nisya in Media; DB 1.5 ; Kent, Old Persian , p. 118). The technical connotation of Old Persian dahyu is certain and is confirmeddespite some doubts expressed by George Cameron but refuted by Ilya Gershevitchby the loanword da-a-yau- i in Elamite. On the basis of the hypothetical reconstruction of twelve districts and twenty-nine satrapies, it has been suggested that the formal identification of the Old Persian numeral 41 with the ideogram DH , sometimes used for dahyu (Kent, Old Persian , pp. 18-19), can be explained by the fact that there were exactly forty-one dahyva when the sign DH was created (Mancini). From the meaning of Old Persian dahyu as limited territory come Middle Persian and Pahlavi deh country, land, village, written with the ideogram MTA (Frahang Pahlawg 2.3, p. 117; cf. Syr. mt ), and Manichean Middle Persian dyh (MacKenzie, p. 26). At times the Avestan use is reflected in Pahlavi deh , but already in Middle Persian the meaning village is well documented; it appears again in Persian deh . Ancient text of Pini also refers to two languages in ik: Sanskrit and Prkt. Prof Avinash Sathaye provides a textual reference on the earliest occurrence of the word, Sanskrit :

triaicatuh airv varh ambhumate math | prkite samskte cpi svayam prokt svayambhuv || (pinis ik)

37

Trans. There are considered to be 63 or 64 var-s in the school (mata) of shambhu. In Prakrit and Sanskrit by swayambhu (manu, Brahma), himself, these var-s were stated. This demonstrates that pini knew both samskta and prkita as established languages. (Personal communication, 27 June 2010 with Prof. Shrinivas Tilak.) Vtstyyana refers to mlecchita vikalpa (cipher writing of mleccha) Vtstyyanas Kamasutra lists (out of 64 arts) three arts related to language:

dea bh jnam (knowledge of dialects) mlecchita vikalpa (cryptography used by mleccha) [cf. mleccha-mukha copper (Skt.); the
suffix mukha is a reflex of m h ingot (Mu.)

akara muika kathanam (messaging through wrist-finger gestures)

Thus, semantically, mlecchita vikalpa as a writing system relates to cryptography (perhaps, hieroglyphic writing) and to the work of artisans (smiths). I suggest that this is a reference to Indian hieroglyphs. It is not a mere coincidence that early writing attested during historical periods was on metal punch-marked coins, copper plates, two-feet long copper bolt used on an Aokan pillar at Rampurva, Sohoura copper plate, two pure tin-ingots found in a shipwreck in Haifa, and even on the Delhi iron pillar clearly pointing to the smiths as those artisans who had the competence to use a writing system. In reference to Rampurva copper-bolt: Here then these signs occur upon an object which must have been made by craftsmen working for Asoka or one of his predessors. (F.R. Allchin, 1959, pon the contextual significance of certain groups of ancient

signs, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, London.). The Indus script inscriptions using hieroglyphs on two pure tin-ingots found in Haifa were reviewed (Kalyanaraman, S., 2010, The Bronze Age Writing System of Sarasvati Hieroglyphics as Evidenced by Two Rosetta Stones - Decoding Indus script as repertoire of the mints/smithy/mine-workers of Meluhha. Journal of Indo-Judaic Studies. Number 11. pp. 4774).

38

Mahbhrata also attests to mleccha used in a conversation with Vidura. atapatha Brhmaa refers to mleccha as language (with pronunciation variants) and also provides an
example of such mleccha pronunciation by asuras. An extraordinary narrative account from atapatha Brhmaa is cited in full to provide the context of the yaja in which vk (speech personified as woman) is referred to the importance of grammatical speech in yaja performance and this grammatical, intelligible speech is distinguished from mlecccha, unintelligible speech. The example of the usage of phrase he lavo is explained by Sayana as a pronunciation variant of: he rayo. i.e. ho, the spiteful (enemies)! This grammatically correct phrase, the Asuras were unable to pronounce correctly, notes Sayana. The B text and translation are cited in full because of the early evidence provided of the mleccha speech (exemplifying what is referred to Indian language studies as ralayo rabhedhah; the transformed use of la where the syllable ra was intended. This is the clearest evidence of a proto-Indian language which had dialectical variants in the usage by asuras and devas (i.e. those who do not perform yagna and those who perform yagna using vaak, speech.) This is comparable to mleccha vcas and rya vcas differentiation by Manu. The translation of B 3.2.1.22-28 is as follows: 22.The gods reflected, That Vaak being a woman, we must take care lest she should allure him. Say to her, Come hither to make me where I stand! and report to us her having come. She then went up to where he was standing. Hence a woman goes to a man who stays in a well-trimmed (house). He reported to them her having come, saying, She has indeed come. 23. The gods then cut her off from the Asuras; and having gained possession of her and enveloped her completely in fire, they offered her up as a holocaust, it being an offering of the gods. (78) And in that they offered her with an anushtubh verse, thereby they made her their own; and the Asuras being deprived of speech, were undone, crying, He lavah! He lavah! (79) 24. Such was the unintelligible speech which they then uttered, -- and he (who speaks thus) is a Mlekkha (barbarian). Hence let no Brahman speak barbarous language, since such is the speech of the Asuras. Thus alone he deprives his spiteful enemies of speech; and whosoever knows this, his enemies, being deprived of speech, are undone. 25. That Yajna (sacrifice) lusted after Vaak (speech [ 0]), thinking, May I pair with her! He united with her. 26. Indra then 39

thought within himself, Surely a great monster will spring from this union of Yagna and Vaak: [I must take care] lest it should get the better of me. Indra himself then became an embryo and entered into that union. 27. Now when he was born after a years time, he thought within himself, Verily of great vigour is this womb which has contained me: [I must take care] that no great monster shall be born from it after me, lest it should get the better of me! 2 . Having seized and pressed it tightly, he tore it off and put it on the head of Yagna (sacrifice [81]); for the black (antelope) is the sacrifice: the black deer skin is the same as that sacrifice, and the black deers horn is the same as that womb. And because it was by pressing it tightly together that Indra tore out (the womb), therefore it (the horn) is bound tightly (to the end of the garment); and as Indra, having become an embryo, sprang from that union, so is he (the sacrifice), after becoming an embryo, born from that union (of the skin and the horn). (B 3.2.1.23-25). (fn 78) According to Sayana, he lavo stands for he rayo (i.e. ho, the spiteful (enemies)! which the Asuras were unable to pronounce correctly. The Kaanva text, however, reads te htavko su hailo haila ity etm ha vcam vadantah parbabhvuh (? i.e. he p. 32 ilaa, ho, speech.) A third version of this passage seems to be referred to in the Mah bhya (Kielh.), p.2. (p.38). (fn 79) Compare the corresponding legend about Yagna and Daki (priests fee), (Taitt. S. VI.1.3.6. (p.3 ) (fn 79) Yagnasya sran; one would expect ka(sra)sya sran. The Taitt.S. reads tm mgeu ny adadht. (p.3 ) (fn 1) In the Kanva text atah (therewith) refers to the head of the sacrifice, -- sa yak khirasta upasprisaty ato v enm etad agre pravisan pravisaty ato v agre gyamno gyate tasmk khirasta upasprisati. (p.39)37 The word meluh.h.a is of special interest. It occurs as a verb in a different form (mlecha-) in Vedic only in B 3.2.1, an eastern text of N. Bihar where it indicates to speak in barbarian fashion. But it has a form closer to Meluh.h.a in Middle Indian (MIA): Pali, the church language of S. Buddhism which originated as a western N. Indian dialect (roughly, between Mathura, Gujarat and the Vindhya) has milakkha, milakkhu. Other forms, closer to B mleccha are found in MIA *mliccha > Sindhi milis, Panjabi milech, malech, Kashmiri bri.c.hun weep, lament (< *mrech-, with the common r/l interchange of IA), W. Pahari mel+c.h dirty. It seems that, just as in other cases mentioned above, the original local form *m(e)luh. (i.e. m(e)lukh in IA pronunciation, cf. E. Iranian 40

bAxdhI Bactria > AV *bahli-ka, balhi-ka) was preserved only in the South (Gujarat? >Pali), while the North (Panjab, Kashmir, even B and Bengal) has *mlecch. The sound shift from-h.h./-kh- > -cch- is unexplained; it may have been modeled on similar correspondences in MIA (Skt. Aki eye _ MIA akkhi, acchi; ks.Etra _eld _ MIA khetta, chetta, etc.) The meaning of Mleccha must have evolved from self-designation > name of foreigners, cf. those of the Franks > Arab farinjI foreigner. Its introduction into Vedic must have begun in Meluh.h.a, in Baluchistan-Sindh, and have been transmitted for a long time in a non-literary level of IA as a nickname, before surfacing in E. North India in Middle/Late Vedic as Mleccha. (Pali milca is influenced by a `tribal name, Pi ca, as is Sindhi milindu, milidu by Pulinda; the word has been further `abbreviated by avoiding the difficult cluster ml- : Prkt mecha, miccha, Kashmiri m c(h), Bengali mech (a Tib.-Burm tribe) and perhaps Pashai mece if not < *mcca `defective (Turner, CDIAL 10389. | Parpola 1994: 174 has attempted a Dravidian explanation. He understands Meluh.h. a (var. Melah.h.a) as Drav. *Mlakam [mlaxam] `high country (= Baluchistan) (=Ta-milakam) and points to Neo-Assyr. Baluh.h.u `galbanum, sinda `wood from Sindh. He traces mlech, milakkha back to *mleks. , which is seen as agreeing, with central Drav. Metathesis with *mlxa = mlaxa-m. Kuiper 1991:24 indicates not infrequent elision of (Dravid.) a- when taken over into Skt. | Shafer 1954 has a Tib-Burm. Etymology *mltse; Southworth 1990: 223 reconstructs Pdrav. 2 *muzi/mizi `say, speak, utter, DEDR 9 9, tamil `Tamil < `own speech.)38 Note: Coining a term, Para-Munda, denoting a hypothetical language related but not ancestral to modern Munda languages, the author goes on to identify it as Harappan, the language of the Harappan civilization. The author later recounts this and posits that Harappan were illiterate and takes the glyphs of the script to be symbols without any basis in any underlying language.39

41

A Pali text, ttardhyayana Stra 10.16 notes: ladhdhaa vimnusattaam riattam purvi

dullaham bahave dasy milakkhuy; trans. though one be born as a man, it is rare chance to
be an rya, for many are the dasyu and milakkhu. Milakkhu and dasyu constitute the majority, they are the many. Dasyu are milakkhu (mleccha speakers). Dasyu are also rya vcas (Manu 10.45), that is, speakers of Sanskrit. Both rya vcas and mleccha vcas are dasyu [cognate dahyu, da ha, daha (Khotanese)], people, in general. 1 A fisherman ; - $ Rm.7. 6.32; Ms. . , 9;1.3 . a fisherman (Apte.

Lexicon) Such people are referred to in Rgveda by Vivmitra as Bhratam janam.

gveda (ca 3.53.12) uses the term, bhratam janam, which can be interpreted as bhrata
folk. The i of the skta is vivmitra gthina. India was called Bhratavara after the king Bhrata. (Vyu 33, 51-2; Bd. 2,14,60-2; lin:ga 1,47,20,24; Viu 2,1,28,32).

ya ime rodas ubhe aham indram atuavam vivmitrasya rakati brahmedam bhratam janam RV 3.53.12 I have made Indra glorified by
these two, heaven and earth, and this prayer of vivmitra protects the people of Bhrata. [Made Indra glorified: indram atuavam the verb is the third preterite of the casual, I have caused to be praised; it may mean: I praise Indra, abiding between heaven and earth, i.e. in the firmament]. The evidence is remarkable that almost every single glyph or glyptic element of the Indus script can be read rebus using the repertoire of artisans (lapidaries working with precious shell, ivory, stones and terracotta, mine-workers, metal-smiths working with a variety of minerals, furnaces and other tools) who created the inscribed objects and used many of them to authenticate their trade transactions. Many of the inscribed objects are seen to be calling cards of the professional artisans, listing their professional skills and repertoire. The identification of glosses from the present-day languages of India on Sarasvati river basin is justified by the continuation of culture evidenced by many artifacts evidencing civilization continuum from the Vedic Sarasvati River basin, since language and culture are intertwined, continuing legacies:

42

Huntington notes40: There is a continuity of composite creatures demonstrable in Indic culture since Kot Diji ca. 000 BCE. Mriga (pair of deer or antelope) in Buddha sculptures compare with Harappan period prototype of a pair of ibexes on the platform below a seated yogin.41

Plate X [c] Lingam in situ in Trench Ai (MS Vats, 1940, Excavations at Harappa, Vol. II, Calcutta) Lingam, grey sandstone in situ, Harappa, Trench Ai, Mound F, Pl. X (c) (After Vats). In an earthenware jar, No. 12 1 , recovered from Mound F, Trench IV, Square I in this jar, six lingams were found along with some tiny pieces of shell, a unicorn seal, an oblong grey sandstone block with polished surface, five stone pestles, a stone palette, and a block of chalcedony42 Mahbhrata alludes to thousands of mlecchas, a numerical superiority equaled by their valour and courage in battle which enhances the invincibility of Pandava (MBh. 7.69.30; 95.36). Chapter 17 of Bharatamunis Nyastra is a beautiful discourse about Sanskrit and Prakrit and the usage of lingua franca by actors/narrators in dramatic performances. Besides, Raja Shekhara, Kalidasa, Shudraka have also used the word Sanskrit for the literary language. (Personal communication from Prof. TP Verma, 7 May 2010). Nyastra XVII.29-30: dvividh

jtibhca prayoge samudht mlecchaabdopacr ca bhratam varam arit The

jtibh (common language), prescribed for use (on the stage) has various forms. It contains words of mleccha origin and is spoken in Bhratavara only XVIII. 80 ] RULES ON THE USE OF LANGUAGES 827 The Common Language 28. The Common Language prescribed for use [on the stage] has various forms 1 . It contains [many] words of Barbarian {mleccha) origin and is spoken in Bharata-varsa [only] Note: 28 (C.26b-27a; B.XVII.29b-30a). 'Read vividha-jatibhasa ; vividha (ca, da in B.) for dvividha.

43

'The common speech or the speech of the commoners is distinguished here from that of the priests and the nobility by describing it as containing words of Barbarian (mleccha) origin. These words seem to have been none other than vocables of the Dravidian and Austric languages. They entered Indo-Aryan pretty early in its history. See S. K. Chatterji, Origin and Development of the Bengali Language, Calcutta, 1926 pp. 42,178.'43 There is a lot of textual data on people as distinct from language -- both mleccha and rya as dasyu (cf. OIr. daha) and as dwpavsinah. I do not know when the word 'ayas' came into vogue. It is as old as Rgveda. The semantics of this word may hold the key in revisiting our language chronologies. I find the following DEDR (Dravidian etyma) entries intriguing: aduru native metal (Ka.); ayil iron (Ta.) ayir, ayiram any ore (Ma.); ajirda karba very hard iron (Tu.)(DEDR 192). I do not know how aduru evolved or is phonetically cognate vis-a-vis ayo 'iron' (Gujarati). There is a very specific explanation for the Kannada word: aduru = gaiyinda tegadu karagade iruva aduru = ore taken from the mine and not subjected to melting in a furnace.44 One intriguing semantic may be cited, again, in the context of the bronze-age. There are two compounds:

milakkhu rajanam 'copper-coloured' (Pali), mleccha mukha 'copper' (Samskrtam).

Why mleccha mukha? I think the lexeme mukha is a substrate lexeme mh 'face, ingot' (Munda. Santali etc.); it is possible that mleccha mukha may refer to 'copper ingot'. m h = the quantity of iron produced at one time in a native smelting furnace (Santali) Mleccha, language. Mleccha, copper. How do semantic associations occur in human interactions as languages evolve? The other meaning of mh 'face' (CDIAL 10158) explains why a face glyph gets ligatured in Indus writing to clear composite hieroglyphs to create mlecchitavikalpa (cipher mentioned by Vtsyyana) See, for example, Seal m0302 (Mohenjo-daro) which shows a 'human face' ligatured to an 'elephant trunk' etc. See other examples on Seals m1179 and m1186A (Mohenjo-daro). The seal m0302 also has the uniquitous fish glyphs denoting ayo 'fish' (Munda stream). ibha 'elephant' (Samskrtam) ibbo'merchant' (Hemacandra Desinmamla -Gujarati) ib 44

'iron' (Santali). There is a Railway station, a village called Ib near Bokaro (with a steel plant in the iron ore belt) on the Howrah-Mumbai rail-route. What is the adorant wearing a scarf offering on seal m1186? It is a bowl with spoons placed on a stool. ka a stool (Kurku) Kano stool, seat (Maltese). (DEDR 1179) Rebus: ka 'stone (ore)' as in: ayask 'excellent iron' (Panini) abu an iron spoon (Santali) Rebus: ab, himba, hompo lump (ingot?), clot, make a lump or clot, coagulate, fuse, melt together (Santali) abe, abea wide horns (Santali) Rebus: hb workplace (P.) dhau m. (also dhahu) m. scarf (WPah.) (CDIAL 6707) Allograph: ato = claws of crab (Santali) Rebus: dhtu = mineral (Skt.), dhatu id. (Santali)

m0302 (Santali) Thus, the composite animal accompanying the adorant denotes: tin ingot.

m1179

tagara 'ram, antelope' Rebus: tagara 'tin'; damgar 'merchant' mh 'face' Rebus: mh 'ingot'

m1186A The text on m1179: Hieroglyphs: mil 'markhor' (Tor.wali) meho 'a ram, a sheep' (G.)(CDIAL 10120) mharam(CDIAL 9606). [mh] m ( S through H) A male sheep, a ram or tup. or [ mhak or ky ] a () A shepherd (Marathi) Allograph: [mha] f A forked stake. Used as a post. Hence a short post generally whether forked or not. Pr. . Rebus: me 'iron' (Ho.) mh 'gold' as in: [ mhasara ] m A bracelet of gold thread. (Marathi) <lo->(B) {V} ``(pot, etc.) to ^overflow''. See <lo-> `to be left over'. @B24310. #20851. Re<lo->(B) {V} ``(pot, etc.) to ^overflow''. See <lo-> `to be left over'. (Munda ) Rebus: loh copper (Hindi) Rebus: loh copper (Hindi). khaa pot Rebus: kh tools, pots and pans (Gujarati). [ lkhaakma ] Iron work; that portion

45

(of a building, machine &c.) which consists of iron. 2 The business of an ironsmith. Kumaoni has semantics: lokha iron tools'. Lyre-player, from one of the steles of king Gudea of Lagash. The lyre has eleven strings. Around 2150 BCE Louvre, Departement des Antiquites Orientales, Paris, France Glyph: tambura harp; rebus: tambra copper (Pkt.)

Cylinder seal of Ibni-sharrum, scribe. khai buffalo bull (Tamil) Rebus: kh '(metal) tools, pots and pans' (Gujarati)

46

Meluhha merchant identified on cuneiform text (Shu-ilishu cylinder seal)

3rd millennium BCE.Musee du Louvre. AO 22 310, Greenstone. Collection de Clercq, Catalogue methodique and raisonnee (1888). That Pali uses the term milakkhu is
significant (cf.

ttardhyayana Stra 10.16) and reinforces the concordance between mleccha

and milakkhu (a pronunciation variant) and links the language with meluhha as a reference to a language in Mesopotamian texts and in the cylinder seal of Shu-ilishu. Possehl45 notes: "The presence in Akkad of a translator of the Meluhhan language suggests that he may have been literate and could read the undeciphered Indus script. This in turn suggests that there may be bilingual Akkadian/ Meluhhan tablets somewhere in Mesopotamia. Although such documents may not exist, Shu-ilishu's cylinder seal offers a glimmer of hope for the future in unraveling the mystery of the Indus script." The pot carried by the woman accompanying the Meluhhan is of traditional, cultural significance in the context of water-ablution ceremonies. cf. the artifact carried by Apkallu in Mesopotamia. It is not clear if this connoted a pot containing the metalsmith's alchemical rasa or alchemial elixir of life or Amrita (Sanskrit: ). In western alchemy, it was also called 'tincture' or 'powder' of alchemists. kola 'woman' Rebus: kol 'working in iron, pancaloha alloy of five metals'. [kamaalu] m

n (S) The waterpot used by the ascetic and the religious student.

47

It is likely that the hieroglyphic narrative describes the Meluhhan as a tin (tagara) merchant (damgar) with competene in working with metal alloys (kol) -- signified by the pot carried by the accompanying woman (kola). kamaalu mn. (in the f (). according to Pa1n2. 4-1 , 71) a gourd or vessel made of wood or earth used for water (by ascetics and religious students) , a waterjar MBh. BhP. Ya1jn5. &c (Monier-Williams lexicon, p. 252). kamaalu1 m.n. gourd or other vessel used for water MBh.Pa. kamaalu -- n. waterpot used by non -- Buddhist ascetics; Pk. kamaalu -- m. drinking gourd used by ascetics; Bi. kwaal mendicant's wooden cup; M. kvaa f. coconut used as a water vessel ; Si. kamanal ascetic's waterpot .(CDIAL 2761). [ kamaaluvu ] kamanaluvu. [Skt.] n. A bowl or cruise carried by a Hindu ascetic. . kamanali. A hermit: "he who carries a cruise." Rebus: [ kamaamu ] kamaamu. [Tel.] n. A portable furnace for melting the precious metals. . Allograph 1: [ kamahamu ] kamahamu. [Skt.] n. A tortoise. Allograph 2: or [ kama or h ] m ( S) A bow (esp. of bamboo or horn) (Marathi). Allograph 3: kamaha penance (Pkt.) Rebus: kampaam coiner, mint (Tamil). The Allograph 4 is a recurring hieroglyph and may well have been connoted by the 'pot' carried by the woman accompanying the Meluhhan to signify a 'mint' associated with the 'antelope' carried by the Meluhhan -- read rebus for 'iron'. tagara 'antelope' Rebus: tagara 'tin'; damgar 'merchant' (Akkadian). Alternative readings: mil markhor (Tor.wali) meho a ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: merchants helper me iron (Munda). mlekh 'goat' (Br.) Rebus: milakku 'copper' (Pali); mleccha 'copper' (Skt.) Meluhha ! Mleccha ! tagara 'antelope' Rebus: tagara 'tin'. Two copper tablets. Mohenjo-daro. Showing two allographs: archer hieroglyph; ficus + crab hieroglyph. ato = claws of crab (Santali); dhtu = mineral (Skt.) loa ficus religiosa (Santali) rebus: loh metal

48

(Skt.) kamakom fig.kamaha crab. kmahum = a bow; kma, kmaum = a chip of bamboo (G.) kmahiyo a bowman; an archer (Skt.) Rebus: kammai a coiner (Kannada); kampaam coinage, coin, mint (Tamil)kammaa = mint, gold furnace (Telugu) The allograph, kamaha, kamaha, kamahaka, kamahaga, kamahaya penance (Prkt) is evidenced in the following Indus inscriptions: m0304 m453B The scarf worn by the person seated in penance: dhau m. (also dhahu) m. scarf (WPah.) (CDIAL 6707) Rebus: dhatu minerals (Santali); dhtu mineral (Pali). mha 'The polar star' (Marathi) Rebus: me 'iron' (Ho.Munda)

Przyluski notes the principal forms of the words signifying man and woman in the Munda languages: Man: hor, hrol, harr, hr, haa, ho, koro Woman: k, r, koi, kol Comparing son and daughter in Santali:

49

Son = kora hapan; daughter = kuri hapan. An old Munda word, kol means man. S. K. Chatterjee called the Munda family of languages as Kol, as the word, according to him, is (in the Sanskrit-Prkt form Kolia) an early Aryan modification of an old Munda word meaning man. [Chatterjee, SK, The study of kol, Calcutta Review, 1923, p. 455.] Przyluski accepts this explanation. [Przyluski, Non-aryan loans in Indo-Aryan, in: Bagchi, PC, Pre-aryan and pre-

dravidian, pp.28-2946 a root kur, kor is differentiated in the Munda languages for signifying:
man, woman, girl and boy. That in some cases this root has taken a relatively abstract sense is proved by Santali koa, koa, which signify one as in the expression koa ke koa each single one. Thus one can easily understand that the same root has served the purpose of designating the individual not as an indivisible unity but as a numerical wholeThus we can explain the analogy between the root kur, kor man the number 20 in Munda k k , ko and the number 10 in Austro-Asiatic family ko, se-kr, skall, gal. (ibid., pp. 2 -30). A clue to the intensity of interactions in the Ancient Near East domain is found in two cognate words: harosheth, 'smithy of nations' (Hebrew) and kharo, name of an early writing system. That Indus writing continued as a legacy in kharo and brhm writing systems is an unfinished hypothesis. One view is that kharo writing system is evolved from PhoenianAramaic in the context of trade in civilization contact areas of Ancient Near East. Some work is in progress on kharo documents of ancient Bauddham texts. kharo (cognate with harosheth) was a syllabic writing system with intimations of contacts with Aramaic writing system. Though early evidences of kharo documents are dated to ca. early 5th century BCE, it is likely that some form of contract documentation using a proto-form of kharo was perhaps used by artisans and traders, across a vast interaction area. kharo 'blacksmith lip, carving' and harosheth 'smithy' are semantic cognates. Most likely, (haroshet) a noun meaning a carving. Hence, kharo came to represent a 'carving, engraving' art, i.e. a writing system.

Harosheth Hebrew: ; is pronounced khar-o-sheth. Harosheth hagoyim smithy o

nations (Biblical); cognate kharo goy, writing/engraving community of smiths (Prkt). A locally made gold pendant of United Arab Emirates, from the Wadi Suq period. This is an evocation of a similar artifact of metal (perhaps gold or electrum gold-silver alloy) dated to ca. 50

2000 BCE. The hieroglyphs read rebus are: 1. Antelope; 2. Mirror images joined back-to-back; 3. Curved mollusc as tail. Hieroglyph: ang, hang snail, mollusc; rebus:

sang stone (ore). Hieroglyph: agara ram; rebus: tamkru, dam-gar (mint) merchant. Hieroglyph:
Joined back-to-back: pusht back; rebus: pusht ancestor. pust bah pust generation to generation. In summary, the meaning conveyed by the hieroglyphs is: lineage stone (ore, tin) mint merchant.

Conclusion The challenge of the cipher, an understanding of the language and content of the messages conveyed through about 7000 inscriptions of Indus Writing Corpora can be met by using a rebus method analogous to the method used on Egytian hieroglyphs and validated by the archaeological context of the Bronze Age which brought a veritable revolution in culture and languages of many parts of Eurasia (ancient Near East) extending from Haifa in Israel to Rakhigarhi in India. The clue is provided by the Rigvedic phrase takat vk, incised speech. What starte with tokens and bullae to categorise artifacts and count them evolved into a writing system based on sounds of Meluhha (Mleccha) language and speech, denoting the words by the use of hieroglyphs read rebus (as in the case of Egyptian hieroglyphs).

Verma, TP, Writing in the Vedic Age, Harappan and Asokan Writing, in: Itihas

Darpan XVIII (1), 2013 Research Journal of Akhila Bhratiya Itihsa Sankalana Yojan, New
Delhi, pp. 40-59. http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/07/writing-in-vedic-age-prof-tpverma.html Writing in Vedic Age by Prof. TP Verma. Three frustrated scholars' dogma on illiteracy.

51

Sproat, Richard, 2013, Written language vs. non-linguistic symbol systems mirrored in a

blogpost: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/05/written-language-vs-non-linguistic.html
3

Rao, Rajesh, 2010. Probabilistic analysis of an ancient undeciphered script. IEEE

Computer. 43~(3), 7680. Rajesh PN Rao, Nisha Yadav, Mayank N. Vahia, Hrishikesh
Joglekar, R. Adhikari and Iravatham Mahadevan, A Markov model of the Indus Script, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,, Vol. 106 no. 33, 13685-13690.
4

Steve Farmer, Richard Sproat, and Michael Witzel, The collapse of the Indus-Script thesis:

the myth of a literate Harappan civilization, EJVS 11-2, Dec. 13, 2005,
5

Asko Parpola (2008). "Is the Indus script indeed not a writing system?" In: Airvati (pp. 111131). Chennai: Varalaaru.com http://www.harappa.com/script/indus-writing.pdf Massimo Vidale, "The collapse melts down: a reply to Farmer, Sproat and Witzel" in: East and West, Vol. 57, No.1/4, December 2007, pp. 333-366 http://www.docstoc.com/docs/documentpreview.aspx?doc_id=9163376
6

Shannon, CE, Communication theory of secrecy systems, Bell Systems Tech. J., 28, 656-

715, 1949 http://netlab.cs.ucla.edu/wiki/files/shannon1949.pdf

7

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/07/indus-writing-cipher-blogposts-s.html See:http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2011/11/archaeological-mystery-solved-site-

of.htmlThe inscriptions on two pure tin ingots found in a shipwreck in Haifa have been discussed in: Journal of Indo-Judaic Studies, Vol. 1, Number 11 (2010) -- The Bronze Age Writing System of Sarasvati Hieroglyphics as Evidenced by Two Rosetta Stones By S. Kalyanaraman (Editor of JIJS: Prof. Nathan Katz) http://www.indojudaic.com/index.php?option=com_contact&view=contact&id=1&Itemid=8
9

http://www.harappa.com/indus4/e6.html http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/iron-ore.html 52

10

11

Source: http://www.cbseacademic.in/web_material/Circulars/2012/68_KTPI/Module_8.pdf Kalyanaraman, S. 2012. Indian Hieroglyphs Invention of Writing. Herndon: Sarasvati

12

Research Center
13

Schmandt-Besserat, D. 1996. How Writing Came About. Austin: The University of Texas

Press.
14

Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1992), Before Writing, 2 vols. Austin: The University of Texas

Press.
15

Ibid. Schmandt-Besserat, D. 2009. SCRIPTA, Volume 6 (September 2009): 145 Kalyanaraman, S. 2012. Indian Hieroglyphs Invention of Writing. Herndon: Sarasvati

16

17

Research Center
18

Nissen, H.J., Damerow, P., Englund, R.K., 1993. Archaic Bookkeeping, Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press, pp. 64-65.

19

Kalyanarman, S. 1998. Indian Lexicon A comparative etymological dictionary of South-

Asian Languages. Manila. http://sites.google.com/site/kalyan97 (Online

download) http://www.scribd.com/doc/2232617/lexicon
20

Emeneau, Murray. 1956. India as a Lingusitic Area. "Langauge" 32: 3.16.

http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/113093
21

F.B.J. Kuiper, 1948, Proto-Munda Words in Sanskrit, Amsterdam, Verhandeling der

Koninklijke Nederlandsche Akademie Van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks Deel Li, No. 3, 1948, p.9 http://www.scribd.com/doc/12238039/mundalexemesinSanskrit
22

Masica, CP, 1971, Defining a Linguistic area. South Asia. Chicago: The University of Chicago

Press. 53

23

Przyludski, J., 1929, Further notes on non-aryan loans in Indo-Aryan in: Bagchi, P. C.

(ed.), Pre-Aryan and Pre-Dravidian in Sanskrit. Calcutta : University of Calcutta: 145-149

24

Southworth, F., 2005, Linguistic archaeology of South Asia, London, Routledge-Curzon.

25

F.B.J. Kuiper, Proto-Munda Words in Sanskrit, Amsterdam, Verhandeling der Koninklijke

Nederlandsche Akademie Van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks Deel Li, No. 3, 1948 http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/sarasvati/dictionary/9MUNDA.HTM
26http://www.ling.hawaii.edu/faculty/stampe/aa.html

See http://kalyan97.googlepages.com/m

leccha1.pdf
27

See: http://www.aakkl.helsinki.fi/melammu/pdf/vidale2004.pdf

28

Colin Masica, Aryan and non-Aryan elements in North Indian agriculture, in: M. Deshpande

and P.E. Hook (eds.), Aryan and non-Aryan in India, (Ann Arbour, Univ. of Michigan, Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies 1979), pp. 55-152.
29

The work is Simharaja, 1909, Prakriti Rupavatara -- A Prakrit grammar based on the

Valmikisutra, Vol. I, Ed. by E. Hultzsch, Albermarle St., Royal Asiatic Society. Full text at:
http://ia700202.us.archive.org/23/items/prakritarupavata00simhuoft/prakritarupavata00simhuoft. pdf
30

See also: http://www.indianetzone.com/39/prakrit_language.htm

31

Robert Shafer, 1954, Ethnography of Ancient India, Otto Harras Sowitz,

Wiesbaden.http://archive.org/stream/ethnographyofanc033514mbp/ethnographyofanc033514m bp_djvu.txt
32

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indology/Vedic_and_Avestan.pdf http://cdli.ucla.edu/cdlisearch/search/index.php?SearchMode=Text&txtID_Txt=P227514

33

54

34

Vermaak, PS, 2008, Guabba, the Meluhhan village in Mesopotamia, in: Journal for

Semitics, Vol. 17, No. 2: http://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/semit/semit_v17_n2_a12.html

35

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/dahyuhttp://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3800.pdf

36

37

cf. atapatha Brhmaa vol. 2 of 5, tr. By Julius Eggeling, 1885, in SBE Part 12; fn 78-81). Witzel, Michael, 1999, Substrate Languages in Old Indo-Aryan (Rgvedic, Middle and Late

38

Vedic, Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies (EJVS) 5-1 (1999) pp.1-67. http://www.ejvs.laurasianacademy.com/ejvs0501/ejvs0501article.pdf
39

Steve Farmer, Richard Sproat, and Michael Witzel, 2005, The Collapse of the Indus-Script

Thesis: The Myth of a Literate Harappan Civilization, EJVS 11-2 Dec. 13, 2005.
40

http://huntingtonarchive.osu.edu/Makara%20Site/makara http://tinyurl.com/gonsh Vats, MS, 1940, Excavations at Harappa, Delhi, p. 370.

41

42

43

Source: Natya Shastra of Bharata Muni in english THE NATYASASTRA A Treatise on Hindu

Dramaturgy and Histrionics Ascribed to B H A R A T A - M r X I Vol. I. ( Chapters I-XXVII ) Completely translated jor the jirst tune from the original Sanskrit tuttri u Introduction and Various Notes, Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta http://archive.org/stream/NatyaShastraOfBharataMuniVolume1/NatyaShastraOfBharataMuniVol ume1_djvu.txt
44

Kannada. Siddhnti Subrahmaya stris new interpretation of the Amarakoa,

Bangalore,Vicaradarpana Press, 1872, p. 330

45

Possehl, Gregory, 2006, Shu-ilishus cylinder seal, Expedition, Vol. 48, No.

1 http://www.penn.museum/documents/publications/expedition/PDFs/481/What%20in%20the%20World.pdf 55

46

http://www.scribd.com/doc/33670494/prearyanandpredr035083mbp]

56