by Roshen Dalal
B.B. Lal finds similarity with Nubian, upper Egypt megaliths, and those in India. The megalithic or early or pre-literate societies of the south were based, according to Kamil Zvelebil, an Indologist of Czech origin, on successful warfare with iron weapons and the use of the horse and horse chariots in fertile rice-growing regions. There is a suggestion that the Dravidian culture moved from south to north, and not vice versa.
Before ending this section, we will look at two more cultures that have been associated with the Later Vedic Samhitas.
BLACK AND RED WARE CULTURE
BRW does not represent a single culture. Various types of this pottery are widely distributed. However, it is found in the Ganga–Yamuna region, in the core area of the Kuru country. In this region, it is often in a stratified context above OCP and below the succeeding PGW culture and, therefore, could be within a time frame approximately between 1500 BCE and 1200 BCE, though it also occurs in later levels.
PAINTED GREY WARE CULTURE
PGW is a fine grey pottery with black painting. It has a wide area of distribution, including the hill regions of Garhwal and Kumaon, the Himalayan foothills, and the northern plains from the Bahawalpur region in Pakistan to Kaushambi near Allahabad. It extends into the Malwa plateau in central India and stray sherds also occur in other areas. There are numerous sites near the upper region of the Ghaggar–Chautang (Sarasvati–Drishadvati of the Vedas), the small tributaries of these rivers, and the West Yamuna canal, which must have been an old course of the river Yamuna. At a few sites, particularly the site of Bhagwanpura (Haryana), there is an overlap with the Late Harappan strata. The earliest dates for PGW are 1300–1200 BCE. In general, there were: houses made from wood posts and thatch, sometimes of mud bricks and occasionally of baked brick; agriculture and domestication of cattle, goats, sheep (and sometimes horses); and a variety of crafts. Objects of copper, iron, semiprecious stone, bone, terracotta, glass, and occasionally of ivory have been found in association with this culture; the fine grey painted pottery actually forms a small percentage of other pottery types found.
Once again, it should be noted that similar pottery does not always indicate a similar culture and, even if it does, different types of people could have occupied the sites of a single culture. It is interesting that PGW sites have been associated with the Later Vedic culture, and are also believed to represent the core area of the Mahabharata. However, they cannot represent both.
LANGUAGE GROUPS
Before making suggestions of the possible identity of Rig Vedic people, we will also look at the languages of India. India has four main language groups: Indo-Aryan, which is part of the Indo-European group; Dravidian; Austro-Asiatic; and Tibeto-Burman. In addition, there are some languages unrelated to these groups, for instance, Andamanese. It is thought that language itself originated around 40,000 to 1 million years ago. How and when these groups of languages developed and arose within India is not very clear. This also has to be linked with the origin of people within India. Some analysis has been done by looking at the different language groups, and linking the results with the theory of the original spread of population from Africa. The chronological sequence of the other language groups in India has not been established. For all these languages, there are different theories regarding their advent and diffusion in India. These languages are often linked to racial groups or subgroups but, once again, it should be emphasized that language and race are not connected.
We cannot go into an in-depth study of the research in all these languages but let us take a look at the main viewpoints.
ANDAMANESE
Andamanese includes languages spoken in the Andamans, which are unrelated to others in India. It is thought to represent one of the earliest languages in South Asia. Two language families here are Great Andamanese and Ongan, and one little-known language, Sentinalese. Great Andamanese is spoken by the Aka-Jeru people who are also known as the Great Andamanese. It had thirty-six speakers in 1997; they were bilingual and could also speak Hindi. Ongan includes Jarawa and Ongan, and does not seem related to the Great Andamanese group. They have about three hundred speakers currently.
The American anthropologist and linguist Joseph Greenberg and the Australian linguist Stephen Wurm felt that these languages are related to West Papuan languages, part of a larger group termed Indo-Pacific; Wurm added that they are also close to certain Timor languages but this could be because of a linguistic substratum. The American phonologist and linguist Juliette Blevins has traced connections between the Ongan language and Austronesian.
The Andaman people remained isolated from other groups for centuries, and thus preserved their original language. They may have been part of a very early migration from Africa, at least 60,000 years ago, though others have linked them with Oceanic peoples.
DRAVIDIAN
These languages are unique to the subcontinent but have some similarities with other languages of the ancient world. The main Dravidian languages are Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, and Kannada, with Tamil being the oldest literary language. However, there are numerous other languages or dialects, and these can broadly be divided into three groups. The northern group consists of Brahui, spoken in the Brahui Hills in Balochistan, as well as Kurukh and Malto spoken in Bengal and Orissa. The central group consists of Telugu and a number of dialects including Kui, Khond, Holani, Konda, Gondi, Naiki, Parji, and Koya. The southern group consists of Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam, Tulu, Badaga, Toda, Kota, and Kodagu. Tribes such as the Irulas, Kadars, Paniyans, and Kurumbas also speak Dravidian languages, though it is thought that their earliest languages may be related to East African languages, and that they may constitute some of the earliest inhabitants of India.
There are Austric elements in Dravidian languages. As already seen, scholars such as McAlpin (1975) suggested similarities between Elamite and Dravidian. He estimated 20 per cent vocabulary cognates and 12 per cent probable cognates. Though many support this theory, the Russian linguist Georgiy Starostin, among others, denied that there were major similarities while the Russian linguist Vaclav Blazak connected Elamite with Afroasian languages. The Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis is related to the theory that agriculture, along with the language, spread to the Indus region from Elam in Iran. However, the British archaeobotanist Dorian Fuller analysed archaeobotanical and archaeozoological data, and felt that Proto-Dravidian already existed in the Indian peninsula. Based on plant remains, the beginnings of agriculture in this region was a local development. The distribution and dispersion of Dravidian languages in this context dates to the Neolithic period, around 4000 BCE, and is unconnected with the north-west or north-east.
Dravidian has also been related to Japanese (Japanese Tamil scholar Susumu Ohno and Sri Lanka professor A. Shanmugadas) not due to the migration of Japanese speakers to India but, as per Ono, due to the eastward migration of Tamil people, which he at first dated to around 3500 BCE but then revised it to a much later date.
Brahui
This is part of the Dravidian group of languages. Today it has only 15 per cent Dravidian words but retains its Dravidian morphology. Brahui speakers are believed to number 2,066,000 in Pakistan; 260,000 in Afghanistan; 16,000 in Iran; and 400 in India. There are numerous Brahui tribes, and they are now mainly Sunni Muslims. There are three main theories of their origin: (1) that they were descendants of Elamite–Dravidians of the Indus civilization; (2) that they came to the region from north India, either before or after the Indo-Aryan migration, but before the arrival of the Baloch; and (3) that they migrated to the area from inner India in the 11th or in the 13th to 14th centuries CE. Though the first theory has been proposed by archaeologists, it is the third theory that is favoured by linguists.
There are no Avestan loanwords in Brahui, suggesting its origin in India at a later date. It is related to Kurukh (Oraon) and Malto of the northern group of Dravidian languages. The traditional origin of these is from farther south, not from the north.
AUSTRO-ASIATIC LANGUAGES
&
nbsp; This is a group of about one hundred and fifty languages spoken in South-East and East Asia, India, and Vietnam. As far as India goes, the main subdivisions are Munda and its variants. There are a number of Munda languages, generally subdivided into northern and southern braches. Munda languages include Korku, Santhali, Mundari, Kharia, Savara, and others.
They have been influenced by contact with other Indian languages. Remo is another language, spoken in southern Orissa, with a basic vocabulary inherited from Proto-Munda and Proto-Austro-Asiatic languages. All Austro-Asiatic languages have certain aspects in common. They have a large number of vowels, between thirty to thirty-five, and a number of prefixes and infixes but no suffixes (except in Nicobarese). Mon-Khmer languages form part of this group and include Khasi (spoken in Meghalaya) and Nicobarese (spoken in the Nicobar Islands). Beyond India, the other languages of this family are Vietnamese, Khmer, Muong, Mon, Khmu, and Wa.
There are various theories of how the Austro-Asiatic languages entered India. One theory is that they originated in Indo-China and south China, spread east to India and south to Malaya, and then to the islands beyond. Another theory linking language with race, is they are associated with very old offshoots of the Mediterraneans, who came into India from the north-west, before typical Mediterranean features with light or brown skin and long heads had developed. This theory states that Austric tribes, along with their languages, spread over India and then went to Myanmar, Malaya, and the Southeast Asian islands. In Myanmar and Indo-China, they mixed with Sino-Tibetans. An Austric group from India reached Sri Lanka, where they survive as the Veddahs, and then went to Australia where their descendants are the Australian aborigines. In the plains, they were displaced by Dravidian and Aryan speakers but Austric languages survive in the hills and forests of central and eastern India. On the Himalayan slopes, Austric languages mixed with and modified prevailing Sino-Tibetan dialects. This explains how Khasis speak an Austric language.
There is still insufficient data for Proto-Austric but, based on linguistic data, a homeland north of eastern Eurasia is suggested, with a split into different languages around 9000–8000 BCE. Reconstructions of Proto-Munda suggest its existence at an early date in Orissa. Para-Munda is suggested by Witzel as predating Proto-Munda, and existing in the Indus region, but this has been questioned.
Recent genetic studies indicate that Austro-Asiatics posssibly originated in India and spread through Tibet and Myanmar to China, but once again these studies are insufficient. Fuller believes current archaeobotanic evidence provides pointers but is not adequate to reach a conclusion, though he favours the theory of language spread into India from the north-east.
Nihali or Nahali is considered an isolate language in central India, though it may be related to Munda.
TIBETO-BURMAN LANGUAGES
This group, sometimes considered a part of Sino-Tibetan languages, is thought to comprise 350 or more languages. (There are several divergent classifications of Sino-Tibetan.) These are spoken in central, east, south, and south-east countries including Myanmar, Tibet, northern Thailand, part of Vietnam, Laos, parts of central China, part of Nepal, Baltistan in Pakistan, and many areas in India, including Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Ladakh, and Kargil in Jammu and Kashmir, and north-east India; within north-east India, the Naga languages, Manipuri, Bodo, Garo, Lushai, Lepcha, Chakma, and Tripuri are part of this group. Within this broad grouping, there are several sub-classifications of Tibeto-Burman; recent research in this area includes the work of David Bradley, an American-origin linguist and professor at La Trobe University, Melbourne, and George Van Driem, a linguist at the University of Berne. It is thought that Sino-Tibetan had developed by 4000 BCE in western China between the Yangtze and Hwang. Here, a language developed from which Chinese, Tibetan, and Burmese evolved, and also perhaps Thai, though Thai is possibly of different origin. It is interesting that Proto-Indo-European and Sino-Tibetan languages have been connected by a scholar of Taiwanese origin, Tsung-tung Chang.
It is not clear when these languages reached India. According to some accounts, they could have been spoken by the Vedic Kiratas and were in the region by Vedic times.
INDO-ARYAN
Most research work in this sphere has been done on the Indo-Aryan languages but here too there are no conclusions on their date. Indo-Aryan has also been considered a racial group. It is presumed that the other three groups were here before the Indo-Aryans. This racial grouping was the result of prevalent British ideas; research from 1990–2010 suggests that there is no Aryan–Dravidian division as north and south Indians are genetically similar.
In any case, anthropologists no longer believe in racial classifications, and the Indo-Aryan theory, in the context of the Rig Veda, is related to langauge, not to race. The relationship of Indo-Aryan and Indo-European as well as Indo-Iranian languages has already been discussed. Several languages of this group are spoken today, of which the base language is Sanskrit, with other additions. Indo-Aryan languages are spoken across north India, extending east to Assam and towards the south till Maharashtra. It is thus the largest language group within India.
Regional and colloquial variants of Sanskrit began to develop from early days, and included Pali, various Prakrit languages, including Ardha Magadhi, Maharashtri, and other variants. Languages of this group today include Hindi and its dialects, including Hindustani, Rajasthani, Avadhi, Bagheli, Chhattisgarhi, Bihari, Garhwali, Kumaoni, other hill dialects, Punjabi, Sindhi, Marathi, Konkani, Gujarati, Odia (Oriya), Bengali, and Assamese. All of these also have local variants.
Kashmiri is also considered Indo-Aryan. Some feel it is derived from Dardic, not Sanskrit, but Dardic too is usually thought to be a branch of Indo-Aryan. Dardic is also, at times, considered a separate division of Indo-Iranian. These languages are spoken by mountain communities within north India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. They are divided into two branches: (1) Shina, including Kashmiri; Shina proper; Kohistani and (2) Khowar or Chatrarai or Chitrali. Nuristani languages were once thought to belong to this group but are now considered a separate branch of Indo-Iranian (see Chapter 4).
Bangani
Bangani, an Indo-Aryan language of Garhwal in Uttarakhand, is believed to have a centum substrate (see Chapter 3 for centum and satem languages), according to various scholars including Claus Peter Zoller of the University of Oslo, and the Indian linguist Anvita Abbi. This has, however, been challenged by Dutch linguist George van Driem and Indian linguist Suhnu R. Sharma (1997). The debate on this continues.
LANGUAGES OF BALOCHISTAN
As Balochistan is a key area in the early history of north-west India–Pakistan, we will briefly look at the languages spoken there today. These include Balochi, Saraiki, Brahui, Pashto, Sindhi, Hazaragi, and Urdu. The Baloch claim that they left their original home in the far north-west Zagros mountains near Aleppo in the mid-1st millennium CE, and moved to Balochistan. They are considered an Iranian group with some Semitic, Indic, and other genes. In the north-west Zagros, the district and tribe of Belijan or Beluchan still exist. These identify themselves as Kurds, who are culturally and linguistically cousins of the Baloch. The migrating Baloch tribes absorbed the locals of Makran, southern Sistan, and the Brahui region. Pashtuns are the other large group in the area. There are also some Sindhis.
GENETIC STUDIES
Scientists such as Stephen Gould, Richard Lewontin, Leonard Lieberman, and others have argued that race is not a valid method to classify humans, and anthropologists have moved away from categorizing people according to race. However, though the term ‘race’ may not be used, recent studies on genetics, genome decoding, and paleo-analysis of bones have again brought the question of types of people to the forefront. Such studies have come up with various theories. Among them are the following:
On the basis of genetic analysis, the American geneticist David Reich and others suggested that Indians are a mixture of two groups, termed Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI). ANI are similar to
western Eurasians, including Europeans, and account for 40–80 per cent of the Indian genome; ASI are not linked with any other group. Today only Andaman islanders have exclusive descent from ASI; the rest are mixed.
Reich also suggests that Dravidians are related to people from the eastern Mediterranean; they are thought to be of the same stock as the people of Asia Minor and Crete, as well as the pre-Hellenic Greeks (Aegeans).
Other genetic studies suggest that there was no large inflow of genes into India after 10,000 BCE. Paleo-analysis of bones from graves in the north-west suggests that there were two periods of discontinuity—between 6000 and 4500 BCE, and after 800 BCE. These studies may have some basis but should not be taken as conclusive. For instance, Reich’s conclusions have been arrived at with samples of only 132 people, from twenty-five groups across thirteen states; the majority of people selected were tribals or lower castes. Haryana, Punjab, Bihar, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Assam, and even Tamil Nadu are among the states totally excluded from this study. Gujarat, Kerala, Karnataka, and Madhya Pradesh are represented only by samples from tribal populations. The limited nature of such a study is clear.
Whatever genetic studies may show, historically we do know of population movements into India from 600 BCE onwards, even before the medieval period. Early Persians, Greeks, Parthians, Kushans, Huns, and even Sasanians all had a presence in north India.