There are 26 Merotitic signs which researchers agreed had established meanings before my decipherment of Meroitic. My identification of Tokharian/Kushana as the language of the Meroitic inscriptions has led me to accept some, but not all of the “established meanings for the Meroitic terms listed below:
“established Meroitic meanings” ...........alternative Meroitic meanings
at, ‘bread .....................................................‘down the road’
wi, ‘brother ...................................................‘honor’
sem, wife .................................................... sm, ‘protection,refuge’
kdi, woman....................................................... woman
st,foot/feet .........................................................------
edhe,tedhe, born by ..........................................------
el,l,yel, give ........................................................e ‘give’; gift
mk, deity............................................................ ‘diety’
lh, great ..............................................................‘great’
mlo, good............................................................. ml, ‘under influence, soul
ml-o, spiritual
mte, small,little................................................... ‘to unlock, to open’
qore, ruler .............................................................qor, ‘royal’; female royal:‘qor-i’
male royal:‘qor-e’
kdike, queen’s sister’ ...............................................------
tñyi, lion...................................................................... -------
abr, ‘man’ ..................................................................ab/ ap, ancestor, father
ste, ‘mother’................................................................. ‘mother’
s, person......................................................................... s, man, king
še, son
šr, sister
abd, province..................................................................ab ‘father, ancestor
kdis, sister .......................................................................kdi ‘woman’
ato, water.............................................................................. -------
erike, terike,.........................................................................yerike ‘begotten of’ terike, ‘fashion and revitalize’
rike,....................................................................................... ‘indeed to sojour’
yerike..................................................................... ‘on a journey to invigorate’, ‘revitalize , to give form to’
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Egyptian, Black African Languages and Meroitic
The Kushites and Egyptians had a close relationship for millennia. As a result the Egyptians had a tremendous influence on the culture of the Kushites, especially in the area of religion[i].
As early as the 12th dynasty the Egyptians controlled Nubia. After 1674 BC, the Kerma rulers regained control of Nubia until the raise of the New Kingdom. Pharaohs of the New Kingdom ruled Egypt for 500 years.
Nubia gained independence after the decline of Egypt in 1085 B.C. During this period the Kushites developed a highly developed civilization at Napata and Meroe (880 B.C.-A. D. 350). Over time the Kushites became strong enough to conqueror Egypt and found the 25th Dynasty.
The long association of Egypt and Nubia suggest that the Egyptians may have influenced more than the culture of the Kushites. In this paper we will review the affinities between the Egyptian and Meroitic languages.
Ll. Griffith during his decipherment of Meroitic (M.) found many Egyptian (E.) terms . These terms were especially used in the political culture area e.g., E. p-sy-n-nsw 'son of king' >M. pesto 'king's foothold/foundation of light' .
Now that we have more evidence about the Meroitic language we can now compare Egyptian and Meroitic to determine if there are any other similarities between these languages. Below are some Meroitic terms that illustrate the influence of Egyptian on Meroitic.
Egyptian Meroitic
m 'do not' ma not, no
nd 'homage' net 'bow in reverence'
r 'to, into' r id.
se 'son' s id.
s y 'satisfaction' se-ne 'to be satisfied'
ss 'writing, scribe' ssor 'scribe'
s w 'to protect' s 'to protect'
di 'give' d id.
t ' thou' t id.
t 'earth' te 'land'
k i 'high' kha 'great'
hc'w 'body' khe 'spirit, body'
rc 'likewise' r 'like'
bi 'good deed' bli 'right, order'
b 'soul' b, be id.
ssmt 'stewart' ssimte id.
p-mr-msc 'general, stategus' pelmos id.
p-sy-n-nsw 'son of the king' pesto
st "Isis' Wos id.
Wsir 'Osiris Sore id.
nfr 'good' na, n
ti 'here' t
Several aspects of Demotic grammar agree with Meroitic structure. This is especially true in relation to the formation of the adjective case and the use of pronouns.
The Meroitic funerary tablets are written in the third or second person. Meroitic words are usually formed by the addition of post-positions or suffixes. The Meroitic pronouns are suffixed to Meroitic words. They include, -te 'you, thou'; -t 'her, he'; ne 'his'; -to 'your'; and the -n and a third person singular suffixes. For example:
-n s/he, it, her, his
i "go", i-n 'he goes'
de 'bequeathal', de-n 'his bequeathal'
qe 'make' , qe-n 'he makes'
In Demotic we see use of suffixial pronouns. For example:
sdm 'hear'
sdmy 'I hear'
sdm .f 'he hear'
sdm hr-f 'he will hear'
In Meroitic the adjective is placed behind the noun. For example,
e 'complete'
ŝ on tene 'The king commence(s) the rebirth'.
ŝ on tene-e 'The king commence(s) the complete rebirth'.
Adjectives in Demotic are also placed behind the noun. For example:
rmt hm ' small man'
ŝy nfr ' good fate'
ssw sbk ' few days'
The -m suffix was used in Meroitic to denote the negative effect. The negative particle -m, is often joined to verbs along with the pronoun. For example:
mi-n 'injure him', mi-m-n 'injure him not'.
In Meroitic tablets the negative suffix rarely appears.
The Egyptian negative particle m, agrees with Meroitic. In Demotic the negative particle mn-, is prefixed, e.g.,
mn lh gm hw 'no fool finds profit'.
In the short review above of Egyptian and Meroitic cognates we can see the obvious influence of Egyptian, especially Demotic on Meroitic. This influence was shown not only in vocabulary but also grammatical features.
This linguistic material discussed above clearly suggest some Egyptian substrata influence on Meroitic. It indicates Egyptian influence on both the structure and vocabulary of Meroitic.
It is very interesting to note that much of the affinity between Meroitic and Egyptian is based on Demotic examples. This may be explained by the fact that Demotic was used by the Kushites during the 25th Dynasty, and forms the foundation for the Meroitic writing.
Meroitic Relationships to African Languages
The great savant Cheikh Anta Diop (1974,1981) was convinced that many West African groups had formerly lived in the Egypto-Nubian region before they migrated to West Africa(Diop,1974). He supported this hypothesis with a discussion of the cognation between the names for gods in Egypt-Nubia and West Africa (Diop,1974), Egypto-Nubian and West African ethnomyns and toponyms common to both regions (Diop,1981)[1] and West African and Egyptian languages.
There are many relationships between Meroitic and other African languages. For example, In Oromo/Galla, the term for queen is 'gifti'; and both 'naaga-ta" in Somali and Wolof 'jigen' mean woman. These terms appear to be related to Kdi > gti/e.
Yet even though we find cognition between some Cushitic and Nubian we can not use these languages to completely decipher Meroitic as proven by many past researchers. The Tocharian language on the otherhand, does allow us to read Meroitic and show its relationship with other African languages.
A comparison of Meroitic to African langauges indicate that Meroitic is closely related to langauges spoken in West Africa. Like Meroitic, the pronoun is often a suffix in other African languages. This suffix of the third person singular is usually n-, in other African languages. For example:
Bambara: no p r i 'his house'
Kpelle: nyin 'his tooth'
Akan: ni dan 'his house'
The Meroitic a- third person singular affix is also found in other African languages. For example:
Swahili: (1) a-ta kwenda 'he's going to go'
(2) a-li-kwenda 'he is here'
Manding: (1) ya zo 'he has come'
(2) ya shirya mana 'he prepared (it) for us'.
The use of -i particle to form nouns in Meroitic correspond to the use of the -it and -ayy suffixes to form nouns in Wolof. The Wolof abstract noun formative suffix is -it, -itt, e.g., dog 'to cut', dogit 'sharpness'.
In Wolof abstract nouns are also formed by the addition of the suffix -ayy, and in Dyolo -ay, e.g.,
baax 'good', baaxaay 'goodness'.
Prefixes are rarely used in Meroitic. The most common prefixes include the prefix of reinforcement -p, the intensive prefix -a and the imperfect prefix -b. The p-, can be either the prefix of reinforcement e.g., ŝ 'patron', p-ŝ 'the patron' ; or the imperfect prefix e.g.,ŝiñ'satisfaction', p-ŝiñ "continuous satisfaction'.
The Meroitic p- affix, means ‘the’. This Meroitic grammatical element corresponds to the Egyptian demonstrative pi 'the'.
In Meroitic, the –o element is used to change a noun into an adjective. The Meroitic –o suffix, agrees with the use affix –u, joined to a vowel, in other African languages to form adjectives. In Swahili, many adjectives are formed by the k- consonant plus the vowel -u : Ku. For example:
(1) imba 'sing' ; zuri 'fine'
Kuimba kuzuri 'Fine singing'
(2) -bivu 'ripe' Kuiva 'to ripen'
(3) -bovu 'rotten' Kuoza 'to rot'.
In Meroitic the plural case was made by the suffix -b, or reduplication. Reduplication was also used as a plural effect in Meroitic, e.g., d'donations',d-d 'considerable donations'.
Reduplication is also used in other African languages to express the idea of abundance and diversity. For example,
Swahili: Chungu kikavunjika vipande vipnade.
"The cooking pot broke into pieces".
The Meroitic use of the -b suffix to make the plural number, corresponds to the use of the -ba- affix in African languages. In the Bantu languages the plural is formed by the ba- affix. In the Manding group of languages we see use of the -ba suffix. In Manding, the -ba affix is joined to nouns to denote the idea of physical or moral greatness. For example:
(1) na-folo 'good, rich'
na-folo-ba 'great fortune'
(2) so-kalo 'piece'
so-kalo-ba 'considerable quarter of a village'.
In the Meroitic inscriptions there is constant mention of the khi 'body, spirit', the kha 'the abstract personality', the kho 'a shinning or translucent spirit soul'; and the Ba 'soul'. In many African languages the term Ba, is used to denote the terms 'soul or to be'. For example:
Egyptian: Ba
Mbachi : Ba
Coptic : Bai
Bambara : Be
Fang : Be.
The kha, existed within and without the human body. It would remain with the body until its flesh decayed, then it would either leave the tomb or hunt it. The Meroitic idea of Kha, as a spirit corresponds to Ka, in many African languages. For example:
Egyptian : Ka
Manding : Ka
Banda : Ka.
The linguistic evidence makes it clear that some of the Meroites may have spoken languages that belonged to the Niger-Congo-Mande family of languages. This is supported by the linguistic evidence of shared grammatical forms and lexical items between Meroitic and Niger-Congo-Mande discussed in this chapter.
Footnote
[i].J.H. Taylor, Egypt and Nubia, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press,1991 and D. O'Connor, Ancient Nubia, Philadelphia: The University Museum, 1993)
As early as the 12th dynasty the Egyptians controlled Nubia. After 1674 BC, the Kerma rulers regained control of Nubia until the raise of the New Kingdom. Pharaohs of the New Kingdom ruled Egypt for 500 years.
Nubia gained independence after the decline of Egypt in 1085 B.C. During this period the Kushites developed a highly developed civilization at Napata and Meroe (880 B.C.-A. D. 350). Over time the Kushites became strong enough to conqueror Egypt and found the 25th Dynasty.
The long association of Egypt and Nubia suggest that the Egyptians may have influenced more than the culture of the Kushites. In this paper we will review the affinities between the Egyptian and Meroitic languages.
Ll. Griffith during his decipherment of Meroitic (M.) found many Egyptian (E.) terms . These terms were especially used in the political culture area e.g., E. p-sy-n-nsw 'son of king' >M. pesto 'king's foothold/foundation of light' .
Now that we have more evidence about the Meroitic language we can now compare Egyptian and Meroitic to determine if there are any other similarities between these languages. Below are some Meroitic terms that illustrate the influence of Egyptian on Meroitic.
Egyptian Meroitic
m 'do not' ma not, no
nd 'homage' net 'bow in reverence'
r 'to, into' r id.
se 'son' s id.
s y 'satisfaction' se-ne 'to be satisfied'
ss 'writing, scribe' ssor 'scribe'
s w 'to protect' s 'to protect'
di 'give' d id.
t ' thou' t id.
t 'earth' te 'land'
k i 'high' kha 'great'
hc'w 'body' khe 'spirit, body'
rc 'likewise' r 'like'
bi 'good deed' bli 'right, order'
b 'soul' b, be id.
ssmt 'stewart' ssimte id.
p-mr-msc 'general, stategus' pelmos id.
p-sy-n-nsw 'son of the king' pesto
st "Isis' Wos id.
Wsir 'Osiris Sore id.
nfr 'good' na, n
ti 'here' t
Several aspects of Demotic grammar agree with Meroitic structure. This is especially true in relation to the formation of the adjective case and the use of pronouns.
The Meroitic funerary tablets are written in the third or second person. Meroitic words are usually formed by the addition of post-positions or suffixes. The Meroitic pronouns are suffixed to Meroitic words. They include, -te 'you, thou'; -t 'her, he'; ne 'his'; -to 'your'; and the -n and a third person singular suffixes. For example:
-n s/he, it, her, his
i "go", i-n 'he goes'
de 'bequeathal', de-n 'his bequeathal'
qe 'make' , qe-n 'he makes'
In Demotic we see use of suffixial pronouns. For example:
sdm 'hear'
sdmy 'I hear'
sdm .f 'he hear'
sdm hr-f 'he will hear'
In Meroitic the adjective is placed behind the noun. For example,
e 'complete'
ŝ on tene 'The king commence(s) the rebirth'.
ŝ on tene-e 'The king commence(s) the complete rebirth'.
Adjectives in Demotic are also placed behind the noun. For example:
rmt hm ' small man'
ŝy nfr ' good fate'
ssw sbk ' few days'
The -m suffix was used in Meroitic to denote the negative effect. The negative particle -m, is often joined to verbs along with the pronoun. For example:
mi-n 'injure him', mi-m-n 'injure him not'.
In Meroitic tablets the negative suffix rarely appears.
The Egyptian negative particle m, agrees with Meroitic. In Demotic the negative particle mn-, is prefixed, e.g.,
mn lh gm hw 'no fool finds profit'.
In the short review above of Egyptian and Meroitic cognates we can see the obvious influence of Egyptian, especially Demotic on Meroitic. This influence was shown not only in vocabulary but also grammatical features.
This linguistic material discussed above clearly suggest some Egyptian substrata influence on Meroitic. It indicates Egyptian influence on both the structure and vocabulary of Meroitic.
It is very interesting to note that much of the affinity between Meroitic and Egyptian is based on Demotic examples. This may be explained by the fact that Demotic was used by the Kushites during the 25th Dynasty, and forms the foundation for the Meroitic writing.
Meroitic Relationships to African Languages
The great savant Cheikh Anta Diop (1974,1981) was convinced that many West African groups had formerly lived in the Egypto-Nubian region before they migrated to West Africa(Diop,1974). He supported this hypothesis with a discussion of the cognation between the names for gods in Egypt-Nubia and West Africa (Diop,1974), Egypto-Nubian and West African ethnomyns and toponyms common to both regions (Diop,1981)[1] and West African and Egyptian languages.
There are many relationships between Meroitic and other African languages. For example, In Oromo/Galla, the term for queen is 'gifti'; and both 'naaga-ta" in Somali and Wolof 'jigen' mean woman. These terms appear to be related to Kdi > gti/e.
Yet even though we find cognition between some Cushitic and Nubian we can not use these languages to completely decipher Meroitic as proven by many past researchers. The Tocharian language on the otherhand, does allow us to read Meroitic and show its relationship with other African languages.
A comparison of Meroitic to African langauges indicate that Meroitic is closely related to langauges spoken in West Africa. Like Meroitic, the pronoun is often a suffix in other African languages. This suffix of the third person singular is usually n-, in other African languages. For example:
Bambara: no p r i 'his house'
Kpelle: nyin 'his tooth'
Akan: ni dan 'his house'
The Meroitic a- third person singular affix is also found in other African languages. For example:
Swahili: (1) a-ta kwenda 'he's going to go'
(2) a-li-kwenda 'he is here'
Manding: (1) ya zo 'he has come'
(2) ya shirya mana 'he prepared (it) for us'.
The use of -i particle to form nouns in Meroitic correspond to the use of the -it and -ayy suffixes to form nouns in Wolof. The Wolof abstract noun formative suffix is -it, -itt, e.g., dog 'to cut', dogit 'sharpness'.
In Wolof abstract nouns are also formed by the addition of the suffix -ayy, and in Dyolo -ay, e.g.,
baax 'good', baaxaay 'goodness'.
Prefixes are rarely used in Meroitic. The most common prefixes include the prefix of reinforcement -p, the intensive prefix -a and the imperfect prefix -b. The p-, can be either the prefix of reinforcement e.g., ŝ 'patron', p-ŝ 'the patron' ; or the imperfect prefix e.g.,ŝiñ'satisfaction', p-ŝiñ "continuous satisfaction'.
The Meroitic p- affix, means ‘the’. This Meroitic grammatical element corresponds to the Egyptian demonstrative pi 'the'.
In Meroitic, the –o element is used to change a noun into an adjective. The Meroitic –o suffix, agrees with the use affix –u, joined to a vowel, in other African languages to form adjectives. In Swahili, many adjectives are formed by the k- consonant plus the vowel -u : Ku. For example:
(1) imba 'sing' ; zuri 'fine'
Kuimba kuzuri 'Fine singing'
(2) -bivu 'ripe' Kuiva 'to ripen'
(3) -bovu 'rotten' Kuoza 'to rot'.
In Meroitic the plural case was made by the suffix -b, or reduplication. Reduplication was also used as a plural effect in Meroitic, e.g., d'donations',d-d 'considerable donations'.
Reduplication is also used in other African languages to express the idea of abundance and diversity. For example,
Swahili: Chungu kikavunjika vipande vipnade.
"The cooking pot broke into pieces".
The Meroitic use of the -b suffix to make the plural number, corresponds to the use of the -ba- affix in African languages. In the Bantu languages the plural is formed by the ba- affix. In the Manding group of languages we see use of the -ba suffix. In Manding, the -ba affix is joined to nouns to denote the idea of physical or moral greatness. For example:
(1) na-folo 'good, rich'
na-folo-ba 'great fortune'
(2) so-kalo 'piece'
so-kalo-ba 'considerable quarter of a village'.
In the Meroitic inscriptions there is constant mention of the khi 'body, spirit', the kha 'the abstract personality', the kho 'a shinning or translucent spirit soul'; and the Ba 'soul'. In many African languages the term Ba, is used to denote the terms 'soul or to be'. For example:
Egyptian: Ba
Mbachi : Ba
Coptic : Bai
Bambara : Be
Fang : Be.
The kha, existed within and without the human body. It would remain with the body until its flesh decayed, then it would either leave the tomb or hunt it. The Meroitic idea of Kha, as a spirit corresponds to Ka, in many African languages. For example:
Egyptian : Ka
Manding : Ka
Banda : Ka.
The linguistic evidence makes it clear that some of the Meroites may have spoken languages that belonged to the Niger-Congo-Mande family of languages. This is supported by the linguistic evidence of shared grammatical forms and lexical items between Meroitic and Niger-Congo-Mande discussed in this chapter.
Footnote
[i].J.H. Taylor, Egypt and Nubia, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press,1991 and D. O'Connor, Ancient Nubia, Philadelphia: The University Museum, 1993)
The Meroitic sign qo
The word qo is a honorific. The word qo in Meroitic means “noble, honor or honorable”. The term qo, can also mean ‘to live, to be renewed, restore’. The term qor means ‘monarch’ , qori ‘female royal’ and qore ‘male royal’. The term qor is made into an adjective with the addition of the suffix –o: qor-o ‘respectable, virtuous, and lordly’.
As a result of my decipherment of Meroitic you can find more Meroitic terms at the following website:
http://geocities.com/olmec982000/meroitic.pdf
You can find specific information on the Meroitic religion and a list of Meroitic religious terms in my article on Meroitic religion. See below:
http://www.arkamani.org/arkamani-library/meroitic/meroitic-religion.htm
As a result of my decipherment of Meroitic you can find more Meroitic terms at the following website:
http://geocities.com/olmec982000/meroitic.pdf
You can find specific information on the Meroitic religion and a list of Meroitic religious terms in my article on Meroitic religion. See below:
http://www.arkamani.org/arkamani-library/meroitic/meroitic-religion.htm
Stages in Meroitic Writing
Griffith has divided the Meroitic writing into two different forms according to the shape of Meroitic signs at various points in history. The two stages of Meroitic writing were called Archaic and Late. In deciphering Meroitic inscriptions it is important that you refer to Giffith (so you can learn how each Meroitic symbol appeared at various stages in the evolution of the Meroitic writing.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD.
The Meroitic writing from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called Late Meroitic.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD.
The Meroitic writing from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called Late Meroitic.
Meroitic Pronunciation
The Meroitic script is almost identical to many of the Kharosthi signs used to write Tocharian. It is interesting to note that over seven of the Kharosthi and Meroitic signs have not only similar shape, but also the same sound.
Griffith (1911a) has divided the Meroitic writing into two different forms according to the shape of Meroitic signs at various points in history. The two stages of Meroitic writing were called Archaic and late. In deciphering Meroitic inscriptions it is important that you refer to Giffith (1911a) so you can learn how each Meroitic symbol appeared at various stages in the evolution of the Meroitic writing.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. The Meroitic writing dating from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called late Meroitic.
The Meroitic script is almost identical to many of the Kharosthi signs used to write Tocharian. It is interesting to note that over seven of the Kharosthi and Meroitic signs have not only similar shape, but also the same sound.
Griffith (1911a) has divided the Meroitic writing into two different forms according to the shape of Meroitic signs at various points in history. The two stages of Meroitic writing were called Archaic and late. In deciphering Meroitic inscriptions it is important that you refer to Giffith (1911a) so you can learn how each Meroitic symbol appeared at various stages in the evolution of the Meroitic writing.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. The Meroitic writing from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called late Meroitic.
Most of the sounds of the Meroitic and Kharosthi symbols have the same sound. Those Tocharian symbols with different sounds are used to interpret the following Meroitic signs.
Tocharian Meroitic
Ç, s = s
Ş, ś = š
K = q
Ne = :
In this examination of Meroitic we used the transliteration of many Meroitic phonemes proposed by Hintze (1974, 1979) , rather than the entire transliteration system for Meroitic proposed by Griffith (1911). Each Meroitic consonant except when followed by the vowel sign /i/, /o/ and /e/ represents the consonant sound plus the schwa (the
PRONUNCIATION
Front Central
Back
close i (y) (w)
close mid e o
open a
The Meroitic vowels are distinguished by individual signs for i , e , a , o .
There are four Meroitic vowels
/a/, /e/, /i/, and /o/ . There is a neutral vowel sound attached to the Meroitic consonants except for the te and to signs.
The Meroitic vowel sounds are as follows:
e long e sound as in make
a long a sound as in father
i long i sound as in see
o long o sound as in sock
stands for a in asleep
I believe that Meroitic may have two additional vowel sounds. These sounds may be the open mid vowels è and ò. In many African languages we find these vowels.
It therefore stands to reason that they might also occur in Meroitic. I believe that this is proven by the Meroitic script.
In Meroitic we have the /t/ sound represented by . Eventhough we have the /t/ sound and the vowel /e/ and /o/, we also have the signs /to/ and /te/. This suggest that the vowels attached to t-, must have a different sound than the regular /o/ and /e/ sound. If the sounds were not different the Meroites could have just used the signs /to/ and /te/
to write these sounds instead of (to) and (te). I would therefore venture to say the should be pronounced $ tò # and should be pronounced $ tè # in Meroitic
CONSONANTS
There are five syllables in Meroitic ñ , se, te , to and the so-called divider sign (:) -ne represented by separate sounds (Hintze 1974). In this translation of Meroitic each Meroitic syllable without a vowel attached to it is written as a single consonant .
The consonants of Meroitic are as follows:
h kh like the rasping ch: Scottish loch and Bach in German
h ch ich breathy ch, ç
a pronounched like /a/ in father
b as in English
d as in English
i pronounced like /i/ in machine
k pronounced like the /k/ in King
l as in English
m "
n "
p "
r "
s pronounced like /z/ in zoo or /s/ as in rose
s pronounced like the sh in share
t as in English
to pronounced like the to in stole
te pronounced like the te in tea
w pronounced like the /w/ in water
y as in English
q
ñ pronounced like ng as in sing
Meroitic Consonants
Plosive p, b t,d h(kh) k,q h(ch)
Nasal m n ñ
Lateral l
Rolled r
Fricative s s(sh) h(ch)
Semi-vowel w y
I read the Meroitic inscriptions using the lexical items and grammar of the Kushana/Tocharian. To decipher Meroitic I found and read every article I could find in English and French on the Tocharian language. Much of the contempory work on Tocharian is in German, my German is poor so I have concentrated on French and English publications.
Once I learned the Tocharian grammar , I began to collect vocabulary items. These vocabulary items were used to read Meroitic text.
I have been working on Meroitic for a number of years so I have collected many Meroitic terms and published a dictionary of Late Meroitic on-line. A dictionary of Early Meroitic is part of my article on the Incriptions of Tanyidamani.
Griffith (1911a) has divided the Meroitic writing into two different forms according to the shape of Meroitic signs at various points in history. The two stages of Meroitic writing were called Archaic and late. In deciphering Meroitic inscriptions it is important that you refer to Giffith (1911a) so you can learn how each Meroitic symbol appeared at various stages in the evolution of the Meroitic writing.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. The Meroitic writing dating from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called late Meroitic.
The Meroitic script is almost identical to many of the Kharosthi signs used to write Tocharian. It is interesting to note that over seven of the Kharosthi and Meroitic signs have not only similar shape, but also the same sound.
Griffith (1911a) has divided the Meroitic writing into two different forms according to the shape of Meroitic signs at various points in history. The two stages of Meroitic writing were called Archaic and late. In deciphering Meroitic inscriptions it is important that you refer to Giffith (1911a) so you can learn how each Meroitic symbol appeared at various stages in the evolution of the Meroitic writing.
Archaic Meroitic dates from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. The Meroitic writing from the 1st century AD to the end of the Meroitic Empire is called late Meroitic.
Most of the sounds of the Meroitic and Kharosthi symbols have the same sound. Those Tocharian symbols with different sounds are used to interpret the following Meroitic signs.
Tocharian Meroitic
Ç, s = s
Ş, ś = š
K = q
Ne = :
In this examination of Meroitic we used the transliteration of many Meroitic phonemes proposed by Hintze (1974, 1979) , rather than the entire transliteration system for Meroitic proposed by Griffith (1911). Each Meroitic consonant except when followed by the vowel sign /i/, /o/ and /e/ represents the consonant sound plus the schwa (the
PRONUNCIATION
Front Central
Back
close i (y) (w)
close mid e o
open a
The Meroitic vowels are distinguished by individual signs for i , e , a , o .
There are four Meroitic vowels
/a/, /e/, /i/, and /o/ . There is a neutral vowel sound attached to the Meroitic consonants except for the te and to signs.
The Meroitic vowel sounds are as follows:
e long e sound as in make
a long a sound as in father
i long i sound as in see
o long o sound as in sock
stands for a in asleep
I believe that Meroitic may have two additional vowel sounds. These sounds may be the open mid vowels è and ò. In many African languages we find these vowels.
It therefore stands to reason that they might also occur in Meroitic. I believe that this is proven by the Meroitic script.
In Meroitic we have the /t/ sound represented by . Eventhough we have the /t/ sound and the vowel /e/ and /o/, we also have the signs /to/ and /te/. This suggest that the vowels attached to t-, must have a different sound than the regular /o/ and /e/ sound. If the sounds were not different the Meroites could have just used the signs /to/ and /te/
to write these sounds instead of (to) and (te). I would therefore venture to say the should be pronounced $ tò # and should be pronounced $ tè # in Meroitic
CONSONANTS
There are five syllables in Meroitic ñ , se, te , to and the so-called divider sign (:) -ne represented by separate sounds (Hintze 1974). In this translation of Meroitic each Meroitic syllable without a vowel attached to it is written as a single consonant .
The consonants of Meroitic are as follows:
h kh like the rasping ch: Scottish loch and Bach in German
h ch ich breathy ch, ç
a pronounched like /a/ in father
b as in English
d as in English
i pronounced like /i/ in machine
k pronounced like the /k/ in King
l as in English
m "
n "
p "
r "
s pronounced like /z/ in zoo or /s/ as in rose
s pronounced like the sh in share
t as in English
to pronounced like the to in stole
te pronounced like the te in tea
w pronounced like the /w/ in water
y as in English
q
ñ pronounced like ng as in sing
Meroitic Consonants
Plosive p, b t,d h(kh) k,q h(ch)
Nasal m n ñ
Lateral l
Rolled r
Fricative s s(sh) h(ch)
Semi-vowel w y
I read the Meroitic inscriptions using the lexical items and grammar of the Kushana/Tocharian. To decipher Meroitic I found and read every article I could find in English and French on the Tocharian language. Much of the contempory work on Tocharian is in German, my German is poor so I have concentrated on French and English publications.
Once I learned the Tocharian grammar , I began to collect vocabulary items. These vocabulary items were used to read Meroitic text.
I have been working on Meroitic for a number of years so I have collected many Meroitic terms and published a dictionary of Late Meroitic on-line. A dictionary of Early Meroitic is part of my article on the Incriptions of Tanyidamani.
Greek and Tocharian
The ancient literary language spoken on the banks of Rivers Sarasvati and Sindhu was Dravidian. Due to the large number of Dravidians living in India alongside the Aramaic, Munda and Indo-Aryan speakers Sanskrit was invented as a link language and lingua franca to unite the Indians. At the base of Sanskrit was the Dravidian languages.
Dr. Kalyanaraman has made it clear that he is skeptical of the integrity of the I-E linguistic discipline. I agree with Kalyanaraman. The affinities between Sanskrit and Greek/Latin result from 1) the early contact between the Indic languages when the Greeks ruled India-Pakistan; and 2) the Latin popularity and spread of Greek civilization and culture when the Romans ruled the world.
At the end of the 18th century Sir William Jones, suggested that Sanskrit was closely related to Western languages that could not be attributed purely to chance. Jones maintained that these Indic and European languages must be descended from a common ancestor. It was from this observation that Indo-European linguistics was born.
In Sir Jones time we knew little about the history of the Greeks in India. Today we know much more about the historical evidence relating to Greek influence in India. The textual material make it clear that when Sanskrit was codified Greek was spoken by many Indians and due to bilingualism, Greek elements probably used in the Prakrits and everyday speech became of the link language: Sanskrit.
The Dravidians formerly were the major linguistic group in Central Asia and India-Pakistan. Many north Dravidian people are presently found in Central Asia. The cattle rearing Brahuis may represent descendants of the Dravidian pastoral element that roamed the steppes in ancient times. North Dravidian speaking Brahuis are found in Afghan Baluchistan , Persian Sistan and the Marwoasis in Soviet Turkmenistan (Elfenbein 1987: 229).
There are islands of Dravidian speakers in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. There are over 300,000 Brahui speakers in Qualat, Hairpur and Hyderabad districts of Pakistan. Other Dravidian speakers are found in Iran, Russia and Yugoslavia (ISDL 1983: 227). The distribution of Northern Dravidian speaking groups outlined above, corresponds to the former spread of Harappan cultures in the 3rd millennium B.C., in Central Asia.
Due to early the Dravidian settlement of Central Asia the Dravidian speakers influenced many languages. There is a Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loans Rg Veda, eventhough Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by Dravidians using BRW.
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. In addition, Indo-Aryan illustrates a widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to 700 lexical loans (Kuiper 1967; Southward 1977; Winters 1989).
It is therefore not surprising that Dravidian languages lie at the base of the languages spoken in Indo-Aryan languages spoken in Pakistan and India. It is therefore not surprising that the Dravidian languages great influenced Sanskrit.
Many researchers reject the idea that Sanskrit was greatly influenced by the Dravidian languages. They dispute this theory because of the Greek relationship to Sanskrit. Although researchers have used the relationship between Greek and Sanskrit in support of an Indo-European linguistic family, it is clear that the relationship between Sanskrit and Greek result from the long influence in India-Pakistan of the Greeks .
The Greco-Bactrians were probably bilingual . Bilingualism can be induced through two methods 1) state coercion or 2) its ability to offer advantages to two or more populations in contact. The latter method of change usually accounts for bilingualism--people use the new language to obtain better access to status, security, ritual or goods. The Greek emphasis on direct methods of political control in Bactria forced many non-Greeks to become bilingual due to its advantage as a tool for greater upward mobility during Greek rule.
The Greek colonization of Bactria, made the Greek language a link language between the non-IE languages spoken in Central Asia three thousand years ago, after many generations of bilingualism led to an interlanguage phenomena that became a permanent feature of the literate speech community in this region. We can define the institutionalization of an interlanguage as language recombination, i.e., the mixing of the vocabulary and structures of the substratum language (Dravidian) and the superstratum language (Greek and later Slavic speaking Saka people) to form a new mixed language: Tocharian.
The Greek culture was transplanted in Bactria by the army of Alexander the Great. It can be assumed that due to direct rule, the Greek language was well established in this region by the cultural matrix accompanying it since possession of Greek culture and language played a major role in the upward mobility of "colonial subjects" in Bactria.
Eteo-Tocharian is a good example of the influence of Greeks in Central Asia. Eteo-Tocharian was written in a modified Greek alphabet (Maricq 1958:398). This script is a manifestation of the Greek influence in Bactria, even after the Kushana subjugation of this area. This latter point is evident in the Grand Inscription of Kaniska (Maricq 1958).
An intruding community like the Greeks in Central Asia did not have to outnumber the colonized people in Bactria to impact on the language of the original Bactrians. The mere fact that the new speech community, although ethnically different were now recognized as socially superior to the subject peoples of Bactria, it was useful for Bactrians to become bilingual so they would be able to function both within their own culture and the new culture introduced by the conquering Greeks. This hypothesis is congruent with Ehret's (1988:569) view that people make cultural choices on the basis of what appears to be most advantageous to the lives they live.
The Greeks made a conscious effort to affect the underpinnings of the native Bactrian's material world and their relations with their spirits or gods. For example, Greek influence is evident in the Gandharan Buddhist style sculptures. This art style illustrates Hellenistic influences in the modeling of the hair and facial features.
The relationship between Greek and Indic languages results from the early contact of the speakers of these languages in Northwest India and beyond during a period in which the Greeks were a major power in Central Asia.
The Greeks also ruled Pakistan and India. The Indian rule of India is discussed in the following books: F.L. Holt, Thundering Zeus ;W.W. Tarn, The Greeks of Bastria and India ; A.K. Narain, The Indo-Greeks ; and H. Kulke & D. Rothermund, History of India .
Many Pakistanis recognize Dravidian as the root language for many languages spoken in Pakistan (Rahman.2004). They accept the fact that a Dravidian language was probably spoken by the people who formerly lived in the Indus Valley.
It was in Pakistan that the Greek language was probably corporated into Sanskrit. Many of the rules for Sanskrit were codified by Panini, who was born in Salatura, in Northwest Pakistan. Panini’s grammar contains 4000 rules.
When Panini wrote his grammar of Sanskrit, it was spoken by the elites in the area. Greek was also popular when Panini wrote the Sanskrit grammar. The Greeks were called Yunani or Yavana. Thus we learn from Agrawala (1953) that the Yavanani lipi (edict) was well known in Gandahara, and even Panini mentions the Yavana in his grammar . The term Yauna meant Ionian (Woodcock, 1966).
The history of Greeks in the area is quite interesting. When Alexander entered the HinduKush region in 327 B.C., Greek settlements were already in the area. By 180 BC, as the Mauryas fell into decline, the Greek Kings of Bactria took control of Western Punjab and Gandhara up to the Indus River. Under King Menander (d.130 B.C.) the Greeks had their capital at Taxila. The center of Greek culture in the area was Charsadda near Peshawar (Woodcock,1966).
Many Greek terms were probably already incorporated in the Prakrits of Northern India-Pakistan and Central Asia. Here the Greeks minted their coins with Kharoshthi, Brahmi and Greek inscriptions.
Greek was used for commercial purposes and served as a patrician lingua franca of the Kabul valley and of Gandhara. During the rule of Pushyamitra many Greeks settled in India. Due to the long history of Greeks in India, Ashoka had some of his edicts written in Greek and Aramaic bilinguals. In 44 A.D., Appolonius of Tyana when he visited Taxila found that merchants and kings learned Greek “as a matter of course” (Rahman, 2004; Woodcock,1966).
Given the popularity of Greek in the region it is not surprising that Sanskrit would show such a strong relationship to the Indic languages, since it was spoken throughout the area of a couple of hundred years. Commenting on the Greek rulers of India, Kulke and Rothermund (1998), said that “They are referred to as ‘Indo-Greeks’, and there were about forty such kings and rulers who controlled large areas of northwestern India and Afghanistan….They appear as Yavanas in stray references in Indian literature, and there are few but important references in European sources. In these distant outposts, the representatives of the Hellenic policy survived the defeat of their Western compatriots at the hands of the Parthians for more than a century” (p.70). The greatest of the Indo-Greek rulers was Menander, who is mentioned in the famous Milindapanho text. The Shakas adopted many elements of Indo-Greek culture which they perpetuated in India for over 100 years (Rahman, 2004).
The large corpus of non-IE words in Tocharian discussed by Blazek (1988) and Winters (1988a, 1990, 1991) is congruent with the hypothesis that IE elements in Tocharian, especially Greek (and Slavic) were loanwords into Tocharian after the Greek conquest of Bactria. This borrowing pattern is consistent with the spread of the Greek language into Bactria by a small politically dominant minority of Greek settlers into a far larger and previously long-established non-IE speaking majority population.
It is impossible to argue for a genetic relationship between Vedic and Greek languages based on the fact that speakers of these languages formerly lived in intimate contact in historical times. Secondly, we know the Dravidians were in Greece before the Indo-Europeans enter the country. These non-I-E speakers were called Pelasgians. As a result, Anna Morpurgo Davies, The linguistic evidence:Is there any?, in Gerald Cadogan, The End of the early Bronze Age in the Agean (pp.93-123), says that only 40% of Greek is of Indo-European etymology (p.105). Since only 40% of the Greek terms are of I-E origin, many of the Greek terms that agree with the Indic languages may be from the 60% of the Greek lexical items that came from non-I-E speakers which as noted by Lahovary in Dravidian origins and the West, were people who spoke either Dravidian languages, or other languages from Africa, genetically related to the Dravidian group.
In conclusion, as a result of the Greek influence in Bactria and India-Pakistan , Indians and Bactrians had to acquire "Greek Culture" to enhance their position and opportunity in North India and Bactria during Greek rule. Greek rule placed prestige on status elements introduced into the region by the Greeks, especially the Greek language. Status acquired by Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis was thus centered around acquisition of Greek language and Greek culture. This supported by the evidence that Indian elites used Greek in business and government (Rahman, 2004). This would have inturn added pressure on the Bactrians to incorporate Greek terms into a Bactrian lingua franca (i.e., Tocharian).
Given the fact that Greek administrators in Bactria and Northern India-Pakistan ,refused to fully integrate Bactrians and Indians into the ruling elite, unless they were “well versed in Greek culture and language) led to subsequent generations of native Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis to progressively incorporate more Greek terms into their native language. This would explain why Tocharian has many features that relate to certain IE etymologies and Panini’s Sanskrit grammar, present many terms that are associated with the Greeks, but illustrates little affinity to Indo-Iranian languages which are geographically and temporally closer to Tocharian. Some researchers might dispute the influence of the Greek language on Sanskrit because Panini’s grammar was suppose to have been written around 400 B.C. This date for the grammar might be too early, because Rahman (2004) and Agrawala (1953) maintains that Greek was spoken in Gandahara in Panini’s time.
The influence of colonial Greeks in Central Asia would explain why the most important evidence of an I-E relationship with Sanskrit and Tocharian relations within the IE family are the Greek cognates (Mallory 1989).
The "elite dominance model" hypothesis would have two basic consequences in relation to Tocharian linguistics. First, it would account for the correspondence in grammar (especially agglutination) and vocabulary between Dravidian and Tocharian on the one hand, and Tocharian and Indo-European on the other. Secondly, the settlement of the Saka in Bactria after the Greeks, would explain the great topological similarity between Tocharian and Balto-Slavic. The evidence of Saka and Greek conquest of Bactria/ Central Asia confirms the Sherratt (1988) hypothesis that Tocharian may be a trade language, and offers a plausible solution to the "Tocharian Problem".
References:
Agrawala, V.S. (1953). India as known to Panini: A study of the cultural material
in the Ashtadhyayi. Lucknow: University of Lucknow.
Elfenbein, J. 1987. A periplus of the Brahui Problem. Studia Iranica 16: 215-233.
Emeneau, M. and T. Burrow. 1962. Dravidian Borrowing from Indo Aryan.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Holt,F.L. (1999). Thundering Zeus. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
ISDL. 1983. Report on the Dravidian Languages. International Journal of
Dravidian Linguistics 12(1): 227.
Kulke, H. & Rothermund, D. (1998). History of India . New York: Routledge.
Mallory, J.P. In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London: Thames and
Hudson.
Maricq, A. 1958. La Grande inscription de Kaniska et L' eteo-
Tokharien l'ancienne langue de la Bactriane.Journal Asiatique 246:
345-439.
Narain, A.K. (1957). The Indo-Greeks . Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Rahman,T. (2004). Peoples and Languages in Pre-Islamic Indus Valley.
Retrieved on : 4-21-04
http://asnic.utexas.edu/asnic/subject/peoplesandlanguages.html
Sherratt, Andrew and Susan. 1988. Archaeology of Indo-European: An
Alternative View. Antiquity 62: 584-595.
Tarn, W.W. (1984). The Greeks of Bastria and India . Chicago: Ares Press.
Winters, Clyde A..1989. Review on Dr. Asko Parpola's "The Coming of the
Aryans".International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 18 (2): 98-127.
Woodcock,G. (1966). The Greeks in India. London: Faber & Faber.
Dr. Kalyanaraman has made it clear that he is skeptical of the integrity of the I-E linguistic discipline. I agree with Kalyanaraman. The affinities between Sanskrit and Greek/Latin result from 1) the early contact between the Indic languages when the Greeks ruled India-Pakistan; and 2) the Latin popularity and spread of Greek civilization and culture when the Romans ruled the world.
At the end of the 18th century Sir William Jones, suggested that Sanskrit was closely related to Western languages that could not be attributed purely to chance. Jones maintained that these Indic and European languages must be descended from a common ancestor. It was from this observation that Indo-European linguistics was born.
In Sir Jones time we knew little about the history of the Greeks in India. Today we know much more about the historical evidence relating to Greek influence in India. The textual material make it clear that when Sanskrit was codified Greek was spoken by many Indians and due to bilingualism, Greek elements probably used in the Prakrits and everyday speech became of the link language: Sanskrit.
The Dravidians formerly were the major linguistic group in Central Asia and India-Pakistan. Many north Dravidian people are presently found in Central Asia. The cattle rearing Brahuis may represent descendants of the Dravidian pastoral element that roamed the steppes in ancient times. North Dravidian speaking Brahuis are found in Afghan Baluchistan , Persian Sistan and the Marwoasis in Soviet Turkmenistan (Elfenbein 1987: 229).
There are islands of Dravidian speakers in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. There are over 300,000 Brahui speakers in Qualat, Hairpur and Hyderabad districts of Pakistan. Other Dravidian speakers are found in Iran, Russia and Yugoslavia (ISDL 1983: 227). The distribution of Northern Dravidian speaking groups outlined above, corresponds to the former spread of Harappan cultures in the 3rd millennium B.C., in Central Asia.
Due to early the Dravidian settlement of Central Asia the Dravidian speakers influenced many languages. There is a Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loans Rg Veda, eventhough Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by Dravidians using BRW.
Emeneau and Burrow (1962) found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. In addition, Indo-Aryan illustrates a widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to 700 lexical loans (Kuiper 1967; Southward 1977; Winters 1989).
It is therefore not surprising that Dravidian languages lie at the base of the languages spoken in Indo-Aryan languages spoken in Pakistan and India. It is therefore not surprising that the Dravidian languages great influenced Sanskrit.
Many researchers reject the idea that Sanskrit was greatly influenced by the Dravidian languages. They dispute this theory because of the Greek relationship to Sanskrit. Although researchers have used the relationship between Greek and Sanskrit in support of an Indo-European linguistic family, it is clear that the relationship between Sanskrit and Greek result from the long influence in India-Pakistan of the Greeks .
The Greco-Bactrians were probably bilingual . Bilingualism can be induced through two methods 1) state coercion or 2) its ability to offer advantages to two or more populations in contact. The latter method of change usually accounts for bilingualism--people use the new language to obtain better access to status, security, ritual or goods. The Greek emphasis on direct methods of political control in Bactria forced many non-Greeks to become bilingual due to its advantage as a tool for greater upward mobility during Greek rule.
The Greek colonization of Bactria, made the Greek language a link language between the non-IE languages spoken in Central Asia three thousand years ago, after many generations of bilingualism led to an interlanguage phenomena that became a permanent feature of the literate speech community in this region. We can define the institutionalization of an interlanguage as language recombination, i.e., the mixing of the vocabulary and structures of the substratum language (Dravidian) and the superstratum language (Greek and later Slavic speaking Saka people) to form a new mixed language: Tocharian.
The Greek culture was transplanted in Bactria by the army of Alexander the Great. It can be assumed that due to direct rule, the Greek language was well established in this region by the cultural matrix accompanying it since possession of Greek culture and language played a major role in the upward mobility of "colonial subjects" in Bactria.
Eteo-Tocharian is a good example of the influence of Greeks in Central Asia. Eteo-Tocharian was written in a modified Greek alphabet (Maricq 1958:398). This script is a manifestation of the Greek influence in Bactria, even after the Kushana subjugation of this area. This latter point is evident in the Grand Inscription of Kaniska (Maricq 1958).
An intruding community like the Greeks in Central Asia did not have to outnumber the colonized people in Bactria to impact on the language of the original Bactrians. The mere fact that the new speech community, although ethnically different were now recognized as socially superior to the subject peoples of Bactria, it was useful for Bactrians to become bilingual so they would be able to function both within their own culture and the new culture introduced by the conquering Greeks. This hypothesis is congruent with Ehret's (1988:569) view that people make cultural choices on the basis of what appears to be most advantageous to the lives they live.
The Greeks made a conscious effort to affect the underpinnings of the native Bactrian's material world and their relations with their spirits or gods. For example, Greek influence is evident in the Gandharan Buddhist style sculptures. This art style illustrates Hellenistic influences in the modeling of the hair and facial features.
The relationship between Greek and Indic languages results from the early contact of the speakers of these languages in Northwest India and beyond during a period in which the Greeks were a major power in Central Asia.
The Greeks also ruled Pakistan and India. The Indian rule of India is discussed in the following books: F.L. Holt, Thundering Zeus ;W.W. Tarn, The Greeks of Bastria and India ; A.K. Narain, The Indo-Greeks ; and H. Kulke & D. Rothermund, History of India .
Many Pakistanis recognize Dravidian as the root language for many languages spoken in Pakistan (Rahman.2004). They accept the fact that a Dravidian language was probably spoken by the people who formerly lived in the Indus Valley.
It was in Pakistan that the Greek language was probably corporated into Sanskrit. Many of the rules for Sanskrit were codified by Panini, who was born in Salatura, in Northwest Pakistan. Panini’s grammar contains 4000 rules.
When Panini wrote his grammar of Sanskrit, it was spoken by the elites in the area. Greek was also popular when Panini wrote the Sanskrit grammar. The Greeks were called Yunani or Yavana. Thus we learn from Agrawala (1953) that the Yavanani lipi (edict) was well known in Gandahara, and even Panini mentions the Yavana in his grammar . The term Yauna meant Ionian (Woodcock, 1966).
The history of Greeks in the area is quite interesting. When Alexander entered the HinduKush region in 327 B.C., Greek settlements were already in the area. By 180 BC, as the Mauryas fell into decline, the Greek Kings of Bactria took control of Western Punjab and Gandhara up to the Indus River. Under King Menander (d.130 B.C.) the Greeks had their capital at Taxila. The center of Greek culture in the area was Charsadda near Peshawar (Woodcock,1966).
Many Greek terms were probably already incorporated in the Prakrits of Northern India-Pakistan and Central Asia. Here the Greeks minted their coins with Kharoshthi, Brahmi and Greek inscriptions.
Greek was used for commercial purposes and served as a patrician lingua franca of the Kabul valley and of Gandhara. During the rule of Pushyamitra many Greeks settled in India. Due to the long history of Greeks in India, Ashoka had some of his edicts written in Greek and Aramaic bilinguals. In 44 A.D., Appolonius of Tyana when he visited Taxila found that merchants and kings learned Greek “as a matter of course” (Rahman, 2004; Woodcock,1966).
Given the popularity of Greek in the region it is not surprising that Sanskrit would show such a strong relationship to the Indic languages, since it was spoken throughout the area of a couple of hundred years. Commenting on the Greek rulers of India, Kulke and Rothermund (1998), said that “They are referred to as ‘Indo-Greeks’, and there were about forty such kings and rulers who controlled large areas of northwestern India and Afghanistan….They appear as Yavanas in stray references in Indian literature, and there are few but important references in European sources. In these distant outposts, the representatives of the Hellenic policy survived the defeat of their Western compatriots at the hands of the Parthians for more than a century” (p.70). The greatest of the Indo-Greek rulers was Menander, who is mentioned in the famous Milindapanho text. The Shakas adopted many elements of Indo-Greek culture which they perpetuated in India for over 100 years (Rahman, 2004).
The large corpus of non-IE words in Tocharian discussed by Blazek (1988) and Winters (1988a, 1990, 1991) is congruent with the hypothesis that IE elements in Tocharian, especially Greek (and Slavic) were loanwords into Tocharian after the Greek conquest of Bactria. This borrowing pattern is consistent with the spread of the Greek language into Bactria by a small politically dominant minority of Greek settlers into a far larger and previously long-established non-IE speaking majority population.
It is impossible to argue for a genetic relationship between Vedic and Greek languages based on the fact that speakers of these languages formerly lived in intimate contact in historical times. Secondly, we know the Dravidians were in Greece before the Indo-Europeans enter the country. These non-I-E speakers were called Pelasgians. As a result, Anna Morpurgo Davies, The linguistic evidence:Is there any?, in Gerald Cadogan, The End of the early Bronze Age in the Agean (pp.93-123), says that only 40% of Greek is of Indo-European etymology (p.105). Since only 40% of the Greek terms are of I-E origin, many of the Greek terms that agree with the Indic languages may be from the 60% of the Greek lexical items that came from non-I-E speakers which as noted by Lahovary in Dravidian origins and the West, were people who spoke either Dravidian languages, or other languages from Africa, genetically related to the Dravidian group.
In conclusion, as a result of the Greek influence in Bactria and India-Pakistan , Indians and Bactrians had to acquire "Greek Culture" to enhance their position and opportunity in North India and Bactria during Greek rule. Greek rule placed prestige on status elements introduced into the region by the Greeks, especially the Greek language. Status acquired by Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis was thus centered around acquisition of Greek language and Greek culture. This supported by the evidence that Indian elites used Greek in business and government (Rahman, 2004). This would have inturn added pressure on the Bactrians to incorporate Greek terms into a Bactrian lingua franca (i.e., Tocharian).
Given the fact that Greek administrators in Bactria and Northern India-Pakistan ,refused to fully integrate Bactrians and Indians into the ruling elite, unless they were “well versed in Greek culture and language) led to subsequent generations of native Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis to progressively incorporate more Greek terms into their native language. This would explain why Tocharian has many features that relate to certain IE etymologies and Panini’s Sanskrit grammar, present many terms that are associated with the Greeks, but illustrates little affinity to Indo-Iranian languages which are geographically and temporally closer to Tocharian. Some researchers might dispute the influence of the Greek language on Sanskrit because Panini’s grammar was suppose to have been written around 400 B.C. This date for the grammar might be too early, because Rahman (2004) and Agrawala (1953) maintains that Greek was spoken in Gandahara in Panini’s time.
The influence of colonial Greeks in Central Asia would explain why the most important evidence of an I-E relationship with Sanskrit and Tocharian relations within the IE family are the Greek cognates (Mallory 1989).
The "elite dominance model" hypothesis would have two basic consequences in relation to Tocharian linguistics. First, it would account for the correspondence in grammar (especially agglutination) and vocabulary between Dravidian and Tocharian on the one hand, and Tocharian and Indo-European on the other. Secondly, the settlement of the Saka in Bactria after the Greeks, would explain the great topological similarity between Tocharian and Balto-Slavic. The evidence of Saka and Greek conquest of Bactria/ Central Asia confirms the Sherratt (1988) hypothesis that Tocharian may be a trade language, and offers a plausible solution to the "Tocharian Problem".
References:
Agrawala, V.S. (1953). India as known to Panini: A study of the cultural material
in the Ashtadhyayi. Lucknow: University of Lucknow.
Elfenbein, J. 1987. A periplus of the Brahui Problem. Studia Iranica 16: 215-233.
Emeneau, M. and T. Burrow. 1962. Dravidian Borrowing from Indo Aryan.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Holt,F.L. (1999). Thundering Zeus. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
ISDL. 1983. Report on the Dravidian Languages. International Journal of
Dravidian Linguistics 12(1): 227.
Kulke, H. & Rothermund, D. (1998). History of India . New York: Routledge.
Mallory, J.P. In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London: Thames and
Hudson.
Maricq, A. 1958. La Grande inscription de Kaniska et L' eteo-
Tokharien l'ancienne langue de la Bactriane.Journal Asiatique 246:
345-439.
Narain, A.K. (1957). The Indo-Greeks . Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Rahman,T. (2004). Peoples and Languages in Pre-Islamic Indus Valley.
Retrieved on : 4-21-04
http://asnic.utexas.edu/asnic/subject/peoplesandlanguages.html
Sherratt, Andrew and Susan. 1988. Archaeology of Indo-European: An
Alternative View. Antiquity 62: 584-595.
Tarn, W.W. (1984). The Greeks of Bastria and India . Chicago: Ares Press.
Winters, Clyde A..1989. Review on Dr. Asko Parpola's "The Coming of the
Aryans".International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 18 (2): 98-127.
Woodcock,G. (1966). The Greeks in India. London: Faber & Faber.