In my blog, I used the title Tulu’research.’ The word’research’ is probably too pompous for a blog title. I chose the title word to give myself a boost of sincerity and seriousness in my blog work. Similarly, I believed that the word would earn the reader’s respect.

Similarly, I believe it is the blogger’s responsibility to define and describe some of the basic words used in the blog, such as Tulu, Tuluva, and Tulunad.

Tulunad (naaD=land) today is a melting pot of customs, castes, and communities, as well as a playground for a plethora of languages and sublanguages, cultures, and subcultures. It is a micro-India in both diversity and unity. Tulu is spoken by the people of Dakshina Kannada and southern Udupi districts in Karnataka, as well as parts of Kasargod district in Kerala. However, enterprising Tulu communities have spread throughout India and the world as employees, professionals, businessmen, and educators.

However, the concept of Tulunad is essentially a mythical aspiration, as there is no specific geographic boundary or socio-political entity that can be delineated as Tulunad. Tulunad exists only in the minds of Tulu speakers. Tulu people have been a part of Kannada kingdoms for several centuries and their current status remains the same. Sociopolitically, the notional Tulunad is defined as a Tulu-speaking region within the Indian state of Karnataka.

As a result, a Tuluva is anyone who speaks or writes in Tulu when the opportunity arises. He may communicate in Tulu because it is his mother tongue, because he needs to converse with another Tuluva, or simply because he enjoys doing so. So there are Tuluvas by birth and Tuluvas by choice, by definition. Tuluvas may have their own mother tongues, which they nurture and cherish in their hearts as all good humans do. Tuluvas may choose to communicate in Kannada, Havyaka, Nadava, Aregannada, Konkani, Beary, Koorgi, Malayalam, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi Gujarathi, Hindi, English, or any other language of this land.

My definition of Tuluva includes all those who can or enjoy communicating in Tulu, and it should include both Tuluvas by birth and Tuluvas by association or choice. In the global village, a Tuluva has a telescopic multi-cultural identity because, in addition to being a Tuluva, he is also a Kannadiga. He is also an Indian, and in the sense of pervasive universal brotherhood, he is a global citizen.

Tulu language and culture have a nearly four thousand year history. Throughout this long period, Tulu has witnessed several episodes of human race migration, language evolution, and customs. Every Tuluva has the right to explore the hazy paths of distant past along which the Tulu language and cultures have evolved. The evolution of Tulu language and culture is inextricably linked with the evolution of India’s diverse languages and composite culture; in essence, it is the evolution of Karnataka as well as India.

The Tulu language and culture have suffered as a result of a lack of historical documentation. Putting together strands of historical evidence and compiling data is a difficult task. Analyses of Tulu language, words, and customs, as well as associated languages and cultures, are one way to accomplish this.

During 1982, my father, Budha Shivalli (1923-1982), compiled a book, ‘Tulu Patero’ (paatero=language), on the philology of Tulu language and grammar written in Tulu using Kannada script, which was eventually published in 2004. Linguists by education and linguists by choice or pure love of the language exist in the same way that “Tuluvas by birth and choice” do. Budha Shivalli was in the second category. I intend to provide a translation of his work in a separate blog linked to this blog for the benefit of those who are unable to read his original Tulu book. I’ll tell you more about it later.

During the editing and composition of Tulu Patero’s typescript in 2004, I felt that it needed a supplementary editorial in light of the developments from 1982 to 2004. I gathered information from books and the internet and synthesised my deductions and inferences into an editorial titled ‘Tulu nadath battina saadi’ (=Tulu’s Evolution). By choice and hobby, I am a philologist and linguist, just like my father. I am a geologist by trade and a philologist by passion for language.

The primary goal of the aforementioned editorial was to stimulate research into the historical evolution of Tulu language and culture, not to profit from sensationalism. However, some critics deemed the editorial ‘controversial,’ despite the absence of any further comments. Labeling a work as ‘controversial’ is a diplomatic way of declaring and recommending that the work is untrustworthy or unworthy of consideration.

So, I started this blog with the intention of providing a Tulu Patero translation. But, before diving into the actual translation, which requires a significant amount of spare time, attention, and patience, I thought I’d practise by reevaluating some of my favourite topics, previously published in Tulu in the form of the cited editorial. However, this bogging acts as a momentum or chain reaction, inducing you to contribute even more. Furthermore, I find that my ‘controversial’ thinking is quite different from Budha Shivalli’s rather puritan style. And the ‘controversial’ label that has been attached to me should not deter people from reading and referring to his work, which I consider to be an invaluable contribution. In light of this, the Tulu Patero will be on its own blog.

Returning to my blog, Tulu Research, I must admit that I have used terms like Tulu “tribes” in the style and meaning of other researchers on ancient races and groups. The term “tribe” refers to those early migrant families. It is not to be confused with the modern sociopolitical term ‘tribe,’ as in scheduled tribe or caste. A similar explanation applies to the contentious word derivation Bantu and Bant. It is intended for the etymological derivation of the original ancient word that is a profession indicator. No offence is meant to any communities that have adopted such names in recent years.

No disdain is ever expressed toward any of the groups because the author believes in universal brotherhood and human genetic equality.

Finding new friends to comment on my blog posts is one of the things I enjoy most about blogging. Manjunath Vadiari, who blogs about ‘Theories on Past Events,’ is a regular commenter on my posts. I enjoy reading the comments, including the dissents. Dissident views compel you to dig deeper and determine whether you made any incorrect assumptions or judgments during your studies.

The blogging ethics require that I make my intentions clear. The primary goal of my postings is to discover evolutionary trends in our historical heritage. The approach to discovering facts pertaining to the distant historical past may differ, as may the inferences drawn, but in the end, truth alone shall prevail. Satyameva Jayate!

To reaffirm my commitment to the sincere discovery of facts, I’d like to repeat what I wrote (1989) in the preface to my doctoral thesis on geology, under the strong and analytical influence of my mentor Prof. B. Krishna Rao:

“Accepting that for any problem there can be only one real and truthful answer, new avenues towards truth should be welcome, hoping that in the long run, only those ideas that stand test of the time will prevail. In the meanwhile, some of the concepts that aim at unraveling the truth or that may lead to new ideas elsewhere have to be encouraged.”

Is there a concept of moolasthana in other parts of India?

Many TuLu communities have the concept of a moolasthana, which consists of the words moola (original) +sthana (place), where their ancestors first settled and lived. In Tulu, the lineage is known as bari (pronounced as short ba as in bun). It is the Uttara Kannada equivalent of bali (pronounced as short ba as in bun, li as heavy Li common in south Indian languages) and gotra in Brahmin communities. The term baLLi refers to a plant creeper, which represents the family lineage. The term bari is most likely the Tulu equivalent of the old Kannada word baLLi. This explanation is necessary because the word bari also means ‘the side’ in TuLu.

Tulunad’s moolasthanas have a small temple dedicated to the divine spirit (Daiva or Bootha), Naaga or the Bermer′. Many of these moolasthanas have replaced the original deities with subsequent deities such as Durga or other Gods as a result of socio-cultural evolution and are located near the beaches or in the proximal areas of the coast. Tulu families make it a point to visit their respective moolasthanas at least once a year. Ceremonial worships are held at the small temple there.

I went to one of these moolasthanas near Hoode, about ten kilometres north of Udupi. Hoode hamlet is situated near the confluence of the Sita and Swarna rivers. The word Hoode denotes a location. ‘Ade, ide, ode,’ and other place indicators mean ‘there, here, and where’ in Tulu, respectively. (Similar words can be found in Malayalam.)

Bengare, near Hoode, is the location of the moolasthana. A sand spit is the equivalent of the word bengare or bangere. Ben+kare is an abbreviation for ‘a location opposite a coastline or beach.’ The lineage indicator bangera appears to be descended from bangare. This is the TuLu moolasthana of bangera ancestry. Surprisingly, all TuLu communities of the bangera lineage have designated this site as their moolasthana. Castes such as poojari, sapalya, moolya, marakala, and others were formed based on their trades or professions. However, all of these TuLu communities share common lineage tags (surnames) such as bangera, putran, and anchan. A person’s lineage is determined by his mother’s lineage (as in matriarchic society).

The fact that diverse communities share a common ancestor suggests that the lineage system predates the classification of people into diverse communities based on trade or profession. After the elucidation of chaturvarna, it appears that the trade-based classification, the varna system, arose in post-Vedic times. According to Greek historians, it was firmly entrenched in Indian society by the time of Chandragupta (circa 340-293 BC) and Chanakya (circa 350-283 BC). As a result, the maternal lineage system of the Tuluva people is most likely of late Vedic origin.

The moolasthanas appear in the earliest Tulu settlements on the west coast. (Perhaps there were other inhabitants in the land prior to the arrival of the Tulu tribes.) For example, the early Munda tribes gave a plethora of village names with the Munda prefix. (See also 8.Mundkur, Munder) It’s worth noting that Mool-thaan (Multan) is a similar-sounding place near the Salt Ranges. The Prakrit word thaan is equivalent to the Sanskrit word sthan. The people of Pirak and Mehrgarh had settled near a place known as Multan, or the original place.

However, for a variety of reasons, several families migrated southward through Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Maharastra, eventually settling on the West Coast. When their offspring/progenies migrated back within Tulunad, it appears that these coastal settlements were renamed moolasthanas.

Manjunath and I disagreed on the bantu > bant′ derivation. I wrote an explanation to him in the comment box, but due to a phone call, I was unable to save it in time on the blog. Instead of rewriting the entire response, I decided to post an additional explanation on the subject.

Bant′ (Tulu), banta (Kannada), and bantu (Telugu) all mean the same thing: a trustworthy assistant and/or bodyguard. The Telugu meaning of Bantu, which is a suicide squad, is simply an extension of the basic meaning. Bantu used to refer to a professional bodyguard who could be counted on. This profession may have been practised by some Bantu people who migrated from their original homeland due to poor living conditions. As a result, the term Bantu came to refer to any trustworthy bodyguard. As a result, the term Bantu came to denote a profession. (This is similar to our practise of referring to any Jeep-like rugged field vehicle as a Jeep, despite the fact that Jeep is a specific brand name and not a type of vehicle.)

Manjunath believes that the Tulu/Kannada word banta was derived from the Sanskrit term bhata via Prakrit. Since elementary school, we have implicitly assumed that many of our words, the tatbhavas, are derived from Sanskrit. However, my deductions suggest that Prakrit was one of the languages spoken by the people of Pirak during the early Vedic period, around 1700 BC. Prak and Prakrit appear to be derived from the place name Pirak (cf. my posting 3.Pirak). Pirak was a multicultural, polylingual society that coexisted with proto-Tulu, proto-Dravida, and early Vedic societies. Sanskrit means “refined and cultured language,” and it evolved from the pre-existing prakrit and related languages.

As a result, the Sanskrit word bhata could be derived from the word bantu/bant. The Sanskrit bhata means soldier or guard, with no connotation of the dependability or bodyguard tags implied in the aforementioned South Indian languages.

The presence of various African tribes in India is not a recent discovery. Siddi tribes of African origin in Karnataka’s Western Ghats may be relatively new additions to our diversity. Population genetics, according to Manjunath, do not support any African genetic affinity for south Indian groups. I’m not sure if any in-depth genetic studies have been conducted in India. However, a recent heterozygozygosity study admitted that they were unable to obtain sufficient Indian samples.

The Nadava are said to have been mentioned for the first time in Tulunad in a 13th century inscription. Tulunad was under the suzerainty of the Vijayanagar kingdom at the time. To distinguish themselves from the soldiers brought with them from Vijayanagar mainland, Vijayanagar administrators may have referred to the local cultivating community as nadava. Currently, the Nadava are a Kannada-speaking community found throughout Uttara Kannada. According to Nadava sources, five Nadava families migrated from Kundapur area and settled around Ankola and Gokarna in Uttara Kannada district about five centuries ago. This is most likely an example of the number of populations/tribes that migrated throughout history.

A dominant tribe is represented by the African words ba (many)+ ntu (people). According to research, the Bantus spread or migrated to various divergent areas in and out of Africa following the desertification of the Sahara region. It’s worth noting that the Tulu word bant′ (>bante) refers to a personal assistant and/or bodyguard. The Kannada word banta means the same thing. Originally, the Tulu word bant′ may have referred to the personal bodyguard of a Tulu king or chieftain. Some of the Bantu people who migrated from the Sahara due to desertification must have landed on the west coast. They must have had dependable, strong, and powerful personalities in order to be accepted as bodyguards or security assistants to the local kings and chieftains.Later, the term must have been extended to a group of people who had settled in this land and formed a professional security cordon around the king or chieftain.

In his blog, Theories on Past Events, Manjunath Vadiari has added more information on Telugu Bantus, who formed suicide squads in ancient Andhra. This information not only sheds light on early Tulu-Telugu relations, but also confirms Bantu tribe migration from the west coast to the eastern Andhra region of the peninsula.

The attachment of a bant′ name-tag to a specific Tulu the community, also known as nadavas, appears to be a later stage in evolution. In addition, the term nadava refers to a native or those who belong to the naad or land/country.

Language and culture are highly emotional and sensitive issues. We have all grown up with a certain set of ideas, and it will be difficult to abandon them when someone suggests anything contrary to our desired opinions.

Anthropologists are almost unanimous in their belief that early man originated in Africa and that his tribes migrated to various parts of the world. According to Rosenberg’s(2002) study, based on heterozygozity or genetic diversity, humans originated in East Africa, around Kenya, where the oldest modern human fossils were discovered, and migrated to other parts of the world. The Harappa–Mohenjodaro and Sind/Baluchistan areas where early Indian civilizations are recorded are also along human migration paths.

Dravidians and Aryans have lived in India for at least 3500 years. They developed languages and cultural trends that are now well established. It should not be assumed that all Dravidians and Aryans originated and evolved solely within this declared motherland.

It is similar to the pleasant experience we have in our own home or in the town where many of our ancestors once lived. Just because several generations of our ancestors lived in this house or town and etched unforgettable pages in history does not mean that one of our primal ancestors came from another town and settled here at some point in history.

If we believe that human populations migrated, we must assume that the protolanguages they spoke and the cultural habits they were accustomed to migrated with them to different parts of the world.

Manjunath at Incoherent Theories suggests that Tulu Bermer (u) was a later adaptation of Brahma in Tulunadu in response to my blog on Bermer. The Bermer of Tulunadu is not a Boota (spirit) and is no longer worshipped on a regular basis like other Gods or Bootas along the coast. Earlier, the Bermer was definitely a worshipping diety for Tulu people in the early period (ca. 500 BC to 14 Century AD), as (partly) evident from folklores like Koti-Chennaya. The primal Bermer was gradually forgotten as the cults of Shiva, Shakthi (Durga), and Krishna rose to prominence in Tulunadu. Until the 1970s, many villages had dilapidated and neglected Bermer temples. As a result, the title of creator Bermer has gradually been transferred to another powerful concept in Tulunad, Nagaaradhane (Naga worship), and Naga God is frequently referred to as Naga Bermer.

According to available historical data, Brahmins were brought to Tulunadu around the 4th century AD by Kadamba king Mayura Varma to conduct regular puja ceremonies at Tulunadu temples. The installation of Shiva temples occurred during the period described by Dr.Gururaja Bhat based on the dating of temple idols. Later Brahma, a Trimurthi, was a four-faced creator, whereas primal Brahma Tulu/Vedic was a horse-riding male God.

Tulu and other tribes in the Pirak-Mehrgarh area worshipped the Bermer as God of Creation (dated ca. 1700 BC). At the time, the creator must have been pictured (particularly by the Tulu tribes) as a heroic male figure astride a horse. Mysterious horse figures reported from Pirak archaeological sites may represent the creator Bermer, who was worshipped by Tulu tribes in the area. The horse was a common animal in that area. It represented strength, agility, activity, and efficiency. (At the time, horses were not a common sight in India.) It is unknown whether Brahma was also conceived of as a horse-riding God by contemporary and coeval Vedic tribes. However, the concept of the Almighty Brahman was given paramount importance in the early Vedic texts. The origin of the word ‘Brahma’ (as cited in Incoherent theories) is relevant in this regard.

Br (semetic root) = to create (Brahma)

Br (Sanskrit) = to expand, swell > brahmanda, universe expanding

Michael Witzel documents the rivalry between Vedic Aryans and Iranians. As a result of rivalry between two dominant factions, antagonists of Brahmas’ followers created Abraham, just as Suras had ahura/asuras pitted against them.