Non-Sanskrit Names in Sanskrit

 History of Non-Sanskrit Names in Sanskrit

Most Indians have a Sanskrit based name and therefore don't have to worry about a Sanskrit name. If they don't then they would probably adopt an official Sanskrit name, atleast this is what rulers of Ancient India would do. The way Sanskrtizing a name, be it a oersonal name of a place name, is interesting. So let us explore non-Sanskritic names rendered into Sanskrit. This article will be a bit informal. 

Swap the Endings, a note on Greek names

If you are familiar with Ancient Greek, you would know that they tend ti end in "-os", like Alexandros or Kratos. When the Greeks (yavana) established their presence in the subcontinent, they sometimes adopted the local Indian culture, which included Sanskritizing their name, Other times, the Greeks were acknowledged through inscriptions. 

One example of a Greek adopting local culture is the abassador Heliodorus, who converted to the Bhagavata relgion. He is recorded in the famour Heliodirus Pillar. Now admitedly, the Heliodorus Pillar inscriptions are written in Prakrit, not Sanskrit, but given their close similarities, we can get a clue as to how he would have Sanskritzed his name. 

Here is the inscription:

𑀤𑁂𑀯𑀤𑁂𑀯𑀲 𑀯𑀸(𑀲𑀼𑀤𑁂)𑀯𑀲 𑀕𑀭𑀼𑀟𑀥𑁆𑀯𑀚𑁄 𑀅𑀬𑀁
Devadevasa Vā[sude]vasa Garuḍadhvaje ayaṃ
𑀓𑀭𑀺𑀢𑁄 𑀇(𑀅) 𑀳𑁂𑀮𑀺𑀉𑁄𑀤𑁄𑀭𑁂𑀡 𑀪𑀸𑀕
karito i[a] Heliodoreṇa bhāga-
𑀯𑀢𑁂𑀦 𑀤𑀺𑀬𑀲 𑀧𑀼𑀢𑁆𑀭𑁂𑀡 𑀢𑀔𑁆𑀔𑀲𑀺𑀮𑀸𑀓𑁂𑀦
vatena Diyasa putreṇa Takhkhasilākena
𑀬𑁄𑀦𑀤𑀢𑁂𑀦 𑀅𑀕𑀢𑁂𑀦 𑀫𑀳𑀸𑀭𑀸𑀚𑀲
Yonadatena agatena mahārājasa
𑀅𑀁𑀢𑀮𑀺𑀓𑀺𑀢𑀲 𑀉𑀧𑀁𑀢𑀸 𑀲𑀁𑀓𑀸𑀲𑀁𑀭𑀜𑁄
Aṃtalikitasa upa[ṃ]tā samkāsam-raño

Here is the Translation:

This Garuda-standard of Vāsudeva, the God of Gods was erected here by the devotee Heliodoros, the son of Dion, a man of Taxila, sent by the Great Yona King Antialkidas, as ambassador

Now the Prakrit forms of the names are obciously from the Sanskrit masculine a-stem forms, that is with the "-aH" ending like kRSNaH or shivaH. We know this because the name Heliodoros is in the instrumental case, as evident by the ending Prakrti "-ena" which the same as the Sanskrit masculne a-stem instrumental "-ena". The Prakrit genative is "-sa", as in Aṃtalikitasa, is from the Sanskrit "-sya" ending, as in devasya or kRSNasya.

Thus Heliodoros would have Sanskrtized his name as helyoDoraH (हेल्योडोरः). Another thing to note is that the name Dion would be DiyaH (डियः), though the thing is that the rendering of Greek to Sanskrit is weird as Dion is of  different noun class in ancient Greek than Heliodoros. 

In fact, Dion, like Poseidon, should be into rendered as Diyan (डियन्), and decline in Sanskrit as PuSan, given that these two declension systems are cognate toeach other.  The name Antialkidas is not the typical "-os" ending of Greek, but it would still work rendered into Sanskrit as a masculine a-stem. 

Also, there isn't an exact transcription of the phonology. The name Antialkidas should be rendered into Sanskrit as (अन्ट्याल्किडः) but instead it is aMTalikiTaH (अंटलिकिटः), where some extra sylables have in added and the "D" sound is changed to a "T" sound.  

This is because when ancient people rendered foreign names into their language, they write what they heard, not what it should be. Sometimes that would also mean "polishing" off the name to make it sound better in Sanskrit or make it easier to say. 

So we have the Greek king names Ptolemaos, Antiochos, Magas, Alexandros, as Tulamaya, Antikini, Maka and Alikasundara. This is called hypercorrection where non-Sanskrit names are made to look like they are Sanskrit. 

 

The word "Helios" meaning Sun is borrowed into Sanskrit as heliH (हेलिः) and declines like an masculine i-stem. However, it should be rendered as heliyaH (हेलियः), but the latter seems hard to pronounce. 

The name Zeus is actually borrowed into Sanskrit, though refering to the planet Jupiter and not the god. This was done by Varahamihira would had a fanatism for the Greeks and is said to have learned Greek himself. 

Zeus was rendered as jyauH (ज्यौः) ("Z" soundis not in Sanskrit), and would decline as dyauH (द्यौः). Fun fact, jyauH is and existing Sanskrit word meaning along the lines of "luminous" and is a tatbhava or dyauH (द्यौः) also meaning "luminous" but also "sky". This is not a coincidence as these Sanskrit words are cognate to the Greek name Zeus. 

Tack on an "-aH", a note on Arabs

During the Islamic Golden age, the Muslims astronomers would translate works from all over the region from Greece to India into Arabic. This would aslo mean that they would learn Sanskrit in the process, and because of this, we see Arabic or Arabized Greek names into Sanskrit. 

David Pingree, whom I have strong feelings about, wrote a paper exploring the Arabic and Persian texts translated into Sankrit in the court of Jayasimha, who ruled between 1687 to 1743, in what is now Rajasthan. 

Here is that paper: http://www.ub.edu/arab/suhayl/volums/volum1/paper%204.pdf

Let us explore the Arabic and Persian names rendered into Sanskrit:

The name of the langauge Arabic which in Arabic is عَرَب (ʕarab) [feminine gender] is rendered in Sanskrit as "aravI" (अरवी). The "b" became a "v", maybe because "b" is a softer sound in in Arabic than in Sanskrit; I am not sure, I don;t know Arabic. In another case the "b" wound was preserved and word Arabic was rendered as arabI (अरबी). 

The Arabic and Persian names or words may end in consonants but when the the Muslim scholars or Hindus schoalrs who learrned Islamic astronomy, would render them into Sanskrit by tacking on the classical "-aH" or the a-stem neutre "-am" ending.  

The Persian word zij, menaign a chord, is rendered into Sanskrit was jIca (जीच) [genative jIcasya (जीचस्य​)]. You know howin Hindi the names end in consonants, so Rama is Ram and Bhima is Bhim? So it seems like the translators did that but in reverse so added an "a" to the end. Another thing to note is that since Sanskrit doesn't have the "z" wound, they used a "j" sound, but interestingly the "j" in Zij was rendered as a "c" in Sanskrit, maybe because saying "jIja" would be awkward. 

In any case, we have more examples of translators simply adding on endings. The name Ptolemaios (Ptolemy) is well knwon throughout the Muslim world as بَطْلَمِيُوس (baṭlamiyūs). Well this was ultimately rendered into Sanskrit as baTlmajUsaH (बट्ल्मजूसः). Again they simply added an "a" to the end to make it Sanskrit, and the funny thing is that Ptolemy could be rendered, like the other Greek names as, pTolamayaH (प्टोलमयः) as the "-os" is the masculone case ending for Ancient Greek the  same way "-aH" is in Sanskrit. The other thing to note is that the "y" is rendered into Sanskrit as a "j", which is a common sound change phenomena. They also managed to blend 3 consonents together: "Tlm",.

Another Arabized Greek name rendered into Sanskrit is Apollonius, which it was rendred as ablUnayUsa (अब्लूनयूस​). Another honorable mention is Theodosios, which was rendred as sAvajUsayUsa (सावजूसयूस​). As you can see with the latter, the pronounciation chnages did not do the name well! 

Again this is because the translators wrote what they pronounced or heard as is, not as it should be.  Hence the text name il-khani is rendered into Sanskrit as yalkhAnI (यल्खानी), as a feminine noune. Ptolemy's famous book Almegest is from Arabic al-mijisti, where al- means "the", and the actual word is "majsiti". This is from Ancient Greek megeste, meaning "greastest". Anyway, this name was rendered into Sanskrit as mijistI (मिजिस्ती), again as a feminine noun. The book il-khaqani however was rendered into Sanskrit as khAkAnI (खाकानी), again as a feminine noun. Note here that the "q", denoting a voicless uvular plosive is rendered as a "k", as voiceless velar polosive, as the former is not native to Sanskrit.    

Returning to names, the name Muhammad Abid was rendered into Sanskrit as mahAmmadAbid (महम्मदाबिद्), which curiously is a consonatn ending, so it looks like some didn't take the short cut of adding an "a" to their name. But someone else chose to render his name by adding an "a", and hence you get Avida (आविद​), and notice the "b" is rendered as a "v".  

This would mean the name Muhammad would be in Sanskrit as mahammad (महम्मद्), and not mahammada (महम्मद). Now the name Muhammad is mentioned in the Bhavishya Purana, the references in which scholars consider to be a 18-19th century interpolation. In any case, his name, in contrast to the previous scheme, is rendered in the shortcut form by adding an "a" to the end, i.e. mahamAda (महमाद​) and mahAmada (महामद​). These Sanskrit renditons seem to be a pun as if taken literally it would translate as "he who is greatly drunk", which reflects the relgious atitudes of Hindus at the time to Islam.  

Link to the Purana (warning, the Purana doens;t have nice things to say about the prophet): 

https://archive.org/details/AlhaKhandInBhavishyaPuranaRevisedAndRechekedPart11/page/n11/mode/2up?view=theater  

 

Amma! A turn to South India

South India is dominated by the Dravidian languages, and as such we see an interesting pattern in Dravidian names rendered itno Sanskrit. Usually it is Sanskrit words borrowed into extant Dravidian lnaguages, bot the opposite. Often, Drvaidian names have a second Sanskrit name. For example Tamil Murugan in Sanskrit is Kartikeya. The Kakatiyas capital, Warangal, means "one stone", a corrupation of Telugu Orugallu, which in was given the Sanskrit name  Ekasila Nagaram. 

On this note people would translate Dravidian based names into Sanskrit. For example the village name kUDalUru in Kerala means "town at the confluence (of rivers)" [kuDal+Uru] and this can be translated sangamagrAma (सङ्गमग्राम), where sangama (सङ्गम) means "confluence" and grAma (ग्राम) means "town". Sangamagrama is where the famois Kerala School Mathematician Madhava was born, he discovered what we know was the infinite series for pi and trignometric functions. 

Now, another thing to note is that Sanskrit has a history of borrowing from Dravidian. Hence we have attestations of the words like palli (पल्ली) or pallikA (पल्लिका), meaning hamlet or village, and obviously comes from a Dravidian language (Proto Dravidian: palli)

See these links for more: 

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/essay/harshacharita-socio-cultural-study/d/doc1196391.html#note-e-228250 

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/vastu-shastra-2-town-planning/d/doc1112516.html

Another Dravidian word borrowed into Sanskrit is ambA (अम्बा) menaing mother, from Proto Dravidian amma. In south India you will notice that many women have "amma" in their name, like Gangamma or Sitamma. These names would be rendred into Sanskrit with the word "amma" being swapped out for the Sanskrit "ambA". 

For example, the poetess who wrote the Sanskrit play Varadambika Paraniyam (has the lngest word in any language) was named TirumalambA (तिरुमलम्बा), which clearly is Tirumalamma. Notice how Tamil "tirumala" is not translted into Sanskrit as "shrIgiri" (श्रीगिरि) or "shrImalaya" (श्रीमलय​) or anything meaning "mountain of shrI". 

The word "malaya" (मलय​) in Sanskrit refers to the Malaya mountains and is from the Dravidian word mala(i) meaning "mountain' or "elevated place".   

So sometimes the Dravidian names are directly borrowed into Sanskrit, with the case endings being swapped out, especially if it is already ending in an "a" sound. For example, Colan in Sanskrit is cola (चोल​). These names are attested in Sanskrit liturature, for example in the Vishnu Purana:

See this link: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/vishnu-purana-wilson/d/doc115963.html#note-t-59024

From the Vishnu Purana we have:

Keralas: From Tamil/Malayalam Chera-alam or "land of the Cheras". The late Vedic text Aitareya Aranyaka calls it Cherapadha.

    

    A take way is that place names were literally "land of (tribe)", where the tribe name is               borrowed into Sanskrit, but an existing Sanskrti wrd for land or country is used.

Karnatakas: The word Karnātaka is commonly believed to have come from the some Kannada word. One such "karu nadu" meeanign "black land" refering to the fertile blacl soil.   

    

cIna: This is clearly China. This comes from the name Qin, as int eh Qin dynasty of the 2nd century BCE. The English name China comes from this dynasty's name. It seems like that Sanskrit speakers simply added the "a" at the end.  China is not in South India obviously but I want to include to make a point.

Conclusion

Hence there are 3 ways that people would Sanskrtize a name. They would take the name and make a crude phonetic transcription of it, sometimes with hypercorrections, and then swap the original language case ending with the Sanskrit one. Other times, instead, they would add a case ending if one is not there, so imagine the names Obama as obAmaH (ओबामः) or Trump as TrampaH (ट्रुम्पः). Some just didn't add on a case ending, which in Sanskrit is actually fine, but the declsion is different. So the name Smith in Sanskrit would decline as: "smith, smitham, smithA, smithe, smithaH, smithaH, smithi, smith" .  Other times they were calques or part loneword and part calques.