Review of EARLY TAMIL EPIGRAPHY.
FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE SIXTH CENTURY A.D.
Iravatham Mahadevan. 2003. Cre-A Chennai & Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University. U.S.A.: Cambridge, pp. 719 + xxxix. Rs. 1.500/-
Brahmi is an ancient script. In the centuries before Christ it was found in epigraphs from Nepal to Sri Lanka. The North West was an exception. As D.C. Sircar says, 'it is not only the mother of all the alphabets of the Sanskrit and Dravidian languages prevalent in various parts of India today, but is also the origin of many alphabets of south East Asia including Tibetan, Singhalese, Burmese, Siamese, Javanese..." (Inscriptions of Asoka, 1998, Reprint, p.16).
Brahmi antedates the Mauryans. Citing the authority of Rhys Davids, Macdonell and Winternitz Will Durant affirms that in 'the eighth or ninth century B.C. Hindu - probably Dravidian - merchants brought from Western Asia a Semitic script akin to the Phoenician and from this "Brahma Script"... all the later alphabets of India were derived'; ('Our Oriental Heritage', 1963, Reprint, p.406). He reiterates the statement of Rhys Davids, "merchants, not priests developed this basic art", (ibid, p.407). A.C. Cunningham, S. Langdon and D.C. Sircar trace its origin to the Indus script. Iravatham Mahadevan debunks the theory, and rightly so. The Indus script is pictographic, while Brahmi is not. Similarities between Brahmi and some early North Semitic tribal scripts are more striking. In 'Non-Roman Ancient Foreign Coins from Karur' R. Krishnamurthy adduces a mass of numismatic evidence for the early contacts between Tamil Nadu and West Asia. Brahmi is a product of "catamaran" revolution in the early waves of globalization.
References to writing occur in the Pali scriptures of the Buddhists. Buddhist legends credit Buddha with the invention of Brahmi. Jain myths associate Brahmi, the daughter of Rishabhadeva, a Jaina Thirthankara, with the script. Buddhists and Jains adopted Brahmi much earlier than the Mauryans. Most Brahmi epigraphs in Tamil record donations to Jaina caves. Hence the earlier appellation, 'Tamil Nadu Cave Script'.
The Asokan inscriptions are the earliest important written documents of India. Undoubtedly, as A.L. Basham asserts, Brahmi would have 'had many years, perhaps many centuries, of development before the days of Asoka', ('The Wonder That was India', 1967, Reprint, p.396)
Asoka's inscriptions aim at propagation of his ideas among the common populace. He deliberately chose local dialects and scripts. The thenexisting Brahmi was his natural choice. He adopted regional variations of the script where necessary. His inscriptions are not in Tamil. The regional, linguistic variations of Brahmi in Tamil make Iravatham Mahadevan adopt the phrase 'Tamil - Brahmi'. Interestingly, V. Kannaiyan, considering the other varieties of Brahmi as variations from the Tamil script, came to the startling conclusion that 'the script employed by Asoka seems to be but a sophisticated variety of the "TamilNad Cave Script" (and) Asoka borrowed the script from the Tamils' ('Scripts', 2000, Reprint, p.3). Perceptions and perspectives vary. Dr. Nagasami calls the script 'Tamili' only. Srinivasa Ritty is against the usage of the very term 'Tamil-Brahmi'. T.N. Subramaniam holds the view that Brahmi was specially created for Tamil. Gift Siromoney suggests that the Asokan Brahmi followed from the Tamil-Brahmi I out of the three systems.
The Jains called the Tamil script 'Dramili', 'Dravidi' or 'Damili'. The Jains came to Karnataka with Asoka's grandfather Chandragupta. Bhadrabahu, the Jain sage, who accompanied them sent Visakacharya to propagate Jainism in Tamil Nadu. It accounts for the Kannada colloquial expressions so assiduously pointed out by Mahadevan in the Tamil inscriptions. It also explains the name of Visaka occurring in some inscriptions. Visaka may not be named after the asterism, as suggested by Mahadevan, but may convey the memory of the Digambara teacher who introduced Jainism in Tamil Nadu. The Jaina contribution to education is immense. Even today, schools are called 'Palli' retaining the rich association with the Jains. The Jains stayed in cavebeds donated by kings and merchants. Hence the endurance of the epigraphs on stones. The Jaina epigraphs are found on the ancient trade routes. The merchants were the patrons of Jainism and Buddhism. It accounts for the coins and inscriptions bearing the word 'Mahasattan' in Sri Lanka and the inscriptions bearing the legends, 'MahasathuvaT and 'Mahanavika' in Andhra echoing 'Masathuvan' and 'Manayakan' of the Tamil epic 'Silappathikaram'.
Mahadevan's 'Early Tamil Epigraphy' is a monumental work. It is the fruit of his devotion and dedication for forty years. But for his book, ancient Tamil kings would have remained mere shadowy figures. He unearthed their past by deciphering the so-called cave script. His findings created an epigraphical revolution, just as R. Krishnamurthy and A. Seetharaman launched a numismatic revolution leading to a better understanding of the classical age of the Tamils. He launched epigraphical expeditions to obtain tracings and estampages of inscriptions which form an invaluable data for scholars to reassess the past.
Part I of his book describes the saga of his epoch - making discoveries. Part II examines the palaeography, orthography and grammar of Tamil Epigraphy. Part III presents the corpus of early Tamil epigraphy, 89 of them in Tamil - Brahmi' and 21 of them in early Vatteluthu. The inscriptions are elucidated with his own interpretations followed by commentary in flawless English that can be understood by laymen and appreciated by scholars.
The book bears the stamp of a genius with intuitive insights. His most perceptive discovery is the prevalence of village autonomy from the earliest times. He interprets the short inscription at Mudalaikulam (Nq^35, ca 2nd century B.C.) as 'the earliest lithic record of village assembly3, 'Uf. His discovery is corroborated by classical literature. There are frequent references to 'manram' and 'podhiyil', 'the public assembly hall or square'. 'Akananuru' (77) mentions 'kuzhisi olai' (1.7) the selection by lot in the pot. Hitherto the Historians considered the system being practised in the age of the imperial Cholas only.
The village autonomy accounts for the vitality, endurance and continuity of Tamil culture despite the seemingly unending wars. Kharavela's inscription (ca. 1st century B.C.) attests to the united fight put up by the Tamils against the northern intruders. Literature offers standing testimony to the fact that cities and kingdoms were well organised for both war and trade. Champakalakshmi seems to be far from the truth, when she remarked that state institutions then were 'less evolved'.
Local autonomy, absence of priestly hierarchy, political independence and the missionary zeal of Jains and Buddhists are listed as facilitating factors for the spread of literacy in early Tamil society. 'Purananuru' (183) highlights another factor, the royal patronage extended to education as evidenced by the assertion of Pandian king Nedunchelian. The presence of early literacy in Tamil Nadu, that can be compared to the glorious days of ancient Athens is, according to Dr. V.C. Kulandaisamy, 'an astonishing discovery5.
Mahadevan identifies 'ilayar' of Sittannavasal (49) with the ancient martial clan of 'ilankocar' of Kongu hailing from the Tulu country. Early literature describes the Kocar as aiding the Mauryan invasion. The martial tradition of Tulu country continues even today, and the heroic Coorgs arc much preferred in the Indian armed forces.
The Tamil inscriptions on pottery found at Salihundam in Andhra reveal the extent of Tamil influence. Mahadevan from the linguistic evidence convincingly establishes the fact that the language of the legends on the reverse of the Satavahana silver portrait coins is Tamil and not old Telugu. As the reason for the employment of Tamil in the coin-legends, he suggests that Prakrit and Tamil were the only two languages used for political and administrative purposes in South India at the turn of the Christian era. He omits the formidable literary evidence in 'Silappathikaram' (26:148-149) about the enduring friendship of Chera king Chenguttuvan and the Satakarnis 'without any differences whatsoever'. 'Pathirrupathu' explains how the coins were found in the northern and northwestern parts of Satavahana dominions. The Cheras are described as rooting out pirates on the West Coast, seizing the Yavanas and fighting in the Dandakaranya region. The prosperity of both the Tamils and the Satavahanas was based on the lucrative sea-trade. They had a common interest in ridding the coast of pirates. They seemed to have put up a united fight against the Saka ruler Nahapana and the Kardamaka ruler Rudradaman. The coins must have been issued to pay for the services of the soldiers of both kingdoms, stationed at the border areas. The issue of bilingual coins has thus strategic considerations as well.
Early Tamil epigraphy has enriched classical Tamil literature and early history of Tamil Nadu by referring to Neduncheliyan, Athiyaman and the Irumporai dynasty. It is a signal contribution. Mahadevan identifies the poet Ilavettanar in Alagarmalai inscription (46). Viramangalam inscription (18) mentions 'EyiP which is mentioned in 'Cirupanarrupadai' (1.152) and noted by Ptolemy as 'Sopadma'.
Mahadevan's contribution to classical semantics is equally perspicacious. To him 'Anthai' is an honorific. He derives 'munriP from 'munru-il', 'munru' meaning forecourt, unlike the traditional grammarians who derive 'munriP from 'il-mun'. He correctly identifies 'kapi' as the name of a clan. It implies it is not a 'gotra'. 'Kapiyur' occurs in Kunnakudi epigraph (74).
U.V. Swaminatha Iyer's reading of Tyakan' in Puram 71 gets corrected as 'Viyakan' mentioned in Alagarmalai inscription (39). Viyakan, a friend of Bhoothapandian is a salt merchant. He also concludes from Tiruparankunram epigraph (53) that a learned family of Antuvans were attached to the hill.
His interpretation of 'Panattu' of Paraiyanpattu (115) as 'the country of the Panan' agrees with the interpretation of 'Akam' (155:6-7) by U.V. Swaminatha Iyer (unpublished notes), R. Raghavaiyangar, N.M. Venkatasawamy Nattar and R. Venakatachalam Pillai. But some old manuscripts give the variant reading, 'Palnattu' for 'Panattu'.
His explanation of 'aratta' as the personal name, meaning 'the haughty one', illumines 'Arat-tan chetti' of 'Silappathikaram' (30:49). 'Aratta' is found in Anaimalai epigraph (60). But his etymological derivation of 'Kaviti' in Mangulam epigraph (3) from Sanskrit Grahapati and Prakrit Gahapati is far from the mark. Classical literature mentions 'Kaviti' or 'etti' as the title conferred mostly on merchants. Paranavitana is correct in identifying 'Kutumbika', (Tiruparankunram, 55), a householder with 'gahapati'. 'Kutumbika' is found in Sri Lanka also.
Similarly, 'Saiyalan' of Muthupatti (57) is interpreted as 'saimhalaka' or the man from the Sahyadri mountain. Dr. T.V. Mahalingam taking note of the masculine suffix 'an' considers it a proper name. He notes the currency of the name 'Siyalan' around the area of the epigraph even today. He concludes it may refer to 'Sayalan' of 'Silappathikaram'. Dr. Vedachalam too shares his view. Unfortunately, Mahadevan does not even mention the alternative interpretations.
Another glaring error of elucidation refers to 'lanko' of Mannarkoil (89). He says 'lanko' is a merchant. He adduces 13th century inscription to buttress his view. But there is neither literary nor inscriptional usage of the contemporary age warranting this conclusion. He himself interprets 'lanko' of Pugalur inscription (61 & 62) as prince / heir apparent. Besides he is silent over the Chera royal emblem that 'Aavanam' 13 (2002) clearly men-y tions in p.2. The rock on which the epigraph occurs is called today the king's rock, 'Rajakkal Parai'. Obviously it refers to Ilango, a Chera prince. With the adjective, 'Kunavin', it may refer to Ilangovadigal of 'Kunavayil Kottam', the celebrated poet.
The dating of early Tamil epigraphy is uncertain. There are no clear references to dates. Mahadevan solves the problem by arriving at certain conclusions based on orthographic features and palaeographic conventions in the inscription. But these are not totally reliable. Mahadevan himself raises the question in p. 234. 'How did two parallel, mutually exclusive and competing systems of medial vowel notations appear at about the same time and within a relatively small and homogeneous linguistic community? No solution to this problem is yet in sight'.
Mahadevan assigns Nedunchelian of Mangulam inscription to 2nd century B.C., Dr. M.D. Sampath to 4th to 2nd century B.C. and Dr. Nagasamy to 1st century B.C. No wonder, Prof. M. Radhadrishna Sharma remarks, 'Palaeography is guessing'. To arrive at dating Dr. M.D. Sampath lays down broad guidelines:
'It is more often seen that palaeography is not the only consideration in determining the date of the early inscriptions. While suggesting a date, enough care has to be taken, that too, if no other internal evidence is not available. It is safe to suggest a date with a plus or minus hundred or atleast 50 years. We often come across the difficulty in writing, since the writing is much affected or influenced by the style and skill of a scribe' (J.E. S.I. Vol. XXI, 1985, p.89).
Mahadevan's dating of Tolkappiyam' to Ca. 2nd - 4th centuries A.D. based on the absence of 'Pullf or dot does not take into consideration the scribe's conventional caution in inscribing 'pulli', be it on stone or palm-leaf. It does not take into consideration Ganapathy Subhiah's assertion (in 'Roots of Tamil Religious Thought', PILC, 1991, p.126) that 'for many of the themes mentioned by Tol (kappiyar) there are no illustrative examples in the extant classical corpus'. However, it may be in fairness asserted in favour of Mahadevan that he attempts at dating on certain rational principles. 'Early Tamil Epigraphy is an invaluable guide to an understanding of the beginnings of Tamil culture.
1. Amazon
2. FrontLine Article
FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE SIXTH CENTURY A.D.
Iravatham Mahadevan. 2003. Cre-A Chennai & Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University. U.S.A.: Cambridge, pp. 719 + xxxix. Rs. 1.500/-
Brahmi is an ancient script. In the centuries before Christ it was found in epigraphs from Nepal to Sri Lanka. The North West was an exception. As D.C. Sircar says, 'it is not only the mother of all the alphabets of the Sanskrit and Dravidian languages prevalent in various parts of India today, but is also the origin of many alphabets of south East Asia including Tibetan, Singhalese, Burmese, Siamese, Javanese..." (Inscriptions of Asoka, 1998, Reprint, p.16).
Brahmi antedates the Mauryans. Citing the authority of Rhys Davids, Macdonell and Winternitz Will Durant affirms that in 'the eighth or ninth century B.C. Hindu - probably Dravidian - merchants brought from Western Asia a Semitic script akin to the Phoenician and from this "Brahma Script"... all the later alphabets of India were derived'; ('Our Oriental Heritage', 1963, Reprint, p.406). He reiterates the statement of Rhys Davids, "merchants, not priests developed this basic art", (ibid, p.407). A.C. Cunningham, S. Langdon and D.C. Sircar trace its origin to the Indus script. Iravatham Mahadevan debunks the theory, and rightly so. The Indus script is pictographic, while Brahmi is not. Similarities between Brahmi and some early North Semitic tribal scripts are more striking. In 'Non-Roman Ancient Foreign Coins from Karur' R. Krishnamurthy adduces a mass of numismatic evidence for the early contacts between Tamil Nadu and West Asia. Brahmi is a product of "catamaran" revolution in the early waves of globalization.
References to writing occur in the Pali scriptures of the Buddhists. Buddhist legends credit Buddha with the invention of Brahmi. Jain myths associate Brahmi, the daughter of Rishabhadeva, a Jaina Thirthankara, with the script. Buddhists and Jains adopted Brahmi much earlier than the Mauryans. Most Brahmi epigraphs in Tamil record donations to Jaina caves. Hence the earlier appellation, 'Tamil Nadu Cave Script'.
The Asokan inscriptions are the earliest important written documents of India. Undoubtedly, as A.L. Basham asserts, Brahmi would have 'had many years, perhaps many centuries, of development before the days of Asoka', ('The Wonder That was India', 1967, Reprint, p.396)
Asoka's inscriptions aim at propagation of his ideas among the common populace. He deliberately chose local dialects and scripts. The thenexisting Brahmi was his natural choice. He adopted regional variations of the script where necessary. His inscriptions are not in Tamil. The regional, linguistic variations of Brahmi in Tamil make Iravatham Mahadevan adopt the phrase 'Tamil - Brahmi'. Interestingly, V. Kannaiyan, considering the other varieties of Brahmi as variations from the Tamil script, came to the startling conclusion that 'the script employed by Asoka seems to be but a sophisticated variety of the "TamilNad Cave Script" (and) Asoka borrowed the script from the Tamils' ('Scripts', 2000, Reprint, p.3). Perceptions and perspectives vary. Dr. Nagasami calls the script 'Tamili' only. Srinivasa Ritty is against the usage of the very term 'Tamil-Brahmi'. T.N. Subramaniam holds the view that Brahmi was specially created for Tamil. Gift Siromoney suggests that the Asokan Brahmi followed from the Tamil-Brahmi I out of the three systems.
The Jains called the Tamil script 'Dramili', 'Dravidi' or 'Damili'. The Jains came to Karnataka with Asoka's grandfather Chandragupta. Bhadrabahu, the Jain sage, who accompanied them sent Visakacharya to propagate Jainism in Tamil Nadu. It accounts for the Kannada colloquial expressions so assiduously pointed out by Mahadevan in the Tamil inscriptions. It also explains the name of Visaka occurring in some inscriptions. Visaka may not be named after the asterism, as suggested by Mahadevan, but may convey the memory of the Digambara teacher who introduced Jainism in Tamil Nadu. The Jaina contribution to education is immense. Even today, schools are called 'Palli' retaining the rich association with the Jains. The Jains stayed in cavebeds donated by kings and merchants. Hence the endurance of the epigraphs on stones. The Jaina epigraphs are found on the ancient trade routes. The merchants were the patrons of Jainism and Buddhism. It accounts for the coins and inscriptions bearing the word 'Mahasattan' in Sri Lanka and the inscriptions bearing the legends, 'MahasathuvaT and 'Mahanavika' in Andhra echoing 'Masathuvan' and 'Manayakan' of the Tamil epic 'Silappathikaram'.
Mahadevan's 'Early Tamil Epigraphy' is a monumental work. It is the fruit of his devotion and dedication for forty years. But for his book, ancient Tamil kings would have remained mere shadowy figures. He unearthed their past by deciphering the so-called cave script. His findings created an epigraphical revolution, just as R. Krishnamurthy and A. Seetharaman launched a numismatic revolution leading to a better understanding of the classical age of the Tamils. He launched epigraphical expeditions to obtain tracings and estampages of inscriptions which form an invaluable data for scholars to reassess the past.
Part I of his book describes the saga of his epoch - making discoveries. Part II examines the palaeography, orthography and grammar of Tamil Epigraphy. Part III presents the corpus of early Tamil epigraphy, 89 of them in Tamil - Brahmi' and 21 of them in early Vatteluthu. The inscriptions are elucidated with his own interpretations followed by commentary in flawless English that can be understood by laymen and appreciated by scholars.
The book bears the stamp of a genius with intuitive insights. His most perceptive discovery is the prevalence of village autonomy from the earliest times. He interprets the short inscription at Mudalaikulam (Nq^35, ca 2nd century B.C.) as 'the earliest lithic record of village assembly3, 'Uf. His discovery is corroborated by classical literature. There are frequent references to 'manram' and 'podhiyil', 'the public assembly hall or square'. 'Akananuru' (77) mentions 'kuzhisi olai' (1.7) the selection by lot in the pot. Hitherto the Historians considered the system being practised in the age of the imperial Cholas only.
The village autonomy accounts for the vitality, endurance and continuity of Tamil culture despite the seemingly unending wars. Kharavela's inscription (ca. 1st century B.C.) attests to the united fight put up by the Tamils against the northern intruders. Literature offers standing testimony to the fact that cities and kingdoms were well organised for both war and trade. Champakalakshmi seems to be far from the truth, when she remarked that state institutions then were 'less evolved'.
Local autonomy, absence of priestly hierarchy, political independence and the missionary zeal of Jains and Buddhists are listed as facilitating factors for the spread of literacy in early Tamil society. 'Purananuru' (183) highlights another factor, the royal patronage extended to education as evidenced by the assertion of Pandian king Nedunchelian. The presence of early literacy in Tamil Nadu, that can be compared to the glorious days of ancient Athens is, according to Dr. V.C. Kulandaisamy, 'an astonishing discovery5.
Mahadevan identifies 'ilayar' of Sittannavasal (49) with the ancient martial clan of 'ilankocar' of Kongu hailing from the Tulu country. Early literature describes the Kocar as aiding the Mauryan invasion. The martial tradition of Tulu country continues even today, and the heroic Coorgs arc much preferred in the Indian armed forces.
The Tamil inscriptions on pottery found at Salihundam in Andhra reveal the extent of Tamil influence. Mahadevan from the linguistic evidence convincingly establishes the fact that the language of the legends on the reverse of the Satavahana silver portrait coins is Tamil and not old Telugu. As the reason for the employment of Tamil in the coin-legends, he suggests that Prakrit and Tamil were the only two languages used for political and administrative purposes in South India at the turn of the Christian era. He omits the formidable literary evidence in 'Silappathikaram' (26:148-149) about the enduring friendship of Chera king Chenguttuvan and the Satakarnis 'without any differences whatsoever'. 'Pathirrupathu' explains how the coins were found in the northern and northwestern parts of Satavahana dominions. The Cheras are described as rooting out pirates on the West Coast, seizing the Yavanas and fighting in the Dandakaranya region. The prosperity of both the Tamils and the Satavahanas was based on the lucrative sea-trade. They had a common interest in ridding the coast of pirates. They seemed to have put up a united fight against the Saka ruler Nahapana and the Kardamaka ruler Rudradaman. The coins must have been issued to pay for the services of the soldiers of both kingdoms, stationed at the border areas. The issue of bilingual coins has thus strategic considerations as well.
Early Tamil epigraphy has enriched classical Tamil literature and early history of Tamil Nadu by referring to Neduncheliyan, Athiyaman and the Irumporai dynasty. It is a signal contribution. Mahadevan identifies the poet Ilavettanar in Alagarmalai inscription (46). Viramangalam inscription (18) mentions 'EyiP which is mentioned in 'Cirupanarrupadai' (1.152) and noted by Ptolemy as 'Sopadma'.
Mahadevan's contribution to classical semantics is equally perspicacious. To him 'Anthai' is an honorific. He derives 'munriP from 'munru-il', 'munru' meaning forecourt, unlike the traditional grammarians who derive 'munriP from 'il-mun'. He correctly identifies 'kapi' as the name of a clan. It implies it is not a 'gotra'. 'Kapiyur' occurs in Kunnakudi epigraph (74).
U.V. Swaminatha Iyer's reading of Tyakan' in Puram 71 gets corrected as 'Viyakan' mentioned in Alagarmalai inscription (39). Viyakan, a friend of Bhoothapandian is a salt merchant. He also concludes from Tiruparankunram epigraph (53) that a learned family of Antuvans were attached to the hill.
His interpretation of 'Panattu' of Paraiyanpattu (115) as 'the country of the Panan' agrees with the interpretation of 'Akam' (155:6-7) by U.V. Swaminatha Iyer (unpublished notes), R. Raghavaiyangar, N.M. Venkatasawamy Nattar and R. Venakatachalam Pillai. But some old manuscripts give the variant reading, 'Palnattu' for 'Panattu'.
His explanation of 'aratta' as the personal name, meaning 'the haughty one', illumines 'Arat-tan chetti' of 'Silappathikaram' (30:49). 'Aratta' is found in Anaimalai epigraph (60). But his etymological derivation of 'Kaviti' in Mangulam epigraph (3) from Sanskrit Grahapati and Prakrit Gahapati is far from the mark. Classical literature mentions 'Kaviti' or 'etti' as the title conferred mostly on merchants. Paranavitana is correct in identifying 'Kutumbika', (Tiruparankunram, 55), a householder with 'gahapati'. 'Kutumbika' is found in Sri Lanka also.
Similarly, 'Saiyalan' of Muthupatti (57) is interpreted as 'saimhalaka' or the man from the Sahyadri mountain. Dr. T.V. Mahalingam taking note of the masculine suffix 'an' considers it a proper name. He notes the currency of the name 'Siyalan' around the area of the epigraph even today. He concludes it may refer to 'Sayalan' of 'Silappathikaram'. Dr. Vedachalam too shares his view. Unfortunately, Mahadevan does not even mention the alternative interpretations.
Another glaring error of elucidation refers to 'lanko' of Mannarkoil (89). He says 'lanko' is a merchant. He adduces 13th century inscription to buttress his view. But there is neither literary nor inscriptional usage of the contemporary age warranting this conclusion. He himself interprets 'lanko' of Pugalur inscription (61 & 62) as prince / heir apparent. Besides he is silent over the Chera royal emblem that 'Aavanam' 13 (2002) clearly men-y tions in p.2. The rock on which the epigraph occurs is called today the king's rock, 'Rajakkal Parai'. Obviously it refers to Ilango, a Chera prince. With the adjective, 'Kunavin', it may refer to Ilangovadigal of 'Kunavayil Kottam', the celebrated poet.
The dating of early Tamil epigraphy is uncertain. There are no clear references to dates. Mahadevan solves the problem by arriving at certain conclusions based on orthographic features and palaeographic conventions in the inscription. But these are not totally reliable. Mahadevan himself raises the question in p. 234. 'How did two parallel, mutually exclusive and competing systems of medial vowel notations appear at about the same time and within a relatively small and homogeneous linguistic community? No solution to this problem is yet in sight'.
Mahadevan assigns Nedunchelian of Mangulam inscription to 2nd century B.C., Dr. M.D. Sampath to 4th to 2nd century B.C. and Dr. Nagasamy to 1st century B.C. No wonder, Prof. M. Radhadrishna Sharma remarks, 'Palaeography is guessing'. To arrive at dating Dr. M.D. Sampath lays down broad guidelines:
'It is more often seen that palaeography is not the only consideration in determining the date of the early inscriptions. While suggesting a date, enough care has to be taken, that too, if no other internal evidence is not available. It is safe to suggest a date with a plus or minus hundred or atleast 50 years. We often come across the difficulty in writing, since the writing is much affected or influenced by the style and skill of a scribe' (J.E. S.I. Vol. XXI, 1985, p.89).
Mahadevan's dating of Tolkappiyam' to Ca. 2nd - 4th centuries A.D. based on the absence of 'Pullf or dot does not take into consideration the scribe's conventional caution in inscribing 'pulli', be it on stone or palm-leaf. It does not take into consideration Ganapathy Subhiah's assertion (in 'Roots of Tamil Religious Thought', PILC, 1991, p.126) that 'for many of the themes mentioned by Tol (kappiyar) there are no illustrative examples in the extant classical corpus'. However, it may be in fairness asserted in favour of Mahadevan that he attempts at dating on certain rational principles. 'Early Tamil Epigraphy is an invaluable guide to an understanding of the beginnings of Tamil culture.
1. Amazon
2. FrontLine Article
posted by SG at
5:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home