Kan Sastri
When Srikanta Sastri was admitted in K. Hospital, Mysore for ill health, Chowdaiah in a gesture of true friendship decided to dedicate a small concert at Srikanta Sastri’s house on Dewan’s Road, Mysore as.
Theancient archaeological site at Keezhadi from Tamil Nadu was in the newsrecently for it’s latest discoveries on the antiquity of the site, early usageTamil Brahmi script and graffiti symbols which supposedly has links to thescript of the earlier Indus valley civilization. Many reports have gone as farto state that the urbanization in ancient Tamil Nadu started at the same time asin Gangetic regions of northern India, around 6th century BCE. They also statethat the pre-Vedic Dravidian people of Indus valley civilization migratedsouthwards and settled in ancient Tamil lands or Tamilakam to give rise toanother civilization which was free from the Vedic influences from north, and that Keezhadi finds reflects this pre-Vedic Tamilcivilization. How true are these claims? This write up does an analysis of suchclaims with factual sources.
- Finally, I quote the words of one of the greatest south Indian historian Shri KAN Sastri. According to him the Vedic ‘Aryanization’ process of southern India started with early phase from around 1000 BCE onwards “The Aryanization of the South was no doubt a slow process spread over several centuries.
- Nilakanta Sastri 38 followers Kallidaikurichi Aiyah Nilakanta Sastri (August 12, 1892 – June 15, 1975) was an Indian historian and Dravidologist who is generally regarded as the greatest and most prolific among professional historians of South India Nilakanta Sastri.
Usage of early Tamil Brahmi script
Firstlet’s go through the issue regarding Tamil Brahmi script. What is Tamil Brahmi?One of the veteran epigraphist who spent his lifetime on Tamil inscriptions,late Shri Iravatham Mahadevan, states that Tamil Brahmi was regional scriptadapted from original Brahmi to suit the needs of Tamil [1]
“The early Tamil cave inscriptions are written in a special regional and linguistic variant of the Brahmi script adapted to the needs of Tamil phonetics. This script, now generally referred to as Tamil-Brahmi, is most probably the one named Damili in the Jaina canonical works Samavayanga Sutta and Pannavana Sutta (assigned to the Pre-Christian Era), and as Dravidalipi in the Buddhist work Lalitavistara (probably written in the early centuries A.D.). “
Mahadevanviewed earlier script of Indus valley civilization as representing Dravidianlanguage, but even he had to admit that Tamil Brahmi is but a modified versionof original Brahmi which was used in other parts of the Indian subcontinent. Itonly means Brahmi script was originally used to write dialects of Prakritlanguage, which were evolved from Old Vedic Sanskrit or it’s related dialects,which was also the popular language from regions of Afghanistan in north toDeccan in south during the early historic period.
Thefact that Prakrit was the original language of Brahmi is further supported byoccurrence of many Prakrit inscriptions from early Sangam age Tamilakam. Itcould only point towards northern origins of Brahmi from Prakrit speakingareas. Archaeologist K. Rajan in his book has written the following [2].
“Thereare several names of north Indian origin, which are in Prakrit proper. A feware in hybrid form too. The Prakrit names can be recognized by the occurrenceof non-Tamil graphemes (aspirants. soft letters, and sibilants) and thegenitive case endings like śa, sa, ha. ya. There are several names in pure Tamillike campaṉ , vaḷikaṉ , kannaṉ , antavaṉ n, cuḷantai, māttaṉ , pākaṉ, inPrakrit like nikama, and in Tamilized Pralkrit like kuviraṉ , silikaṉ andmakatai. There are certain names like ātaṉ-asaṭaṉ and periyaṉ -sātaṉ ,in which, one segment is in Tamil and another segment is in Prakrit or inTamilized Prakrit. Another interesting feature is that certain names arewritten differently. For instance, the Prakrit names sāta and tisa areTamilized by adding alveolar ṉ at the end making the word as sātaṉ and tissaṉ respectively.In another instance. the initial sa in the word sātaṉ is converted into Tamilca. Likewise, the name tisa is written as tīssaṉ/tissaṉ as well as tissan (thealveolar ending ṉ is replaced with dental n).The writing in both ways like cātaṉor sātaṉ, clearly suggests that the residents of Kodumanal werefamiliar with both the languages. ”
Infact multiple sites dating back to early Sangam age in Tamil Nadu has yieldedinscribed Prakrit words. As per K. Rajan, the Prakrit words occurs fromearliest layers in Tamil Nadu, going back to 6th century BCE [3]
“Thus,the influence of Prakrit-speaking at lexical and structural levels needs to bestudied very closely. However, there is not much room for such structuralanalysis in Kodumanal inscribed potsherds as 99% of them are very short andmostly carry personal names. We hardly get any evidence of Prakritized Tamil,probably unwarranted in Tamil speaking area. The occurrence of Prakrit namesfrom the lowermost layers of the habitation cuttings suggest that theadaptation process might have taken place well before 6th century BCE. “
Also,supposedly one of the earliest discovered Tamil Brahmi inscription from TamilNadu reads as ‘vayra’ which itself is a loan from Sanskrit or Prakrit vajra. Sothis proves that Tamil Brahmi had Prakrit loans since earliest period [4]
Anotherthing is that as per the excavation reports, the early Tamil Brahmiinscriptions from Keezhadi itself shows Tamilized loans from Prakrit orSanskrit such as the name Kuviraṉ. It is ultimately from Sanskrit name Kubera,who is the ruler of Yakshas or nature spirits. [5]
Fromall these evidences, we can say that early Prakrit loans into Tamilinscriptions from earliest periods shows a crystal clear link with north, andprobably that Prakrit loans came from north to south along with the Brahmiscript. So in nutshell, the discovery of early Tamil Brahmi inscriptions onlypushes back the antiquity of the original northern Brahmi as well.
The link between Indus script symbols and graffitiesdiscovered from southern sites.
Now wemove on the Graffiti-Indus link. The finds of Indus script-like graffities fromTamil Nadu is nothing new. Over the years, there have been various reports ofthese Indus script-like finds. However none of them have been verified properlybecause the graffiti signs occur here and there, that too mostly in isolatedcases without any proper sequence like we see in a proper writing system. These signs do occur along with Brahmi letterssometimes, but probably these were trademarks or other sort of marksrepresenting regional marks, industry, clan or tribe etc. To claim that itrepresents a developed writing system like Indus script is too much, as we don’t have any proper inscriptions in suchgraffities apart from isolated occurrences. Such graffiti symbols also occursin iron age cultures of north India. For example as seen in this seal from theancient city of Vaishali in Bihar [6].
Kansas Trivia
Thisseal is dated much later than Indus valley civilization. It was commented uponeven by Iravatham Mahadevan, who usually endorsed Dravidian authorship of Indusvalley civilization, as representing Indus script-like signs [7].
We donot know the exact significance of such symbols. It is true that some symbolsdoes have resemblance to the Indus signs, and even if such graffiti symbolsfound from southern India indeed derive from Indus script, it doesn’t mean thatIndus language was Dravidian. After all the seal from Vaishali is obviouslyfrom the era when the region was part of Vedic culture (archaeologists dated itto Mauryan era at the earliest, while Mahadevan comments that it is at leastfrom 1100 BCE). Hence, we can also view that such graffiti symbols came fromnorth to south via historical expansion of the Vedic culture into southernIndia which had it’s origins from Indus valley,if we identify Indus valley civilization as Vedic or even ancestral to theVedic culture! Thus the assumption that the Indus-like symbols discovered fromsouthern India indicates a Dravidian migration from Indus valley to southernIndia is entirely based on the preconceived notion that Indus valleycivilization was Dravidian.
A non-Vedic civilization in early Tamilakam?
Finallywe come to the most important issue. Since the Keezhadi finds, theDravidianists have been claiming that Keezhadi represents an independent pre-Vedicsecular Tamil civilization which was free of Vedic influences from north.
Fromthe Prakrit loans highlighted previously, it is clear that Keezhadi, like other ancient sites of Tamilakam, had links with northern India since it’s earliestperiod and they were not part of any isolated separate pre-Vedic Tamilcivilization.
True,the findings from Keezhadi would push back the date of urbanism in Tamilakamback to 6th century BCE. But to say that it was contemporary to Gangeticurbanization is not entirely correct.
By 600 BCE many urban Vedic Janapadas with grand cities were already established in Gangetic region as well as in Deccan. These Janapadas also minted their own punch-marked coins. In fact we also find early Tamil Pandyan kingdom minting the same type of coins with their royal fish symbol on reverse [8]
Thisonly means that proper kingdoms & currency system was established insouthern India during the time of Vedic Janapadas with the influences fromnorth.
Thus,the early Tamil kingdoms were part of one unified civilization which includednorthern Janapadas as well, and the Tamil kingdoms & ancient sites likeKeezhadi were not part of any separate pre-Vedic civilization likeDravidianists wants them to be.
Alsoit is plain wrong to state that urbanism in Tamilakam occurred same time as inGangetic region. Urbanism in Gangetic region dates back to ‘proto-urban’Pianted Grey Ware or PGW cultural phase, beyond 1000 BCE and well beyond 6thcentury BCE dates from Keezhadi. Some PGW sites also overlaps with late Indusculture. As noted historian Upinder Singh has written in her book [9]:
“The dates of the PGW culture range from c.1100 to c 500/400 BCE, and the sites in the north-west are probably earlier than those in the Ganga valley Given as wide geographical distribution and chronological range, it is not surprising that there are regional variations both in the pottery as well as in associated remains. In the archaeological sequence of the Ganga valley, the PGW phase is followed by the Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW) phase, the beginning or which goes back to c, 700 BCE at Sringaverapura.The evidence from various PGW sites suggests a proto-urban phase.
“Important evidence of the PGW material culture is available from excavated slits such as Hastinapur, Alamgirpur, Ahichchatra, Allahpur, Mathura, Kampil, Noh, Jodhpura, Bhagwanpura, Jakhera, Kaushambi, and Shravasti. PGW occurs in four kinds of stratigraphic contexts. At some sites (e.g. Rupar and Sangho! in Punjab, Daulatpur in Haryana, and Alamgirpur and Hulas in western UP), it is preceded by a late Harappan level, with an intervening break in occupation. At other sites (e.g. Dadhert, Katpalon. and Nagar in the Punjab and Bhagwanpura in Haryana), there is an overlap between the PGW and late Harappan phase.”
Infact Keezhadi is just one site showing early signs of urbanism in Tamilakam,while most other ancient sites in ancient Tamilakam were overwhelmingly innon-urban megalithic phase during the iron age until urbanism came in duringlater centuries. In Gangetic zone we have signs of urbanism or proto-urbanismfrom multiple sites which later evolved into grand cities as stated above.
Theurbanization of Gangetic region was a gradual process, tracing the roots toiron age PGW culture which itself overlapped with late Indus culture. It iscertainly older than any urban site from Tamilakam discovered so far. So it isnot correct to claim that process of urbanism in early Tamilakam wascontemporary with that of north.
Vediccivilization unified north & south India
Finally,I quote the words of one of the greatest south Indian historian Shri KANSastri. According to him the Vedic ‘Aryanization’ process of southern Indiastarted with early phase from around 1000 BCE onwards [10]
“TheAryanization of the South was no doubt a slow process spread over severalcenturies. Beginning probably about 1000 BC, it had reached its completionbefore the time of Katyayana, the grammarian of the fourth century BC, who mentionsthe names of the Tamil countries of the extreme South. “
During1000 BCE most parts of Tamilakam was in megalithic phase. While we have no clueabout the language or religion of these iron age megalithic people, from theirassociation with punch-marked coins & prevalence of megalithic culture eveninto later centuries (by then Tamil kingdoms already followed Vedic culture),we can probably infer that it could indeed have been associated with expansionof Vedic culture from north. The proper urban civilization in Tamilakamgradually evolved from megalithic phase by later centuries BCE & it didn’tform any separate civilization from north. Once the expansion of Vedic cultureinto south happened, both north & south India had one unified Vedic civilizationsince earliest attested historic era.
Alllikely the Vedic cultural expansions from out of Aryavarta (regions of northernIndia which was the land of Vedic Aryans) during late Vedic era onwards alsoincluded movement of people as well. Hence, vast majority of the modernspeakers of Dravidian linguistic group, including the Tamils, also share theheritage & ancestry of ancient Vedic civilization.
References
[1]Recent Discoveries of Jaina Cave Inscriptions in Tamilnadu by IravathamMahadevan
[2] EarlyWriting System: A Journey from Graffiti to Brahmi by K. Rajan p.421.
[3] Ibid,p.422.
[4]Palani excavation triggers fresh debate – TheHinduhttps://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/palani-excavation-triggers-fresh-debate/article2408091.ece
[5] KeeladiAn Urban Settlement Of Sangam Age by TN Archeological Society p.14
[6] Vaisali excavations,1958-1962, by B. P. Sinha, and SitaRam Roy Plate XXX, seal 24.
[7]Iravatham Mahadevanas cited in The Lost River: On The Trail of theSarasvati, by Michel Danino p.218
[8] SangamAge Tamil Coins by R.Krishnamurthy Plate 1, 1-6.
[9] A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century by Upinder Singh p.246. [10] A History of South India: From Prehistoric Times to the Fall of Vijayanagar by KAN Sastri p.17.
Featured Image: The Hindu
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. IndiaFacts does not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in this article.
| Brihadeeswarar Temple(Vimana tower), Thanjavur |
Kansas Tribute
| Brihadeeswarar Temple (Entry), Thanjavur |
