INTRODUCTION

I am not a historian; that is I am not a chronicler of political

events. But I am a historian of literary events and my researches
into the literary history of Tamil have also involved me in the past
political history of the Tamil Nadu. As a historian of literature, I
am primarily concerned not with the trends in the history of the
people but with the trends in the writing, the social and political
forces which influenced the writing and had conditioned it, the
evolution and growth of a new genre, and of course with the
period or approximate date of particular authors and their lives, if
these could be ascertained with any amount of accuracy and
authenticity.
The Indian people have been concerned more with the values
in life and with how to live the life and how to uphold those
values, and less or not at all with a record or chronicle of the
living. Hence the charge that the people of India and the people
of South India have no sense of history. This may be true. But
they need not be apologetic about it. Life and values in life
matter to us who have an unbroken literary and cultural tradition,
a living tradition of over 2500 years, and mere dates do not
certainly matter to us as much as they matter to nations who
have only a literary history of a few hundred years. We know
probably something about the recent past but have no
knowledge about the remote past. Hence in my attempt at
reconstructing Tamil literary history, I have been going from the

known to the unknown, from the recent known period to the less
known earlier periods, backwards in time. I have begun with the
16th century and have gone upto the 9th century and am now
proceeding to the history of the Eighth century. The research and
the writing will take me in time to the First century A.D. and the
centuries B.C.
Deep insight into the literature (including language and
grammar) is necessary for this investigation. Besides, one should
approach all literature not only with considerable erudition but
also with reverence. Earlier views on all subjects are not to be
brushed aside in a cavalier manner but should be accepted as
they are, until they are proved wrong and the contrary is
established. There is a trend in some quarters to discredit
everything that has been said so far on all matters of literature
and history, not on any scientific basis, but just for the fun of
advancing same fanciful idea to belittle established theories. This
does not help to advance thought or research on any matter. A
truly scientific approach is necessary and one should not have
pre-conceived views on any matter or conduct his research
merely to prove such views or find justification for them.
Early in the writing of the literary history, I was convinced that
it was not possible to write a cogent history merely by a study of
the literature and its grammar. A real history of literature is
possible not by a study of the language and literature alone, but
by a co-ordinated study of the political and the social history, the

inscriptional evidence and the religious trends also. If a literary

history is to have any value, it should take stock of all the forces
influencing literature and attempt to give a clear picture of the
state of creative literary production during any period. Dismissing
any period as dark will indeed leave this history incomplete. This
realization made me examine every period more deeply. I was
able in this way to reconstruct the period and arrive at some
definite conclusions for the purpose of my literary history. This
naturally led me inevitably into the other fields of contemporary
social and political history. My study has helped me to connect
together many points, which had been left as loose ends by
earlier literary historians, and piece together an acceptable
history from fact, literature and sometimes legend also, and to
weave a presentable fabric of the social history of the period in
the Pandiya country in particular and the Tamilnad in general.
In trying to sort out the books that were written in the
language during any period, the writer had to understand the
social history and the evolution of the people's life and
aspirations and find out the trends not only of the period but also
of the later years. The general historian in the past is concerned
in popular opinion, with dates of accession and crowning of kings,
abdication, succession, wars and treaties etc. For a historian of
literature, these factual particulars are not enough. He concerns
himself with poets and their books, with the chiefs who were
celebrated by the poets in their songs, the public benefactions
they did; if there were no poets, he cannot just pass on; he has to

stop and examine why there was no poetry or writing. Thus,

where history poses no problem, the literary historian seems to
face a number of problems.
I have been able to present a connected, acceptable and to a
large extent authentic History of Tamil Literature because I had
always tried to coordinate and weave together elements of not
only literary effort, grammar and linguistics, but also religion and
philosophy, epigraphy and history, including social history, into
the fabric of my Literary History.
2
While proceeding thus, certain problems apparently
inexplicable stared me in the face and presented hurdles. One of
them is the history of the period immediately after the Sangham
Age and earlier than the Age of the Hymns is, the Age of
Devotional Poetry in Saivism and Vaishnavism. This is the period
of about three hundred years after the Second century and
before the Seventh century A. D. , roughly between 250 and 550
A. D. This has been labelled by all writers, literary critics,
historians and writers on philosophy in South India as the Dark
Period of the Tamilnad in the three spheres of religion, history
and literature. A convenient label namely the Kalabhra
Interregnum has been placed on this and most people have
complacently ignored any discussion of this period, and its
literary achievement, its social history and its religious evolution.
How ever, this did not appear to me as a dark period at all. My

approach has been from the literary angle, which gives a satisfactory continuity and cogency, and from literature, I proceed to
social history and religion.
Ever since a copy of the Velvikkudi grant became available to
the Epigraphists and the Historians of India, particularly of South
India, the problem of the Kalabhras had assumed a position of
importance in reconstructing the Pandiya history in the early
centuries of the Christian era. The period after Pandiyan
Palyagasalai Mudukudumip-Peruvaludi and before Nedunjadaiyan
had been a blank. "In the Tamil country a long historical night set
in after the close of the Sangham age until about the beginning
of the seventh century. The only historical incident that has come
to light relates to the complete subjugation of the Tamil country
by a tribe called Kalabhra who overturned not only the political
system of the land but also the old social order". From the
account given in the Velvikkudi plates it has been possible to
reconstruct the history from Pandiyan Kadumkon (575 A.D.) to
Nedunjadaiyan, the donor of the grant (765-790 A.D.). A period of
three centuries from about 250 A.D. after the period of the Third
Madurai Sangham to about 575 A.D. when Kadumkon overthrew
the Kalabhras, is now called the Kalabhra interregnum, a period
during which the ancient Pandiya rulers had been driven out of
the throne which was usurped by force of arms by an alien tribe
known to history by the name of the Kalabhras.

I chose the subject of the Kalabhra interlude in the Pandiyan

history here as my subject for many reasons. One, it had been
labelled by almost all scholars as a dark period and so I decided
to see if I can help even in a small measure to dispel the
darkness. Two, many problems in Tamil literary history can easily
be solved if we could throw some light on the period of the
Kalabhra interlude lasting for over three centuries. Three, my
history will not be complete unless I resolve the problems of the
Kalabhra interlude into the Pandinad at least in a manner that
can help to outline the continuity of the literary history.
I am trying to reconstruct the history of this period only from
two distinct fragments of positive direct evidence. One is the epigraphic evidence mentioning the Kalabhras directly, an evidence
which has given the very name to the problem, and the other is
the literary evidence which mentions the Karunataka king who
invaded and captured the Pandiya country. The second fragment
is generally liable to be dismissed as legend by many who claim
that they care only for scientific truth. But here we have to bear
in mind one important factor. Where we do not possess any
authentic historical sources, we have to find out the truth
underlying the relevent legends. Legends came into existence in
order to supply flesh and blood to a truth or mere fact which was
just the skeleton of the matter. We should train ourselves to look
through and beyond the legend in order to discover the truth or
the fact which had been clothed in legend.

3
Sekkilar was a chronicler of the lives of the Saints mentioned
by St. Sundarar. He and the other similar writers preceded us by
eight centuries and a half and were much closer in point of time
to the people and the events recorded by them. They could
therefore have had more accurate and closer knowledge of the
events and so their knowledge is much nearer, more reliable and
relevant (although perhaps coloured by their own religious
affiliations) than our conclusions at this distance of time. History
has not been recorded for us in this part of the country and
presented to us on a salver as it were. If that were so, there
would be no need for research or exploration. With all available
sources in literature, legend and inscriptional evidence, we are
reconstructing social history. Dates by themselves have no
significance. We are concerned only with broad trends in the life
and aspirations of the people.
We are concerned with evolving some theory, some insight
into the past and some ordering of the happenings, which will
accommodate all the available facts in literature, culture, religion
and history, and harmonize all of them into something which
comes nearest to Truth and True History. This is not a dogmatie
assertion but a synthesis and a reconstruction. In the absence of
direct evidence, circumstancial evidence can be accepted with
caution, but should not be ignored.

Literature is not a chronicle. It is only concerned with a poetic

expression of the author's experiences and the values he wanted
to preserve. In the case of Periya puranam, for example, it is
concerned with giving out the story of the Siva bhaktas of a past
with a view to evoking bhakti similar to theirs in the readers and
the devotees, We have to read between the lines to discover the
true course of events and of social history. Again, inscriptions
give only facts and dates. They do not give any social history
directly. Rarely do they give the causes which gave rise to the
epigraphic record concerned. We have to interpret them in order
to get at a glimpse of the society of the period. But literature
deals directly with society. Hence we may not be wrong if we say
that literature is more valuable as source material than even
dated inscriptions for understanding the social history of any
period.
The Kalabhra problem, as I had been able to see it, was not
merely a political problem but equally a cultural problem.
Previous writers on the subject do not appear to have taken note
of this. They had been concerned only with the political history,
to the exclusion of social history. Only a few writers' had
perceived the impact of the Kalabhras on the people and they
had asserted boldy that the Kalabhras had been instrumental in
suppressing the culture and religion of the Pandinad. But even
they had not discussed how these had suffered at the hands of
the usurpers. I have attempted to discuss this impact in sufficient

detail, focussing attention on many points of literary

development or arrest thereof.
In so doing, there may be naturally criticism of the culture and
the religion of the Kalabhras. The criticism applies to what
existed and what happened in the Pandiya country 1500 years
ago and has no reference to any people or their religion in the
modern day. The whole study has been done in a very objective
manner.
4
This paper will consist of two partsthe first one on the Kalabhras and the second on their impact on the life and the culture
of of Pandinad.
The first lecture will deal with the questions of the origin of the
Kalabhras. The various suggestions like the Gangas, Kalvar, Kalikula, Muttaraiyar and Pulli of Venkatam will be examined. With a
view to a better understanding of all the problems involved, an
explanation of some terms in the Velvikkudi grant will be given.
Then the language and the religion of the Kalabhras will be taken
up and a passing reference will also be made to the Kalabhras in
Cholanad and the Kalabhras in Tondainad.
The Second lecture will take up the several problems in the
history of the literature of the period which had probably caused
the period of the Kalabhras to be called a dark period. The
problems are raised and discussed in detail under the heads

literary, cultural, religious, and historical and at every stage the

solution is pointed out to lie in the occupation of Madurai and
Pandinad by the Kalabhras who clamped a long period of cultural
darkness there for 300 years. Reference is made to the literature
produced in the Pandiya country as a silver lining around the dark
clouds of the area, and literature of the period in other Tamil
areas is also referred to.
Some detailed notes in the manner of elucidation of some refrences in the two lectures and some more short notes giving the
Tamil literary references mentioned in the footnotes are
appended.
With this preface, I shall now take up the two parts of the lecture proper.
Let me emphasize once again my approach. History deals with
Facts but poetry deals with Values. As I am approaching the
Kalabhra problem more from the literary point of view, my
concern and the problems raised by me will naturally be from the
point of view of Values, of course augmented by historical
evidence.
I am indebted to all the earlier writers on the subject, to the
historians, epigraphists and literary historians and critics, but for
whose careful studies on the different aspects of the problem,
this study would not have been possible.

CONCLUSION

Now let me summarise what I had tried to express in the two

lectures regarding the obscure problem of the Kalabhras in Pandinad.
In the first lecture, I emphasized the fact that the responsibilities of
a literary historian are more broadbased than the historian proper, in
that he is expected to trace social history and to explain literary
production as well as non-production.
I am not advancing any new theory here. I am simply arranging all
existing facts and views in such a manner that they will explain the
motivation as well as the known events in a form acceptable from all
points of view. Certain repetitions are unavoidable because of the very
nature of the treatment.
Pandiyan Palyagasalai Mudukudumip-Peruvaludi, a well known ruler
of the Pandiya dynasty, lived in the centuries B.C. and he gave a grant
of land in Pahanur to Narkotran, for performing sacrifices, to be enjoyed
by the donee and his successors. But by the middle of the Third
century A.D., a band of adventurers known to history as the Kalabhras
captured Madurai and confiscated the land donated, and only after the
lapse of about 300 years, another Pandiya ruler named Kadumkon,
came upon the scene, drove away the Kalabhras, and re-granted the
same land to Nar-Chingan, a descendant of Narkotran.
I explained how the Velvikkudi grant was drawn up according to the
Dharma sastras, and dwelt upon some terms in the grant which it was
necessary to interpret and understand correctly in order to have a full
picture of the Kalabhra interlude in Pandinad. The term Kalabhra was
traced through literature and epigraphy and it was pointed out that
Kalabhra and the Kalappala of the Dalavaypuram plates were the
same, although it was quite likely that there was an endogenous group

which called itself Kalappala (raga) because it had originally helped in

the overthrowal of the Kalappala or Kalabhra. In tracing the origin of
the Kalabhras, the possibility of their relationship with the Gangas, with
Pulli of Tiruvenkatam, with the Kalikula etc. and their relationship with
the Muttaraiyar was examined and it was pointed out that the
Kalabhras were in no way connected with the Kalvar kula but might
have been an unfamiliar tribe in the area around Sravana Belgola. So
naturally it may not be wrong to conclude that they came from the
area known then and later as the Erumainadu. I have attempted to
show that they were aliens in the Tamilnad, by language, by culture,
and by religion.
The language of the Kalabhras would have been Prakrit (or Pali
elsewhere) and some primitive form of Kannada and their religion was
the Digambara sect of the Jabs. A reference was also made to the
Kalabhras in Cholanad (and also in Tondainad) referred to by Buddha
dhatta who speaks of Accuta Vikkanta of the Kalabhra kula and by the
laudatory verses on him in the Tamil language cited by a commentator.
An explanation has also been offered for the total absence of any
mention of the Kalabhras in the Tamil literature in both the
contemporary period and the later periods.
Finally I had pointed out that a number of literary, cultural, religious,
and historical problems arise in a study of the literature of the period
and that these problems can be answered only by having a clear
picture of the Kalabhras in Pandinad and their impact on the language,
culture and religion of the people there.
The second lecture gave a solution to the problems raised. The
answer to the several problems lies in the fact that the Kalabhras were

not a princely dynasty but were merely a sort of a marauding tribe and
somehow conditions seem to have favoured them in their onslaughts
over the Pandiya, Chola and Pallava regions at about the same period ;
they were total strangers to the language, culture and religion of the
land they conquered and their policy of suppression created all these
problems and more. An outline of a survey of the literature of the
period in depth has also been indicated.