The only purpose of a language in my opinion is to communicate one’s thoughts to another. Why is the lack of differentiation between ka, ga, ha and pa and ba seen as a sign of inferiority? Also, what do you mean by ba and ga being “harsh” sounds? It does not sound any harsher than “ka” and “pa” to me. Sinhalese (and Tamils) cannot differentiate between Va and Wa and also Pa and Fa. On the other hand English does not posses the gna sound. Does this mean one is inferior to the other? We have no chance of distinguishing between the array of “clicking” sounds in southern african nations.

A language can be deemed superior to another (At least in the field of Information Theory) only if it has less redundancy. i.e. If one can express the same idea in fewer words then that is a superior language. If the same word can be represented with fewer characters that too is a sign of superiority as it has less redundancy.

Just to put things in perspective, none of the Sinhalese or Tamil litterary works mentioned above can hold a candle to the ancient Greek cannon which is much older, much more complete in range of topics and almost modern in its intellectual maturity.

In contrast, ancient Eastern litterature is highly repitive and overly descriptive to the point of hyperbole.

Sorry I missed the below mentioned point.

*****The evolution of Vatteluttu was interrupted by a sudden social upheaval. As you know the Chera’s, Pandiyans and the Chola’s were constantly fighting for territory and plundering neighboring nations. A high level of militarisation would have leveled the power of the elites with lower strata of the society. The LTTE is in fact a microcosm of this phenomenon. The commoners aspired for knowledge and literacy when they begin to acquire wealth and power.*****

This is only a speculation/hypothesis which may or may not be true. You have the freedom to imagine, but the others may have different point of views.

Not only Tamil but almost all the languages underwent a transition to arrive to the present status which is suitable not only for the religious leaders and the elites but also for the commoners.
For example, lets consider the Sinhala language. The most popular Sinhala Scholars (I have mentioned a few names in my post above) believe that the CORE (mother and father) of Sinhala is Pali/Prakrit and Tamil along with a few words from the aboriginal tribes. Today it has adopted many other languages including Malayalam (Kotchi), Portuguese, Dutch, English, etc and transformed into the present state.

*****A large body of secular poems from numerous unknown authors in the Sangam which I date to not much older than 10-11 CE is another indication.*****

Just because some poems in the Sangam Literature has unknown authors, you have the freedom to date them as per your whims and fancies. My foot!

*****This indicates modern Tamil was not restricted to just the Brahmins and the elites.*****

The modern Tamil originated after the 7th Century AD, of course unlike the old Tamil which was rich and poetic (most probably restricted to the Brahmins and the elites) the modern Tamil would have been for all.

*****Unlike the other Dravidian scripts, Tamil had an intermediary step in the form of Tamil Vatteluttu. The evolution of Vatteluttu was interrupted by a sudden social upheaval.*****

The original South Indian Dravidian (Tamil) script was round shaped (Tamil Vatteluttu) from which all the other Dravidian scripts including the Sinhala script originated. Where as the original North Indian (Indo-Aryan) script was angular (square) in shape from which all the North Indian scripts originated.

After the 7th Century AD, Tamil underwent a transition adopting a few angular (square) shaped script similar to the North Indian, the pulli (dot) system only unique to Tamil and some changes in grammer and pronounciation deviating from its literary format to a common laymen fromat.

*****Had the transition to modern Tamil occurred in the hands of the elite and the educated few, it would have evolved to include the constants kh, g, gh, and ch etc and a number of other vowels.*****

There is a valid point here in your observation, all the other Dravidian languages in South India and Sinhala language adopted all the above constants except Tamil, but on the other hand even the old Tamil did not have the above constants.

As Thirumal has pointed out, the old Tamil was famous among the Indians because it was melodious. Poets have described the old Tamil as ‘Amuthu’ (nectar), because of its mellifluous beauty and soft intonations even though it did not contain the above constants.

*****Regarding the LEMURIA Myth*****

For your information, even I believe that the large sunken landmass in the Indian Ocean known as LEMURIA mentioned in the beginning of Sangam is a myth very similar to the beginning chapters of Mahavamnsa to give that inspiring feeling or for the serene joy and emotion of the pious.

Anyhow, unlike the Mahavamnsa where bestiality cannot be scientifically proved, it is still too early to rule out the existance of a sunken land mass. Only recently the NASA discovered an ancient bridge between India and Sri Lanka. The research what the scientists have done so far in this regard is insufficient to come to conclusions.

In his eminently readable book “The Sinhalese of Ceylon and the Aryan Theory” its author Samuel Livingstone describes the birthplace of Dravidian civilization as LEMURIA, the land mass that broke away from Africa (Madagascar). Even though a large part of this landmass (known to Tamils as Kumari kandam) sank due to the rise in sea levels, the part that was left (without sinking) was called ILAMURIDESAM which is known today as Sri Lanka. A few extracts from his book adopted by Charles Somasundram: http://www.tamilwritersguild.com/edited_Ilamurid.pdf

However, our most popular archeologist Dr. Siran Upendra Deraniyagala says,

It needs to be borne in mind that there would have been unimpeded gene-flow between southernmost India and Sri Lanka (in both directions) from the Palaeolithic period onwards, and that future research will probably reveal a whole range of genetic clusters in the prehistoric populations of this region, which would invalidate the concept of Balangoda Man as a homogeneous ‘race’ (cf. id. 1990: 17,20).

Hello Deva,

Tamilnand clearly had a high literacy rate compared to upper southern regions. I made this observation because reasons I give below.

1- A large number of secular inscriptions found on pottery, burial grounds and other places scattered throughout Tamil Nadu region. A large body of secular poems from numerous unknown authors in the Sangam which I date to not much older than 10-11 CE is another indication. The inscriptions found on upper southern regions on the contrary were mainly close to centers of religion. This indicates modern Tamil was not restricted to just the Brahmins and the elites.

2 – Unlike the other Dravidian scripts, Tamil had an intermediary step in the form of Tamil Vatteluttu. The evolution of Vatteluttu was interrupted by a sudden social upheaval. As you know the Chera’s, Pandiyans and the Chola’s were constantly fighting for territory and plundering neighboring nations. A high level of militarisation would have leveled the power of the elites with lower strata of the society. The LTTE is in fact a microcosm of this phenomenon. The commoners aspired for knowledge and literacy when they begin to acquire wealth and power.

3 – Vatteluttu to modern Tamil transition was made during the social upheaval I mention in point 2. Had the transition to modern Tamil occurred in the hands of the elite and the educated few, it would have evolved to include the constants kh, g, gh, and ch etc and a number of other vowels.

You may disagree with me, but I personally think I have solved the riddle of Dravidian scripts.

Athos,

*****Comparing Tamil Vatteluttu with the evolution of Sinhala script. Its a pity both Northern and Southern Brahmin script was not added in a separate column for a better comparison.*****

I agree with you, the good doctor who wrote the above article should have added the Northen (Asokan) Brahmi script (Indo-Aryan) and the Southern (Harappan) Brahmi script (Dravidian) for a better comparison.

Also, he should have added the present day south Indian (including Sri Lankan) script and the present day North Indian script for a better comparison.

*****At the first step of its evolution, the letters A and O in Sinhala does not bear any resemblance to Tamil Vatteluttu. This clearly suggests the Sinhala script evolved from Brahmi around the same time as Tamil Vatteluttu.*****

Except for one or two, the Sinhala script resembles the old Tamil Vatteluttu. Lets not forget that Sinhala also had the Asokan influence during the 3rd Century BC.

*****Sinhala and other Brahmi derivatives retain and expand on Brahmi base however Tamil does not make any progress.*****

On what basis or evidence did you came up with the above ignorant statement?

*****If you look at the table above, there are many deficiencies in the Tamil alphabet in comparison to other Brahmi based scripts.*****

In my post #19, I have explained the reason for that.

*****The form of certain characters take a backward step taking square forms. I would like to float a theory on this. Atho’s popular versus elitist literacy theory.
This is why modern Tamil looks more primitive in comparison to other Brahmi based scripts.*****

As I mentioned right from the beginning in my first reply to you, until now you have not shown any maturity in your arguments. For some people they say ignorance is bliss. Your Athos theory also looks very silly and childish.

The ancient Tamil script is round shaped (Vatteluttu) where as the modern Tamil has both round shaped and angular (square) shaped scripts. According to you, since it has adopted some square shaped scripts it has become primitive.

My dear, almost all the North Indian scripts are angular (square) shaped. Are you saying that they are all primitive?

In case if you did not understand the pulli (dot) system, the ancient Tamil names found in the stone inscriptions and Pali chronicles did not end with an N or M. Similarly those found in South India.
Example: Sena, Elara, etc

After the 7th Century AD, the modern Tamil adopted the pulli system. The present day Tamil names end as Senan, Ellalan, etc.

Do not mix up Tolkappiyam with the huge and ancient Sangam Literary work. Just because the Sangam lirerary work has a mythical beginning like all other great civilisations that does not mean that a very rich and uncomparable sangam literature written in one of the living classical languages in the world (Tamil) becomes a Hoax.

Only an insane, psedo-historian or a chalatan can come up with such a comment.

Let me begin from the end (last part) of your reply.

*****All the great civilisations have a mythical beginning just to give that awe inspiring feeling in the minds of hunter gatherer savages who have not much to show for.*****

It is only the beginning chapters of the Mahavamsa (myths and fairy tales) that the Mahanama thero says he drew from the so called *Sihalatthakatha*. In other words the *Sihalatthakatha* is nothing but a myth most probably created by none other than the Mahanama thero.

Since you are accepting the fact that all the great civilisations have a mythical beginning, let us apply the same to the Sangam Period.

Don’t you think that the sunken landmass Kumari kandam (Lemuria) and the the first Sangam said to be participated by Lord Shiva are mythical beginning just to give that awe inspiring feeling even though these myths hardly makes a dent in the essence of what the Rich Sangam Literature has to convey?

*****Tamil, the language which the bulk of the work which some historians claim is a hoax, with the earliest known literary work as late as 13 CE in hive of confusion said to originate from a mythical place called Lumeria.*****

The above statement is not only highly misleading but it is totally false.

Could you name AT LEAST ONE renowned historian who claims that the bulk of the Tamil literary work as HOAX including the link to that site?

*****How the hell did this thing become a Classical Language?*****

India is a country with hundreds of languages where the Official/National language is Hindi and most of its leaders are North Indians. In a country with that many ethnic groups and languages and controlled by the Hindi speaking North Indians, it is not at all possible to declare a South Indian language as classical unless of course there is enough strong evidence to prove the case. The people of India including its leaders and the scholars/interlects will never buy Devaneya Pavanar’s such claims. Yet Tamil is the only living language in India that is declared as Classical.

*****Robert Cladwell who pioneered the study of the Draviadian dated the earliest known Tamil literary work Tolkappiyam between 8-9th and 12-13th CE.*****

Now, do not confuse Tolkappiyam with Sangam literary work. Sangam literature is huge (Elephant size). Even though a few scholars have controversial opinions regarding the dates and names of authors of SOME of the Sangam literary work (similar to the beginning chapters of the Mahavamsa), based on the archaeological and other evidences, the modern language scholars believe that the earliest of the Tamil Sangam poems were composed about the 2nd century BC. The earliest Tamil Brahmi inscriptions found in South India date to 3rd century BC. The present day scholars believe that the Tamil language could have developed only after 5th Century BC and could have been written down after 3rd century BC.

Now, coming to Tolkappiyam,

All the pre-historic and early historic inscriptions in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka are in old Tamil where the Tamil names did not end with an ‘n’ or an ‘m’ or an ‘i’, but were very similar to those Prakrit or Pali names ending with ‘a’.

It was only after the 7th century AD, that the Tamil language adopted some changes to its Grammar, script, etc. and evolved into the present form. This might have happened after the Tamils developing what it is commonly called as the ‘pulli (dot) system’ which is peculiar to Tamils in particular among the Indian lanaguages and due to this dot system the words/names ending with ‘a’ ends up with ‘n’ and ‘m’.

That is why, if the pali chronicles such as the Mahavamsa did not mention about the Tamil Kings of Anuradhapura (Sena, Guttika, Elara, Pulahatha, Bahiya, Panayamara, Parinda, Dathiya, etc) and if our historians were to depend only on the inscriptions, we would not have known that these Kings were Tamils. Here, we have to give some credit to Ven. Mahanama, but at the same time, there would have been many native Tamil Buddhist Kings out of the many rulers whose ethnic identities the chronicles may not have mentioned at all and therefore we will never know.

Unlike the Sangam literature which is the literary work of the ancient Tamils where the pulli is never used, in Tolkappiyam the pulli is mentioned and therefore the modern scholars believe that Tolkappiyam is later then 7th century AD.

*****Dipa’ is essentially means ‘Diva’ or ‘Hela Diva’ as the Island was known. Hela or Elu is pure Sinhala. There is no connection to Tamil here.*****

For your information, Dipa Basa means *the language of the Island* in Mahinda thero’s language (PALI) and the word Dipa has nothing to do with Elu. We have no evidence about the language spoken before his arrival, what he called in his language as Dipa Basa.

I do not wish to get into narrow minded arguments with you. I have made a few observations after studying material provided here in this article. See if you can comment on it without getting into petty quarrels.

PIC – 3 Comparing Tamil Vatteluttu with the evolution of Sinhala script. Its a pity both Northern and Southern Brahmin script was not added in a separate column for a better comparison. At the first step of its evolution, the letters A and O in Sinhala does not bear any resemblance to Tamil Vatteluttu. This clearly suggests the Sinhala script evolved from Brahmi around the same time as Tamil Vatteluttu. Sinhala and other Brahmi derivatives retain and expand on Brahmi base however Tamil does not make any progress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_family

If you look at the table above, there are many deficiencies in the Tamil alphabet in comparison to other Brahmi based scripts. Not only is the character set limited to few letters, the form of certain characters take a backward step taking square forms. I would like to float a theory on this.

- Atho’s popular versus elitist literacy theory –

Early Tamil literacy took a popular or democratic form as a language of the people whereas other scripts were developed under society elites including Brahmins in India and Sinhala scholar monks in Sri Lanka. The primary evidence for this situation comes from inscribed pottery, relatively more numerous in Tamil Nadu than elsewhere in the country. The pottery inscriptions are secular in character and the names occurring in them indicate the script was popular among the common people from all parts of the Tamil society. The popularity was at the cost of its richness where it had to be simpler to appeal to wider sections of the community. On the other hand, inscriptions from upper South Indian sites seem to to mostly associated with religious centers like Amaravati and Salihundam.

This is why modern Tamil looks more primitive in comparison to other Brahmi based scripts. There must have been some form of a social revolution during the Tamil Vatteluttu to modern Tamil evolution around 6AD where the common man was increasingly exposed to Tamil literature.