[INDOLOGY] Re: On the Date of Classical Tamil Poems

Jean-Luc Chevillard jean-luc.chevillard at univ-paris-diderot.fr
Thu Feb 25 08:34:36 UTC 2021


* chose
--> "chosen"


On 25/02/2021 09:13, Jean-Luc Chevillard wrote:
> Dear Palaniappan,
> 
> thanks for this.
> 
> Maybe one could add to the list of such usages the phrase அருவி யாம்பல் 
> [aruvi y-āmpal], which was considered as striking enough to be chose as 
> a title for the poem Patiṟṟuppattu 63 (which is part of the decade 
> composed by Kapilar)
> 
> -- Jean-Luc
> 
> https://twitter.com/JLC1956
> 
> 
> On 24/02/2021 21:07, Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan wrote:
>> Oops, I meant to correct 'urāak kutirai' to be 'ūrāk kutirai'.
>>
>> Sorry.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Palaniappan
>>
>> On 2/24/21, 2:04 PM, "Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan" <palaniappa at aol.com> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>      Sorry, please correct 'urāk kutirai' to be 'ūrāk kutirai'.
>>
>>      Regards,
>>      Palaniappan
>>
>>      On 2/24/21, 1:55 PM, "Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan" 
>> <palaniappa at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>          Dear JLC,
>>
>>          Thank you for this link. I should acknowledge that long time 
>> ago, it was Rajam who pointed out this type of usage in Classical 
>> Tamil to me. It should also be noted that some commentators call this 
>> technique by the term 'veḷippaṭai'. This is how Tamil Lexicon explains 
>> the term, "(Rhet.) A figure of speech in which the meaning of an 
>> ambiguous word is made clear by the use of a qualifying word, as pāyā- 
>> vēṅkai; பல்பொருள் குறிக்குஞ் சொல்லை ஒரு பொருட்கு நியமிக்கும்பொருட்டு ஏற்றதோர் அடை 
>> கொடுத்துக் கூறும் அணிவகை. (புறநா. 17, உரை.)" It should be noted that by 
>> this definition, even affirmatively explaining a homonym is called 
>> 'veḷippaṭai'.  Indeed, the example cited by the Tamil Lexicon is one 
>> such usage in Puṟam 17.13, i.e., 'aṭu poruna' making clear that by 
>> 'poruna' the warrior-king is indicated and not a bard. The 
>> commentators also use this term in regards to 'pūvā vañci (Puṟam 
>> 32.2), uḻāa nāñcil (Puṟam 139.8), and urāak kutirai (Puṟam 168.14). 
>> However, one can see that most of the examples use NAP in these usages.
>>
>>          That is why I was surprised that commentators like 
>> Vēṅkaṭacāmi Nāṭṭār missed the significance of the expression 'eḻāap 
>> pāṇaṉ'.
>>
>>          Regards,
>>          Palaniappan
>>
>>
>>          On 2/22/21, 2:53 AM, "Jean-Luc Chevillard" 
>> <jean-luc.chevillard at univ-paris-diderot.fr> wrote:
>>
>>              For a recent discussion (in Tamil) of the topic in a 
>> Tamil mailing list,
>>              see:
>>
>>              
>> https://groups.google.com/g/tamilmanram/c/4HshwozaY-E/m/5KqqmnRNAgAJ
>>
>>
>>              1. வேளாப் பார்ப்பான் (அகநானூறு)
>>              2. பொராஅப் பொருநன் (புறநானூறு)
>>              3. எழாஅப் பாணன் (அகநானூறு)
>>              4. பறாஅக் குருகு (கலித்தொகை)
>>              5. சூடா நறவு (பரிபாடல்)
>>              6. நோக்கல் நோக்கம் (தொல்காப்பியம்)
>>              7. பாடாத கந்தருவம் (காளமேகப் புலவர் பாடல்)
>>              8. பத்தி கோணாத கோணம் (காளமேகப் புலவர் பாடல)
>>
>>
>>              -- Jean-Luc Chevvillard
>>
>>
>>              https://twitter.com/JLC1956
>>
>>
>>              On 22/02/2021 09:31, SUDALAIMUTHU PALANIAPPAN via 
>> INDOLOGY wrote:
>>              > Dear Herman,
>>              >
>>              > Thank you for your comment. Earlier I have discussed in 
>> Indology, why
>>              > the popular interpretation of ‘paṛppāṉ’ as ‘brahmin’ in 
>> all occurrences
>>              > should be set aside in favor of treating it as meaning 
>> ‘a priest’ in
>>              > general, who could be either brahmin or non-brahmin. (I 
>> have discussed
>>              > the reading vēḷārp paṛppāṉ in Aka. 24 earlier in 
>> Indology.)
>>              >
>>              > Coming to other occurrences, there are many instances 
>> where a homonym is
>>              > used in an expression following a verb used as a 
>> negative adjectival
>>              > participle (NAP). The verb used in the expression 
>> cannot be used with
>>              > the intended subject and thereby indicates the other 
>> unique meaning.
>>              > Here are some examples.
>>              >
>>              > /tuvvā naṟavu/ - (Pati. 60.12)
>>              > Here /naṟavu/  can mean toddy as well as a city in the 
>> Cēra domain. The
>>              > NAP 'non-eaten/non-consumed’ is used to indicate the city.
>>              >
>>              > /vāṭā vaḷḷi /- (Peru. 370)
>>              > Here /vaḷḷi/ can mean either a creeper or a type of 
>> dance. The NAP
>>              > 'non-withering' is used to indicate the dance.
>>              >
>>              > /vāṭā mālai / (Puṟ. 364.1)
>>              > Here /mālai /can mean either a garland or necklace. The 
>> NAP vāṭā
>>              > ’non-withering’ is used to indicate a necklace.
>>              >
>>              > /eyyā varivil/  (Aka. 192.4)
>>              > Here /varivil/ can mean either a bow with lines (of 
>> material tied around
>>              > the bending material) or a rainbow with lines and 
>> ‘/ey/’ means ’to
>>              > discharge an arrow’. The NAP 'non-arrow-discharging’ is 
>> used to indicate
>>              > the rainbow.
>>              >
>>              > The multiple objects indicated by the homonym can 
>> sometimes be linked by
>>              > an obvious etymological connection and sometimes not. 
>> They can also be
>>              > connected by metonymy. When multiple subjects indicated 
>> by the homonym
>>              > can use the same verb we need to look at other 
>> contextual information
>>              > provided.
>>              >
>>              > Tolkāppiyam Collatikāram Kiḷaviyākkam (/nūṟpā/s 50-54 
>> or 52-55 or 52-56
>>              > according to different commentators) deals with this 
>> use of homonyms.
>>              >
>>              > In the case of porāap porunar and eḻāap pāṇaṉ, we are 
>> not dealing with
>>              > disparate things like toddy versus city or creeper 
>> versus dance.
>>              > Moreover, as I have discussed earlier in Indology
>>              > 
>> (https://list.indology.info/empathy/thread/F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA?hash=F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA#F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA 
>>
>>              > 
>> <https://list.indology.info/empathy/thread/F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA?hash=F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA#F2E2TBAGDGGHNC45MKHVVLBO64ZOYEDA>), 
>>
>>              > the same word maḷḷar is used to describe both the bards 
>> and warriors.
>>              > So, in these cases, we are talking about different 
>> subsets of a single
>>              > community that perform different functions and the 
>> poets use the same
>>              > general technique we described above to uniquely 
>> identify the subset.
>>              >
>>              > Regards,
>>              > Palaniappan
>>              >
>>              >
>>              >> On Jan 24, 2021, at 5:32 AM, Tieken, H.J.H.
>>              >> <H.J.H.Tieken at hum.leidenuniv.nl
>>              >> <mailto:H.J.H.Tieken at hum.leidenuniv.nl>> wrote:
>>              >>
>>              >> Dear Palaniappan,
>>              >> One more remark on the/vēl̥āp pārppaṉ/ and the other 
>> examples
>>              >> given mentione by you. From these constructions it 
>> would appear that
>>              >> the terms/pārppaṉ/,/porunar/ and///pāṇaṉ/refer to 
>> something like a
>>              >> (sub)caste called/pār̥ppaṉ/ etc, whose members are not 
>> restricted to
>>              >> brahmins performing sacrificial duties. However, 
>> before being able to
>>              >> say something more in this line we have to have more 
>> examples of this
>>              >> type of compound.
>>              >> Herman
>>              >>
>>              >> Herman Tieken
>>              >> Stationsweg 58
>>              >> 2515 BP Den Haag
>>              >> The Netherlands
>>              >> 00 31 (0)70 2208127
>>              >> website:hermantieken.com <http://hermantieken.com/>
>>              >> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>              >> *Van:*INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info
>>              >> <mailto:indology-bounces at list.indology.info>> namens 
>> Tieken, H.J.H.
>>              >> via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info
>>              >> <mailto:indology at list.indology.info>>
>>              >> *Verzonden:*zondag 24 januari 2021 09:34:26
>>              >> *Aan:*Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan; indology
>>              >> *Onderwerp:*Re: [INDOLOGY] On the Date of Classical 
>> Tamil Poems
>>              >> Dear Palaniappan,
>>              >> I think your interpretation of/eḻā pāṇaṉ/ is correct, 
>> as is that
>>              >> of/porāa porunar./I like to add another instance of 
>> this type of
>>              >> compound (about this, more below), from AN 24:/vēl̥āp 
>> pārppaṉ/ Wilden's
>>              >> (ad hoc) interpretation of this compound runs as 
>> follows: we would
>>              >> have to do with a non-sacrificing brahmin (/pārppaṉ/) 
>> making a living
>>              >> by, in this case, cutting bangles, when he is unable 
>> to do so by
>>              >> officiating at sacrifices. Also here, your 
>> interpretation applies: we
>>              >> have to do with a craftsman referred by the same name 
>> as a brahmin
>>              >> priest. The craftsman is distinguished from the latter 
>> by/vēl̥ā/.
>>              >> I have dealt with the passage in "Translating Tamil 
>> Caṅkam Poetry:
>>              >> Taking Stock" (OLZ 118 (4-5) (2020), pp. 287-303, esp. 
>> p. 294-5 and
>>              >> ftn 60) (By contract I am not allowed to place a pdf 
>> link on my website)
>>              >>
>>              >> As to the type of compound, I do not have the article 
>> at hand, but I
>>              >> think it is precisely the one dealt with by Leendert 
>> van Daalen in "A
>>              >> Note on/vidhūma/ or/sadhūma/ /iva pāvaka/ 
>> at/Rāmāyaṇa/...." in IT 7
>>              >> (1979), 171-189.
>>              >> With kind regards
>>              >> Herman
>>              >>
>>              >> Herman Tieken
>>              >> Stationsweg 58
>>              >> 2515 BP Den Haag
>>              >> The Netherlands
>>              >> 00 31 (0)70 2208127
>>              >> website:hermantieken.com <http://hermantieken.com/>
>>              >> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>              >> *Van:*INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info
>>              >> <mailto:indology-bounces at list.indology.info>> namens 
>> Sudalaimuthu
>>              >> Palaniappan via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info
>>              >> <mailto:indology at list.indology.info>>
>>              >> *Verzonden:*zondag 24 januari 2021 02:08:14
>>              >> *Aan:*Indology List
>>              >> *Onderwerp:*Re: [INDOLOGY] On the Date of Classical 
>> Tamil Poems
>>              >> I am reposting after correcting some typos.
>>              >> I recently came across Auvai Turaicāmip Piḷḷai’s 
>> interpretation of
>>              >> some key details of Akam 113, and Akam 226. He makes 
>> these comments in
>>              >> his introduction to the decad called Pāṇaṉ Pattu of 
>> his commentary on
>>              >> Aiṅkuṟunūṟu (1958: 1028-29). (See attachment.) I do 
>> not know if he has
>>              >> provided detailed commentaries for the two poems.
>>              >> With respect to Akam 113, Pillai says that the ruler 
>> Pāṇaṉ belonged to
>>              >> a section of the bardic community of the Pāṇar that 
>> did not engage in
>>              >> music and dance but excelled in wrestling and ruling 
>> the land. He
>>              >> refers to Perumpāṇappāṭi, etc., which we had discussed 
>> earlier in the
>>              >> thread. Pillai adds that the descendants of that Pāṇāṉ 
>> were later
>>              >> called  Vāṇar, Vāṇātirāyar, Vāṇataraiyar, and 
>> Vāṇakōvaraiyar. Pillai’s
>>              >> interpretation has been accepted by many later 
>> scholars such as Ve.
>>              >> Varatarācan (1973: 15) and Irā. Iḷaṅkumaraṉ (1987: 
>> 141). This confirms
>>              >> my interpretation of/eḻāa/in Akam 113.17 as 'not 
>> making music’. (For
>>              >> the affirmative use of/eḻīi/in the sense of music 
>> making, see
>>              >> Patiṟṟuppattu 29.7-8.)
>>              >> In this context, it should be noted that the critical 
>> edition of
>>              >> Akanāṉūṟu by Eva Wilden (2018) interprets the text 
>> ‘/eḻā[a]p pāṇaṉ/’
>>              >> as ‘the bard who does not rise’. In my view, Wilden 
>> got only half of
>>              >> it right. She is right to translate/pāṇaṉ/as ‘the 
>> bard’. But, Wilden
>>              >> has interpreted/eḻā/as deriving from DEDR 851/eḻu/- 
>> 'to rise'. It
>>              >> should be related to DEDR 5156/yāḻ, ñāḻ/, stringed 
>> musical instrument;
>>              >> eḻu- 'to emit sound’… The correct interpretation is 
>> ‘the bard who does
>>              >> not play the lute/make music’. This usage is the 
>> converse of/'porāap
>>              >> porunar/' in Puṟam 386.19, where 'non-fighting 
>> warriors’ is used to
>>              >> refer to bards, where both the bards and warriors can 
>> be denoted by
>>              >> the word ‘porunar’.
>>              >> One may argue that the fact Akam 113 uses ‘/eḻā[a]’ to 
>> describe
>>              >> ‘Pāṇaṉ/’ may simply indicate the homophonous nature of 
>> the name of the
>>              >> ruler ‘/Pāṇaṉ/’ and the word for the bard, 
>> ‘/pāṇaṉ,’/and not
>>              >> necessarily show that the ruler was of bardic 
>> origin/./ But, we know
>>              >> that the bards had received villages as gifts from 
>> Puṟam 302. But,
>>              >> with respect to bards receiving a bigger territory, we 
>> have that
>>              >> possibility supported by Ciṟupāṇāṟṟuppaṭai 109 
>> according to which the
>>              >> chief Ōri  gave ‘the good country with small hills to 
>> Kōṭiyar’. Pillai
>>              >> (1958: 1030) states that depending on what they did, 
>> Pāṇar were known
>>              >> by several names such as Pāṇar, Akavunar, Kūttar, 
>> Kōṭiyar, Iyavar, and
>>              >> Porunar. In a similar manner, the Pāṇar could have 
>> received some
>>              >> territory in the northern border area of the Tamil 
>> region, which could
>>              >> have become the base of the Pāṇar, who later became 
>> the Bāṇas.
>>              >> As for the bards becoming warriors, it is not 
>> impossible for one to
>>              >> have both skills. In the famous Tanjavur temple 
>> inscription South
>>              >> Indian Inscriptions, vol 2, no.66, there are several 
>> members of the
>>              >> crack troops of Ṛājarāja I (Terinta Valaṅkai 
>> Vēḷaikkārar, Terinta
>>              >> Parikkārar) who have been given grants as musicians 
>> (pp.299-300).
>>              >> The dynastic drift of the Bāṇas from the northern 
>> Tamil border area
>>              >> into Telugu or Kannada regions is nothing unusual. As 
>> I already noted
>>              >> in an earlier post, a branch of Cōḻas settled in the 
>> Cudappah district
>>              >> of the Telugu region in the 7^th century can be seen 
>> to drift all the
>>              >> way to Sonepur in South Kosala (Orissa) in the 12^th 
>> century Mahadā
>>              >> plates of Somesvaradevavarman.
>>              >> In Akam 226, Pillai does not interpret Pāṇaṉ as an 
>> ally of Kaṭṭi who
>>              >> fled without fighting in the court of the Cōḻa king 
>> Tittaṉ Veḷiyaṉ.
>>              >> Rather, it was Pāṇaṉ, who was in the court of the 
>> Chōḻa king, the
>>              >> intended adversary of Kaṭṭi. Modern scholars like 
>> Vēṅkaṭacāmi Nāṭṭār
>>              >> and R. Vēṅkaṭācalam Pīllai (1946: 454) unnecessarily 
>> add a word
>>              >> ‘/kūṭi/’ meaning ‘having joined’ to “/Pāṇaṉoṭu/’ to 
>> come up with the
>>              >> misinterpreted meaning. The verb ‘/poru/’ ‘to fight’ 
>> is preceded by
>>              >> the adversary being fought/intended to be fought by 
>> the subject of the
>>              >> verb with the case marker ‘/oṭu/'. Perhaps Nāṭṭār was 
>> influenced by
>>              >> Rā. Irākavaiyaṅkār (1923: 1670), who interpreted Pāṇaṉ 
>> as an ally of
>>              >> Kaṭṭi in his earlier edition. Hart (2015: 232) has 
>> followed Nāttār’s
>>              >> interpretation.
>>              >> George L. Hart, 2015. The Four Hundred Songs of 
>> Love.Institut Français
>>              >> De Pondichéry, Pondicherry.
>>              >> Irā. Iḷaṅkumaraṉ, 1987. Pāṇar. Maṇivācakar Patippakam, 
>> Citamparam.
>>              >> Rā. Irākavaiyaṅkār, 1923. Eṭṭuttokaiyuḷ Neṭuntokai 
>> Ākum Akanāṉūṟu
>>              >> Mulamum Uraiyum. Vē. Irājakōpālaiyaṅkār Patippu, 
>> Mayilāppūr.
>>              >> Na. Mu. Vēṅkaṭacāmi Nāṭṭār and R. Vēṅkaṭācalam Pīllai, 
>> 1946.
>>              >> Eṭṭuttokaiyil Oṉṟāṉa Akanāṉūṟu Maṇimiṭai Pāvaḷam. 
>> Tirunelvēli,
>>              >> Tennintiya Caiva Cittāṇta Nuṟpatippuk Kaḻakam, Ceṉṉai.
>>              >> Auvai Turaicāmip Pillai, 1958. Eṭṭuttokaiyil Oṉṟākiya 
>> Aiṅkuṟunūṟu
>>              >> Mulamum Viḷakkavuraiyum. Part III. Mullai. Aṇṇāmalaip 
>> palkalaik
>>              >> kaḻakattārāl veḷiyiṭappeṟṟatu.
>>              >> Ve. Varatarācaṉ, 1973. Tamiḻppāṇar Vāḻvum Varalāṟum. 
>> Pāṇṇaṉ
>>              >> Patippakam, Ceṉṉai.
>>              >> Eva Wilden, 2018.  A Critical Edition and an Annotated 
>> Translation of
>>              >> the Akanāṉūṟu, 3 volumes.École Française 
>> D’Extrême-Orient and Institut
>>              >> Français De Pondichéry, Pondicherry.
>>              >> Regards,
>>              >> Palaniappan
>>              >>
>>              >>     On Oct 22, 2012, at 11:13 PM,palaniappa at aol.com
>>              >>     <mailto:palaniappa at aol.com>wrote:
>>              >>     Dear George,
>>              >>     I appreciate your comments.
>>              >>     As for the fonts, I like to use the diacritic 
>> fonts too whenever
>>              >>     possible. In my first post, I did use the 
>> diacritic fonts. But,
>>              >>     when Dr. Tieken replied to my post the diacritic 
>> fonts in my
>>              >>     earlier post showed up as question marks in my 
>> Mac. Since there
>>              >>     were not too many participants in the thread, to 
>> be safe, I
>>              >>     resorted to the transliteration I used.
>>              >>     Thanks
>>              >>     Regards,
>>              >>     Palaniappan
>>              >>
>>              >>     -----Original Message-----
>>              >>     From: George Hart <glhart at BERKELEY.EDU 
>> <mailto:glhart at BERKELEY.EDU>>
>>              >>     To: INDOLOGY <INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
>>              >>     <mailto:INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk>>
>>              >>     Sent: Mon, Oct 22, 2012 3:53 pm
>>              >>     Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] On the Date of Classical 
>> Tamil Poems
>>              >>
>>              >>     Dear Palaniappan,
>>              >>     I think you have made a good case for Pāṇaṉ and 
>> Bāṇa, and
>>              >>     especially like the perumpāṇaṉ / bṛhadbāṇa, as 
>> even the
>>              >>     alliteration works.  I hope you publish this, as 
>> it is
>>              >>     significant, I think.  I am still not convinced by 
>> what you say
>>              >>     about pāṇar in the Kuṟuntokai poem -- after 
>> reading many Sangam
>>              >>     poems and working through much of the Akananuru, your
>>              >>     interpretation just doesn't sound right to me.  Of 
>> course, that
>>              >>     doesn't mean you aren't correct, but there's 
>> really no way to
>>              >>     tell.  If the Pāṇar were standing to one side (or, 
>> more likely, in
>>              >>     the middle of one side playing their drums), and a 
>> battle started,
>>              >>     they'd still be looking in front and behind them 
>> to avoid being
>>              >>     killed.  Thanks for an intriguing and informative 
>> analysis.
>>              >>     One remark: Why not use roman unicode, as it's 
>> very hard to read
>>              >>     the transliteration that eschews diacritic marks.  
>> I believe every
>>              >>     OS and email program is capable of handling 8-bit 
>> unicode.
>>              >>     George
>>              >>     On Oct 21, 2012, at 9:21 PM, Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan
>>              >>     <Palaniappa at AOL.COM <mailto:Palaniappa at AOL.COM>> 
>> wrote:
>>              >>
>>              >>
>>              >>
>>              >>
>>              >>         Dear George,
>>              >>         Please see the attached inscription. What can 
>> one say about
>>              >>         the perumpANan here? Is he a pANan2 or bANan2? 
>> Which comes
>>              >>         first - perumpANan2 or bRhad-bANa? The 
>> modifier 'peru' is
>>              >>         found in other names such as perumuttaraiyar 
>> (mentioned in
>>              >>         nAlaTiyAr), ko-p-peruñ-cOzan2, peruñ-cEral, 
>> etc. The title
>>              >>         peru- is very common in Tamil. It was also 
>> used in connection
>>              >>         with different professions as in perumpANan2 
>> and perunAvican2.
>>              >>         Then how about the title bRhad in bRhadbANa?
>>              >>         First of all, the title bRhad-bANa for a 
>> dynasty is very
>>              >>         unusual. The only other so-called dynastic 
>> title I know of,
>>              >>         bRhatphAlAyana, is not a dynastic title at 
>> all. In fact, in
>>              >>         the case of bRhatphAlAyanas and sAlankAyanas, 
>> according to K.
>>              >>         A. Nilakanta Sastri, the scholars have simply 
>> used the gotra
>>              >>         names in the absence of dynastic names.  
>> (Early History of the
>>              >>         Andhra Country, p.151, n.1). Moreover, it is 
>> only in the
>>              >>         tALagunda inscription we find the occurrence 
>> of 'bRhad-bANa'.
>>              >>         Everywhere else in non-Tamil inscriptions, the 
>> members of the
>>              >>         dynasty are called bANarAja, bANAdhirAja-. In 
>> other words we
>>              >>         only find bANa- but not bRhad-bANa. But in 
>> Tamil we find many
>>              >>         instances of perumpANaraicar, permpANan, etc.
>>              >>         This leads one to infer that the author of the 
>> tALagunda
>>              >>         inscription was simply translating the name 
>> perumpANan2 into
>>              >>         Sanskrit. Since in Tamil -p- following nasal 
>> -m- is pronounced
>>              >>         as -b-, the author of tALagunda has rendered 
>> the first
>>              >>         component as bRhad and kept the second part as 
>> bANa. This
>>              >>         suggests that the original form of the 
>> dynastic name should
>>              >>         have been Ta. pANan2. It is also possible that 
>> in the Kannada
>>              >>         and Telugu areas 'pANa-' was being pronounced 
>> as 'bANa' either
>>              >>         independently or influenced by the 
>> pronunciation of '- pANan2'
>>              >>         in perumpANan2 as '-bANan2' .  Once the 
>> stand-alone form
>>              >>         'bANa' becomes widespread, a re-branding using 
>> a Sanskrit
>>              >>         mythological pedigree tracing the lineage to 
>> mahAbali, father
>>              >>         of bANAsura is carried out with the dynastic 
>> title as 'bANa'.
>>              >>         Later when this form 'bANa' is imported back 
>> into Tamil, Skt.
>>              >>         bANa > Ta. vANa-.
>>              >>         In the book "ceGkam naTukaRkaL" inscription 
>> no. 1971/54 of the
>>              >>         2nd year of Narasimhavarman II mentions a 
>> vANakO atiraicar. In
>>              >>         the same collection, no. 1971/73 of the 10th 
>> year of the same
>>              >>         king mentions a perumpANatiyaraicar.
>>              >>         The phrase "ezAap pANan2" further points to 
>> the homophon
>>              >>         indicating bard as well as the chieftain 
>> suggesting in this
>>              >>         case that the chieftain was called 'pANan2' 
>> too with
>>              >>         word-initial p-.
>>              >>         As for the domicile and area controlled by the 
>> pANan2/bANa
>>              >>         chiefs, it has varied historically. They might 
>> have started
>>              >>         near Gingee where the paRaiyan2paTTu 
>> inscription is found
>>              >>         mentioning 'pANAtu'. (At least one variant of 
>> akam.155
>>              >>         mentions pANATu. See Early Tamil Epigraphy, p. 
>> 629 for a
>>              >>         discussion of this.) Then they could have 
>> moved north so that
>>              >>         by the 4th century they are found near 
>> zrIparvata hill. After
>>              >>         serving the Chalukya, Pallava, and Chola 
>> dynasties, in the
>>              >>         13th century, we see bANa chieftains with 
>> titles such as
>>              >>         mAvali vANAdirAyan, mAbali vANarAyar, etc., 
>> controlling parts
>>              >>         of the pANTiya country under the pANTiyas. As 
>> a parallel case,
>>              >>         it should be noted that a branch of the 
>> Cholas, Telugu Cholas,
>>              >>          were controlling areas around Sonepur in 
>> Orissa in the 12th
>>              >>         century issuing inscriptions in Sanskrit 
>> tracing their descent
>>              >>         to Chola karikAla and uRaiyUr (EI 28, p. 286) 
>> progressively
>>              >>         moving northeast from the area to the north of 
>> the Tamil
>>              >>         country over several centuries.
>>              >>         In my opinion, the pANan2 mentioned in Akam 
>> 113 and 226
>>              >>         referred to one or more members of the same 
>> lineage later
>>              >>         called the bANas.
>>              >>         kaTTi mentioned in akam 226 is also mentioned 
>> in akam 44 as
>>              >>         well as kuRuntokai 11. See below.
>>              >>         /tun2 arum kaTum tiRal kaGkan2 kaTTi (akam. 
>> 44.8)/
>>              >>         /pal vEl kaTTi nal nATTu umpar/
>>              >>         /mozipeyar tEettar Ayin2um/(kuRu. 11.7-8)
>>              >>         We should take the dynatic names mentioned 
>> here as individuals
>>              >>         belonging the dynasty being mentioned. Like 
>> the bAnas, these
>>              >>         dynasties were also in the northern border of 
>> the Tamil
>>              >>         country. 'kaGkan' referred to the Western 
>> Ganga dynasty.
>>              >>         Vicciyar were also in the northern area. So it 
>> is not
>>              >>         surprising that pANar allied themselves with 
>> vicci or kaTTi.
>>              >>
>>              >>         The use of the plural form pANar in kuRu. 328 
>> is of the same
>>              >>         nature as in akam. 336 below.
>>              >>
>>              >>         /mAri ampin2 mazai tOl cOzar/
>>              >>
>>              >>         /vil INTu kuRumpin2 vallattup puRa miLai/
>>              >>
>>              >>         /Ariyar paTaiyin2 uTaika en2/
>>              >>
>>              >>         /nEr iRai mun2kai vIgkiya vaLaiy/E (akam. 
>> 336.20-23)
>>              >>
>>              >>         Here 'cOzar' (in plural) could refer to the 
>> cOza fighters.
>>              >>
>>              >>         Similarly, you can see 'cOzar' used below 
>> referring to the
>>              >>         cOza fighters
>>              >>
>>              >>         /koRRac cOzar kogkarp paNIiyar/
>>              >>
>>              >>         /veNkOTTu yAn2aip pOor kizavOn2/
>>              >>
>>              >>         /pazaiyan2 vEl vAyttan2n2a nin2/(naR. 10.6-8)
>>              >>
>>              >>         So in kuRu. 328, pANar (bANa) forces would 
>> have joined the
>>              >>         battle on the side of the vicciyar who might 
>> be led by their
>>              >>         chief, 'perumakan2'. It is possible the pANan2 
>> chief might
>>              >>         have sent his forces without joining them.
>>              >>
>>              >>         As for non-fighters standing between the two 
>> armies, I
>>              >>         consider it highly unlikely they were standing 
>> in between the
>>              >>         fighting armies. They have to be really 
>> standing on the side
>>              >>         while the battle is raging and in that case 
>> they will only
>>              >>         move their gaze from side to side and not 
>> front and back. So I
>>              >>         do not think simhAvalokanyAya will be valid 
>> here. At least if
>>              >>         the description applies to the fighters, then 
>> their behavior
>>              >>         will parallel the warriors whether it is their 
>> fierce look or
>>              >>         looking forward and backward, So, the looking 
>> persons should
>>              >>         be fighters and not bards.
>>              >>
>>              >>         Regards,
>>              >>
>>              >>         Palaniappan
>>              >>
>>              >>
>>              >>
>>              >>         <Perumpanan_0004.jpg>
>>              >>
>>              >> _______________________________________________ 
>> INDOLOGY mailing
>>              >> listINDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>              >> 
>> <mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>indology-owner at list.indology.info
>>              >> <mailto:indology-owner at list.indology.info>(messages to 
>> the list's
>>              >> managing committee)http://listinfo.indology.info
>>              >> <http://listinfo.indology.info/>(where you can change 
>> your list
>>              >> options or unsubscribe)
>>              >
>>              >
>>              > _______________________________________________
>>              > INDOLOGY mailing list -- indology at list.indology.info
>>              > To unsubscribe send an email to 
>> indology-leave at list.indology.info
>>              > indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the 
>> list's managing committee)
>>              > http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change 
>> your list options or unsubscribe)
>>              >
>>              _______________________________________________
>>              INDOLOGY mailing list -- indology at list.indology.info
>>              To unsubscribe send an email to 
>> indology-leave at list.indology.info
>>              indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's 
>> managing committee)
>>              http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your 
>> list options or unsubscribe)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list -- indology at list.indology.info
> To unsubscribe send an email to indology-leave at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing 
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or 
> unsubscribe)





More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list