As a scholar (admittedly my scholarship in this matter is heavily disputed) who dates Tamil Caṅkam poetry not earlier than the post-Pallava Pāṇṭiyas I am naturally interested to see what archeologists make of Tamilnadu in the early pre-Pallava period. Unfortunately, all the information I have access to is formed by press releases of the type kindly provided by Palaniappan to this list. However, I don't know what to make of it. For instance, on the basis of Keeladi iron would have been introduced in Tamilnadu between 2953 and 3345 BC, but furtheron the material from that site is said to date back "more than 2000 years". How many more years? Earlier reports posted by Palaniappan on this list were about criticism of the dating of the archeological sites, but as coming from North India the arguments were treated as enemy fire.

However, what I am for personal reasons in particular interested in is the claim in the introduction of the report that the excavations reflect a literate (sic) Tamil. civilisation, in which I read an argument to stick to the date of Caṅkam poetry between the 3^rd c. BC and the 3^rd c. AD. How is "literate" defined here?

Herman