|
On Tamil Militarism - a 11 Part Essay
Part 11: The legend of Cheran Senguttuvan
Lanka Guardian,
[pp.15-16]
[prepared by
Sachi Sri Kantha, for electronic record]
15 November 1992
[together with
Post Script
by Sachi Sri Kantha on the Significance of Sivaram’s study on the Maravar Caste and
Tamil Militarism, 6 May 2005]
 “The lines of a song in today’s ceremony touched my
heart. The lines refer to the Tamil flag which fluttered on the
Himalayas. Although this may be a thing of the past, history can be
re-established. Today this country is at war because the youth of
this area were denied opportunities in education and culture…Our
youth have not only done well in education but have shown that they
have the self respect to achieve their aims through armed struggle.
If nothing is done towards finding a settlement to the crisis in the
north-east, the history related in the lines of that song will be
reasserted.” - Joseph Pararajasingham, MP for Batticaloa, speaking
at a school function on 26.9[Sept]’92 (reported in the Virakesari of
1.10[Oct].’92
The song referred to by the member of parliament is from an MGR
film. The lines of the song about which the MP speaks, are “I see
that era when Cheran’s flag fluttered on the Himalayas.”*[see below
the foot-note by Sachi Sri Kantha]. Joseph’s speech and MGR’s song
invoke one of the most powerful narratives of modern Tamil
nationalism – the conquest of north India by the kings of the three
Tamil dynasties, the Cheras, Cholas and the Pandyas, which was
accomplished by imprinting the Bow (Chera) or Tiger (Chola) or
Pandya Fish (Pandya) emblems on the Himalayas.
The legend of Cheran Senguttuvan is the dominant episode of this
narrative. Its political life in the Tamil nationalist project in
Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka has been more tenacious than the Dutugemunu
– Elara episode in the narrative of Sinhala Buddhism’s struggle
against the ‘South Indian Tamil threat’.
The legend of Cheran Senguttuvan, as we shall see later, was used by
the Dravidian movement for drawing a compelling characterization of
its anti-Hindi agitation. The legend forms the third part of the
epic Silappathikaram, which was written by Ilango Atikal, Seran
Senguttuvan’s brother – a Jain ascetic.
It relates the story of
Kannaki who became the goddess Pattini. The epic is divided into
three parts (kaandam), named after the capitals of the Chera, Chola
and Pandya kingdoms; Vanji, Puhar and Madurai. Unlike the heroic
Sangam poetry which preceded it, the Silappathikaram speaks for the
first time about a Tamil Nadu as such, constituted by the three
kingdoms, distinguished by a martial tradition superior to that of
north India. It portrays the three dynasties conquering the north
and imprinting their emblems on the Himalayas, together and
separately. The Pandyan king who mistakenly causes the beheading of
Kannaki’s husband, Kovalan, bears the title ‘He who overran the
Aryan army’ (Aryappadai kadantha).
M.Raghava Aiyangar wrote a book based on the third part of the epic
– the Vanji kaandam – called, ‘Seran Senguttuvan’. It was dedicated
to Pandithurai Thevar. A recent work on Aiyangar’s contribution
says, “This was the first book to give the Vanji kaandam in prose.
It was after this that many scholars studied the Vanji kaandam and
wrote books…the book made everyone realise and appreciate the golden
era of the Tamils.” (Annals of Tamil Research: M.Raghava Aiyangar
Commemoration Volume, University of Madras, 1978, pp.18-19) The book
went through four editions in the first two decades of its
publication. “It can be said that after the appearance of this book,
research on the Sangam period expanded. Many times it was made a
text in the universities of Andhra, Mysore and Madras and in Ceylon,
and is widely read.” (Araichi Thohuthi, 1938, p.20).
We examined the life and politics of M.Raghava Aiyangar in the last
issue. As we pointed out there, Aiyangar’s idea of Tamilian
renaissance differed from contemporaneous Indian nationalists in one
important respect. Whereas the Indian nationalists who upheld the
cause of Tamil culture and history, especially saw them from a
pan-Indian perspective, Aiyangar’s writings emphasised a south
Indian, Tamilian uniqueness and martial superiority. His most famous
work ‘Seran Senguttuvan’ and the essay he wrote later to supplement
and support it are clear attempts to establish and popularise that
idea. Three reasons can be identified for his attitude.
The first, as we noted earlier, was his close relationship with the
Marava rulers of Ramnad – the Sethupathys. The second is that he was
a Vaishnavite Brahmin – the Indian National Congress was dominated
in the Presidency of Madras by Saivite Brahmins. Many Vaishnavites
have, as a result tended to sympathise with the Dravidian movement
(Sivathamby, 1989). In a lecture delivered to the 23rd annual
conference of the Madurai Tamil Sangam, Aiyangar said,
“The three Tamil kings, the Cheras, Cholas and the Pandyas
established their martial glory beyond Thamilaham (Tamil homeland)
which lay between the Vengadam hills to the north and Comorin to the
south; but their love for the Tamil speaking land was so great that
they were not desirous of attaching lands where foreign languages
are spoken, to Thamilaham…It will be appropriate to name the Madras
Presidency as the Dravidian Province.” (Araichi Thohuthi; 1938,
pp.318, 338)
The third reason is related to his stay in Kerala, as head of the
Tamil department in the University of Trivandrum. Kerala was the
ancient Chera kingdom. Aiyangar’s writings during his residence at
Trivandrum attempt to place Kerala history and culture within the
tradition of Thamilaham. The Maharaj of the Travancore state at that
time, Sithirai Thirunal had told Aiyangar, “Malayalam is the Tamil
language that bathed in the sea of Sanskrit” (R.Veerapathiran; 1978,
p.38).
Some aspects of Kerala and Tamil literature and ‘Chera Venthar
Seiyutt Kovai’
Aiyangar’s ‘gothra’(section) name was Aiyanarithan, a poet of the
Chera dynasty, who wrote the Purapporul Venba Malai – a treatise on
Tamil martial culture. One of his most controversial essays which
resulted from his work at Trivandrum was on the kinship system of
the Chera dynasty. All this stems from his work on Seran
Senguttuvan. This book which has to be read in conjunction with his
essay, ‘The conquest of the Himalayas by the Tamil Kings’ (Thamil
Ventharin Imaya Padai-eduppu) attempted to ground the story of
Senguttuvan in epigraphical literary evidence. The work seeks to
establish a story of Senguttuvan, related in the Silappathikaram’s
Vanji kaandam, as a historical truth. The book as a school and
university textbook has left a deep imprint on Tamilian
cultural-political vocabulary.
Annadurai, Karunanidhi, MGR and the speakers of the Federal Party
have invoked the example of Seran Senguttuvan to bestir Tamil youth.
The Silappathikaram portrays his expedition into north India as the
assertion of Tamil military might over Aryan kings who had in their
ignorance disparaged the martial prowess of southern Tamils.
Senguttuvan vows to defeat two Aryan kings, Kanakan and Vijayan
(“They who could not hold their tongue”, says the epic) who had cast
aspersions on what is called “Then Thamil Aatral” – south Tamil
might. [Would] make them carry a stone hewn from the Himalayan
mountain, back to Tamil Nadu for the deification of Kannaki as
goddess Pattini. Senguttuvan is told, “You faced the thousand Aryan
kings in combat on the day you bathed the goddess in the great flood
of the Ganges…if you have decided on the expedition (to bring the
stone), let the kings of the north fly the Bow, Tiger and Fish flags
in their lands.”
Senguttuvan, says the epic, was born to Nedun-cheralathan, who bears
the title, Imaya Varamban (He who has the Himalayas as his boundary)
and the daughter of a Chola king; and as such, he is seen as
representing a Tamilian unity. (The Silappathikaram says that
Gajabahu of Lanka invoked the goddess Pattini at Senkuttuvan’s
capital to come to his country and give her blessings on the day
Senkuttuvan’s father Imaya Varamban’s birth was commemorated there.)
The conquest of the north and the Himalayas is a leitmotif in the
Sangam anthologies which precede the Silappathikaram. (“The Aryans
screamed out loud in pain when you attacked them.”, says a poem in
the Sangam anthologies) The three parts of the epic emphasise the
theme to glorify each dynasty. The first part refers to an
expedition undertaken to the Himalayas by Thirumavalavan, who was
known as Karikalan (Prabhakaran’s nom de guerre) – the founder of
the Chola empire. He is shown as defeating the Maghadha, Avanti, and
Vajjra kingdoms. The second part speaks of the Pandyan who conquered
the ‘newly arisen Himalayas’ when his ancient land of the Kumari
mountains and the Pahruli river were taken by the sea.
It is a theme in the inscriptions of the Chola empire at a later
date. One Chola emperor takes on the title, the Conqueror of the
Ganges. Minor poetry which arose after the decline of the Cholas
praising military commanders and chieftains of the Tamil country
also utilise the theme (Karumanikkan Kovai, Kalingathu Parani, etc.)
The leitmotif of the Tamil emblem on the Himalayas finds the most
vivid expression in the story of Senguttuvan. Aiyangar takes it out
of its epic context to emphasise a perception – that the Tamils were
historically indomitable martial race. The story of Senguttuvan’s
expedition repeatedly lays stress on the what is referred to as
South Tamil martial might. Aiyangar’s later essay on the theme of
Tamil expeditions into the north tried to prove again that these
events were true on the basis of evidence, culled from the Imperial
Gazeteer of India and the Hand Gazeteer of India.
In this essay, he [Aiyangar] argues that Asoka did not think of
invading Tamil Nadu because he and other northern Aryan kings were
aware and scared of the martial prowess of the ancient Tamils who
before their times had invaded and defeated the north and imprinted
their emblems on the Himalaya mountains.
The first Tamil king to imprint his emblem on the mountain was
Karikalan; the names borne by parts of the Himalayas such as the
Chola Pass and the Chola Range prove the Chola king’s expedition is
a historical fact, argued Aiyankar (Araichi Thohuti; 1938, p.184).
He did the ‘academic’ groundwork for the propagation of the
narrative of Tamil military expeditions into the north as an
expression of a unique and superior martial prowess and its symbol –
the Tamil flag on the Himalayas. Dravidian propagandists and the
politicians of the Federal Party transformed it into a nostalgic and
powerful story of a golden era woven into the rhetoric and national
liberation and youth mobilization.
Foot-Note by Sachi Sri Kantha
There is some confusion here, about which MGR
song was played in the said school function. The quote of Joseph
Pararajasingham, cited by Sivaram, states “The lines refer to
the Tamil flag which fluttered on the Himalayas” but the exact
Tamil words of the song were not quoted. But Sivaram has cited
the lines as “I see that era when Cheran’s flag fluttered on the
Himalayas”. I’m not sure whether Sivaram was a witness to that
particular event of September 26, 1992.
If Sivaram’s translated
quote of the song is taken literally, then these lines appear in
an MGR song: “Puthiya Vaanam – Puthiya Bhoomi enrum Puhal Mazhai
Pozhikirathu” (Anbe Vaa movie).
But, an earlier MGR song by poet
Kannadasan
“Achcham Enpathu Madamaiyada”
அச்சம் என்பது
மடமையடா (Mannathi Mannan movie)
provides a more fuller version of the Tamil militarism spirit,
including the flag fluttering on the Himalayas. In my recent
eulogy to Sivaram, I had presumed that the Kannadasan song in
the Mannathi Mannan movie was the one which was referred to by
Joseph Pararajasingham. Despite this confusion, there is no
doubt that MGR made use of the powerful historical scenario of
‘Cheran Tamil flag fluttering on the Himalayas’, more than once
in the lyrics of his movies.
Postscript (to the
11-part series) by Sachi Sri Kantha, 6 May 2005
The Significance of Sivaram’s study on the Maravar Caste and
Tamil Militarism
Its unfortunate that D.P.Sivaram’s notable study [at least the
published version in the Lanka Guardian journal] on the Maravar
Caste and Tamil Militarism didn’t have a proper closure in 1992.
One is also not sure, why Sivaram didn’t respond to two of his
critics, namely Charles Hoole and T.Vanniasingham. May be, he
might have felt that the expressed views of these two
correspondents were half-baked and not worth a response.
From my readings of the academic contributions of late Charles
R.A. Hoole (Principal, Baldaeus Theological College,
Trincomalee; died on Sept.28, 2003), I have inferred that he
subscribed to the tradition of the 19th century Chrisitian
evangelists, who came to the Tamil Nadu and Eelam to retrieve
the ‘savage natives from their sins and show the path to the
Saviour’. Evangelists belonging to this clan [which included
Charles Hoole’s namesake Rajan Hoole and Rajani Thiranagama,
among others] adhere to an obscurantist view that hardly any
respectable culture and civilization among the Tamils existed,
before the Christian missionary campaigns in the Indian
subcontinent which began in earnest since early 1500s.
Correspondent T.Vanniasingham’s thoughts [Lanka Guardian,
Oct.15, 1992] also partially reflected this Christian evangelist
position. His observation that “Poets and bards were hired-hands
in the service of chiefs and could be paid to praise and
exaggerate their struggles and victories” is somewhat naïve. The
quatrain of 12th century epic poet
Kambar cursing the Chola king
with disdain,
“Mannavanum Neeyo – Vala Naadum Unatho – Unnai
Arintho Thamizhai Othinen”
[Are you still a King? Is this
wealthy land only yours? Did I study Tamil only to serve you?]
disproves the fallacy of correspondent Vanniasingham.
Maybe
there indeed were poets and bards of mediocre quality who
praised and exaggerated the ‘glories’ of their Chiefs. But,
ranking poets and bards who had pride in their skills never
stooped low for mundane benefits. Even in the 20th century, the
ranking Tamil poets [Subramaniya Bharati,
Bharathidasan,
Kannadasan and
Kasi Anandan comes to my mind] have shown us in
their lives that they’d suffer poverty, indignity, humiliation,
harassment and even prison terms; but they’d never lick the feet
of power holders for mundane comforts. Of the four Tamil poets
I’ve noted as examples, the last three were our contemporaries,
and Kasi Anandan is still living.
Unlike the two [or three, if one includes R.B.Diulweva] critics
of Sivaram, few non-Tamil academics from USA who have made
in-depth research on the Tamil literature and culture have
provided corroborating reports to that of Sivaram. These have
been compiled as ‘Essays on South India’ (Asian Studies at
Hawaii, No.15, University Press of Hawaii, 1975), edited by
Burton Stein.
Thus, I provide excerpts below, from the thoughts
of Clarence Maloney, George L.Hart III and Burton Stein, to
supplement the research of Sivaram on Maravar caste. This is
vital since I believe that Sivaram may not have had access to
these reports, which preceded his 1992 study. The research
ventures of George Hart and Burton Stein (1926-1996) in the
1960s and 1970s have questioned the credibility of the
pro-Brahmanical views expressed by Nilakanta Sastri, the doyen
of medieval Tamil studies in the first half of 20th century, and
the author of
The Cholas (Madras; University of Madras,
1935-1937) and
A History of South India from Prehistoric Times
to the Fall of Vijayanagar (Oxford University Press, 1966, 3rd
edition).
George L. Hart III [‘Ancient Tamil Literature: Its Scholarly
Past and Future’, pp.41-63]
“…A reading of any of Nilakanta Sastri’s books discloses many
facts concerning the daily life and culture of the Brahmans of
South India, who were never more than a tiny (though important)
minority, but it reveals an almost total lack of information
concerning other segments of the South Indian population, even
those high non-Brahman castes in whose hands the power has
almost always been held. Ancient Tamil literature, on the other
hand, was written by high-class poets who followed the model of
the oral poetry of the Paanans and Paraiyans, men of the lowest
castes, and is devoid of both high-class and Brahmanical bias.
For this reason, it gives a more accurate picture of the social
life and customs of the area to which it belongs than does any
other classical literature of India.” (pp.41-42)
“…It does not seem too much to hope that some day
anthropologists will actually be able to trace the history of
many Tamil castes. Unfortunately, most work done by
anthropologists on modern Tamilnad has been devoted to the
descendants of the uyarntor, or ‘high ones’. Much more study
needs to be devoted to the low castes, who are, after all, just
as important for a proper understanding of the customs of the
area as their higher counterparts.” (p.58)
Burton Stein [‘The State and the Agrarian Order in Medieval
South India: A Historiographical Critique’, pp.64-91]
I quote below two relevant paragraphs from Burton Stein’s essay,
but refrain from citing the complete references he had noted,
only for reason of convenience. He also makes a passing mention
of Polonnaruva inscription of Sri Lanka during the period of
King Vijayabahu.
“The maintenance of Chola armies and the requirements of warfare
as central state functions requiring a bureaucratic structure
constitute the ultimate defensive redoubt of the conventional
view of the state and the economy. Substantial chapters are
devoted to territorial security and the organization of royal
armies. Where a military unit is identified, it is assumed to be
part of a central military organization. Thus the many
velaikkarar military units of the period of Rajaraja are
considered not only as the ‘king’s own’ but as soldiers who have
vowed to sacrifice their lives, by suicide, if necessary. The
evidence upon which these conclusions about Chola armies are
based is highly doubtful, and it is interesting to note that the
early epigraphists Hultzsch, Krishna Sastri, and Venkayya held
the view that the warriors called velaikkarar were probably made
up of men from various occupational groups temporarily engaged
in military activities.
Gopinatha Rao, Nilakanta Sastri, and
Mahalingam have, in recent years, transformed these soldiers
into a centrally recruited and controlled force completely
devoted to the ruler. The implication of the revised view is
that the Chola state had a monopoly of coercive power which at
once required an effective mobilization and centralization of
resources through a bureaucracy and, simultaneously, provided
the ‘central’ government with a powerful instrument of coercion
for that purpose – a large, royal, standing army. This
proposition is indefensible and contrary to a considerable body
of evidence that military power was distributed among many
groups quite independent of the ‘centralized monarchy’.
We have
substantial evidence that mercantile groups maintained a
formidable military capability which was required by the
extensive, itinerant trade network of the age. Ayyavole
inscriptions bear this out, as does the famous Polonnaruva
inscription of Sri Lanka in the time of Vijayabahu (ca.1120) in
which the Tamil idangai velaikkarar are referred to in
association with the trade organization of the valanjiyar.
References to kaikkolar velaikkarar have suggested that artisans
too were capable of maintaining armed units, though Nilakanta
Sastri has questioned this.
However, the major loci of military power were from those
prosperous and populous tracts of agriculture throughout the
Coromandel plain and parts of the interior uplands. The logic of
resources – human and non-human – would make the dominant
peasant population the major source of armed power. Local
military authorities, local ‘chiefs’, were conspicuous in the
early Chola period, before Rajaraja I, and once again attained
high visibility in the thirteenth century when the Chola
overlordship weakened. During he period of the great Cholas,
from Rajaraja I through the time of Kulottunga I, these local
chiefs almost disappear from view as that view is provided by
inscriptions. This may, of course, mean that as a class of local
leaders these warriors were eliminated much as the ‘poligars’
were reduced later by Tipu Sultan and the British. In a few
cases there is evidence of this. However, it is much more likely
that this level of leadership continued intact, but submerged
beneath the surface of a society only partially revealed to us
in the inscriptions of the age.” (pp.75-76)
Clarence Maloney [‘Archeology in South India: Accomplishments
and Prospects’, pp.1-40]
“…The various Sangam literary works mention diverse occupations:
kings, chieftains, scholars, sacrificial priests, purohita,
poets, warriors, customs agents, shippers, foreign merchants,
horse importers, blacksmiths, carpenters, potters, salt makers,
pearl divers, caravan drivers, guards, tailors, fishers,
dancers, drummers, plow farmers, shepherds, hunters, weavers,
leather workers, and robbers. So far archeology has not produced
evidence of well-developed handicrafts such as this list
suggests. But for such a variety of occupations to be patronized
there must have been an elite element leading an essentially
urban way of life.
Named peoples may be considered as tribes, geographical or
occupational castes, or ruling lineages: Kadambar, Velir,
Oliyar, Aruvaalar, Maravar, Aayar, Kocar, Oviyar, Paratavar,
Palaiyar, Velalar, Naagar and others. These functioned
essentially as castes; both Palaiyar and Paratavar were living
in Korkai under the Pandiyas. But caste as a structural system
was not as rigidly hierarchical as it was to become in later
medieval centuries.” (p.17)
Coda
By means of his 1992 study on the Marava caste,
D.P.Sivaram has joined the elite circle of North American
academics who preceded him in focusing their attention on other
non-Brahmin Tamil castes. These academics include, Robert
Hardgrave (Nadar caste), Brenda Beck (Kongu region’s Kavundar
caste), Clarence Maloney (Paratavar caste), Bryan Pfaffenberger
(Jaffna Vellalar caste) and Stephen Barnett (Thondai-mandala
Kontaikatti Velalar Mudaliyar caste).
Sivaram’s study describing the paalayam and paalaya kaarar
(‘Poligars’ of British) of Tinnevely district in Tamil Nadu
aroused my interest when it appeared in the Lanka Guardian,
since one formative influence in my life - for a whole decade of
1960s - was from this region. The native address of my music
teacher and flute guru, T.P.Jesudas [the Radio Ceylon flute
artiste of 1950s and 1960s], which I remember very well is:
Paalayam Kottai, Samathanapuram, Tirunelvely district.
Last but
not the least, though Sivaram did not have a Bachelor’s degree
from a university, it is my view that for his published academic
contribution on Marava caste, Sivaram truly deserves a
posthumous honorary post-graduate degree [Master’s Degree at
least] from a Sri Lankan university. And I’m sure that quite a
number of Sri Lankans as well as non-Sri Lankans would concur
with my suggestion.
|
