Tamil Civilization - the Origins

[mallar]

read "meendezum pandiyar varalaru"

 

[Bang Galore]

There is simply no logic in debating with any seriousness Indian pre history. We simply end up in the realm of conjectures. If there was a proto dravidian speaking people in the territories of the IVC & if they were pushed down south by an invading people who settled there, that knowledge is simply so lost to time because there is no evidence whatsoever to be even reasonably sure of a position. There is nothing in the Rg veda suggesting that, nothing in the memory of any dravidian speaking peoples of any such thing, all we have are essentially modern version of fairy tales driven by ethnic & political reasoning which essentially means that anyone with any agenda can twist what little is known to suggest his/her own theory which is then lapped up by other people of that persuasion. @Joe Shearer & I along with others have argued many times on other related theories but there is simply not enough of any type of evidence to be really certain of what might have happened. It seems that barring some smoking gun yet to be discovered, all we will ever have are wild conjectures of every known variety. Genetic studies have made the matter only more confusing by opening more questions even as they seek to add one more answer to this conundrum.

 

[Joe Shearer]

There is simply no logic in debating with any seriousness Indian pre history. We simply end up in the realm of conjectures. If there was a proto dravidian speaking people in the territories of the IVC & if they were pushed down south by an invading people who settled there, that knowledge is simply so lost to time because there is no evidence whatsoever to be even reasonably sure of a position. There is nothing in the Rg veda suggesting that, nothing in the memory of any dravidian speaking peoples of any such thing, all we have are essentially modern version of fairy tales driven by ethnic & political reasoning which essentially means that anyone with any agenda can twist what little is known to suggest his/her own theory which is then lapped up by other people of that persuasion. @Joe Shearer & I along with others have argued many times on other related theories but there is simply not enough of any type of evidence to be really certain of what might have happened. It seems that barring some smoking gun yet to be discovered, all we will ever have are wild conjectures of every known variety. Genetic studies have made the matter only more confusing by opening more questions even as they seek to add one more answer to this conundrum.

While we are both agreed that the subject under discussion, Indian pre-history, is a lost cause, I have been reading the current historical thinking about south India, which, to say the least, is fascinating. We have progressed a huge distance since the days of the hitherto canonical K. A. Nilkantha Sastri. I would like to share some of these current insights with you and others interested, perhaps in a separate thread. Fortunately, the university seems to be ready to leave me alone to my sluggish 'Net connection for a few days going forward, and I can make a reasonable attempt at representing these views.

 

[madooxno9]

Now Tamils want to claim Pakistani history.

Pakistani history , really ?

 

[Rafi]

Pakistani history , really ?

What of it, my son.

 

[Trichy]

IVC/HVC is evacuated by people there due to River Saraswathi dried up, the people left there and get settled in River Ganga basins...

Before IVC there are lot of history is still hidden, the Discovery of Two Cities in coastal area of current day Gujarat. From there only the people emigrate to IVC/HVC and other parts of India.

And more cities are sunken by sea level rise due to last Ice age are still undiscovered. Still there is a ban to explore the Mahabalipuram (TN, INDIA) Coastal areas from GoI. Almost all Coastal area near Tamil Nadu have a ban for search or research by GoI.

There is a lot of evidence for sea level rise,

Example: Madurai (TN, INDIA) Meenakshi Amman Temple is Built by the survivors of the Sea rise. It have the Written records for this.

Aryan Theory is Simply a BULLSIHT..!

 

[Joe Shearer]

IVC/HVC is evacuated by people there due to River Saraswathi dried up, the people left there and get settled in River Ganga basins...

Before IVC there are lot of history is still hidden, the Discovery of Two Cities in coastal area of current day Gujarat. From there only the people emigrate to IVC/HVC and other parts of India.

And more cities are sunken by sea level rise due to last Ice age are still undiscovered. Still there is a ban to explore the Mahabalipuram (TN, INDIA) Coastal areas from GoI. Almost all Coastal area near Tamil Nadu have a ban for search or research by GoI.

There is a lot of evidence for sea level rise,

Example: Madurai (TN, INDIA) Meenakshi Amman Temple is Built by the survivors of the Sea rise. It have the Written records for this.

Aryan Theory is Simply a BULLSIHT..!

@Bang Galore

As I said, while the pre-history, even the proto-history of the peninsula is still a knotty problem, it is quite clear now that the history of south India from the Sangam Age onwards is evident from the thousands of epigraphs that are available for research. There was no formed state, no acquisition of surplus labour or of surplus produce, little if any private property, no structure and state hierarchy, and, above all, NO TEMPLES, during this age. What we know of south Indian imperium springs from as late as the fourth to seventh century AD. Why these imbecile posts appear beggars comprehension.

 

[Bang Galore]

@Bang Galore

As I said, while the pre-history, even the proto-history of the peninsula is still a knotty problem, it is quite clear now that the history of south India from the Sangam Age onwards is evident from the thousands of epigraphs that are available for research. There was no formed state, no acquisition of surplus labour or of surplus produce, little if any private property, no structure and state hierarchy, and, above all, NO TEMPLES, during this age. What we know of south Indian imperium springs from as late as the fourth to seventh century AD. Why these imbecile posts appear beggars comprehension.

I guess most of this is a legacy from the Dravidian movement since almost all such claims are made by only one segment of the Dravidian speaking people. Arguments like these are also who gives me pause about the traditional pre-history(Indian) ideas, that an invading group forced the settlers of major cities southwards. It would be too much of an ask to be expected to believe that people who built some of the greatest cities of that time, once defeated & pushed out were content to give up that urban life & live in stone-age conditions for the next 1000-2000 years in the South of India. Everyone it seems decides on the theory they like & then conjure up stories around them. Might as well I guess because too few people can be bothered about the facts which themselves are so thin that they can barely be called facts. Absence of evidence is not only treated as an absolute evidence of absence by some, it is accepted as evidence of presence by others.

P.S. It is one of the reasons I await your posts. Whether I'm in complete agreement or not in the conclusions drawn, at the very least I'm less uneducated about something than before.
.

 

[Developereo]

Tamil civilisation formed the basis for Indian civilisation.
[...]
Tamils from the south migrated north
[...]
These people settled around the banks of the Sindu river and over the years were responsible for the creation of Indus Valley civilisation

Now that's what I call chutzpah.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I guess most of this is a legacy from the Dravidian movement since almost all such claims are made by only one segment of the Dravidian speaking people. Arguments like these are also who gives me pause about the traditional pre-history(Indian) ideas, that an invading group forced the settlers of major cities southwards. It would be too much of an ask to be expected to believe that people who built some of the greatest cities of that time, once defeated & pushed out were content to give up that urban life & live in stone-age conditions for the next 1000-2000 years in the South of India. Everyone it seems decides on the theory they like & then conjure up stories around them. Might as well I guess because too few people can be bothered about the facts which themselves are so thin that they can barely be called facts. Absence of evidence is not only treated as an absolute evidence of absence by some, it is accepted as evidence of presence by others.

P.S. It is one of the reasons I await your posts. Whether I'm in complete agreement or not in the conclusions drawn, at the very least I'm less uneducated about something than before.
.

@Bang Galore

You must remember that we were a generation brought up to believe that K. A. Nilakanta Sastri's was the canonical account. It was a shock, not entirely a pleasant one, to realise, on reading Kesavan Veluthat on The Early Mediaeval in South India, that

1. The Sangam Era covered a period which was pre-Agamic Hindu;
2. That there was no organised caste system in that period;
3. That the structure of most of the subsequent Cola and Pallava (and Cera) lands consisted of chieftains from the unsettled mountain and forest regions plundering the settled agrarian plains and creating affiliations and war-bands on that plunder;
4. That the onset of centralised and bureaucratised monarchies, the Pallavas, followed by the Colas, was marked by parallel social and religious movements;
5. That the chieftains of the previous period were gradually converted into 'feudatories' (but without the European political connotations that the word has);
6. That the temple in south India, a phenomenon originating largely in the seventh and eighth centuries, was an instrument of state power;
7. That temples were royal temples, proclaiming the god-like qualities of the ruler, and the desirable devotee-like qualities of the subject;
8. That other temples were centres of agricultural administration, under the control of syndicates;
9. That these syndicates were driven by Brahmins and the land grants made to them;
10. That these syndicates were nevertheless not exclusively Brahmin but featured the prominent role of Vellalas as well;
11. That these agrarian expansions, coupled with the Sanskritisation of the south, marked the conversion of tribes into castes;
12. That the need to equate all tribes with each other led to a two-step hierarchy, the Brahmins and all the others (ignoring the untouchables for the moment, as they were evidently a later development);
13. That all this happened so late, between the fourth century BC and the seventh century AD.

It is with a sinking feeling that I see in front the attendant volumes on

South India under the Cholas, by Y. Subbarayulu, extensively quoted by Veluthat already,
South Indian History and Society: Studies from Inscriptions AD 850-1800, by Noboru Karashima,
The Perumals of Kerala, by M. G. S. Narayanan,
The Kerala Temple and Early Mediaeval Agrarian System, by Rajan Gurakkal, and a host of others.

Quite clearly, my knowledge of south Indian history is completely out of date. It is even more depressing to contemplate other works that have been increasingly influential of late, such as

The Making of Early Mediaeval India by Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya,
Rethinking Early Mediaeval India, (ed.) by Upinder Singh (yes, the same one)

and a host of writings by the prolific R. S. Sharma.

I can get some gloomy satisfaction in pointing out to you that the same is the case for the so-called modern period of Indian history. While we are all familiar with Ayesha Jalal, there is such a wealth of work done on this period that all my early reading is quite at a discount.

So much for the ***** who whine that there has been no adequate examination of Indian history by Indians. As if they knew or cared.

Pray for me.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Now that's what I call chutzpah.

@Developereo

I am sorry, I wrestled with my baser self, and lost.

Why did you find it necessary to add four superfluous letters to the word?

 

[Vinod2070]

Now Tamils want to claim Pakistani history.

I do't think we are talking about the period after 14th Aug 1947!

 

[INDIC]

@Joe Shearer

Is there a summary of the Mahabharat + Vedas available ? ..

I have a theory , I'd like to collect some data and try to test the theory.

How can you have a theory without reading these books.

 

[Joe Shearer]

How can you have a theory without reading these books.

These books, like other scriptural and quasi-scriptural writings, and like epics, do not constitute an acceptable source of history. Interpretations of possible historical developments based on their analyses are classified as proto-history.

It is not clear what theory @salman108 wishes to test, but it may not be an historical theory. If it is an historical theory, he is wasting his time.

 

[INDIC]

These books, like other scriptural and quasi-scriptural writings, and like epics, do not constitute an acceptable source of history. Interpretations of possible historical developments based on their analyses are classified as proto-history.

It is not clear what theory @salman108 wishes to test, but it may not be an historical theory. If it is an historical theory, he is wasting his time.

These books give a lot insight about the historical events of the ancient India. Like Mahabharat gives a lot of infomation about the ancient geographical entities and communities that resided in ancient Indian subcontinent or beyond.

Theory can only be developed after reading these books, not first imagine and then look for it.