Digitized by Viruba

Tamil Influence in Ancient Sri Lanka

with Special Reference to Early
Brahmi Inscriptions
A. Veluppil!ai

Geographically, Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka, though separated by a

narrow stretch of sea, are very close neighbours. Geologically, there is.
much in common between these two states. The question is not just finding
out when contacts started between Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka. The theory
of the lost continent of Lemuria tries to explain that at a remote past, the
Indian Ocean was not there and that Sri Lanka, South India, East Africa
and South East Asia were all connected by land. The sea between Tamil­
nadu and Sri Lanka is shallow. There is what is called the Adam's Bridge.
between Mannar in Sri Lanka and Dhanuskodi in Tamilnadu. A number
of islands and islets are found like dots in the World Map between Tamil­
nadu and Sri Lanka. Though both Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka have sources
like the Caiikam Literature and the ancient chronicles respectively to throw·
light on their early history, epigraphy is a much more reliable source than
literature for the reconstruction of the history of a remote past. As could
be suspected in these circumstances, there seems to have been lot of interac­
tion between the two states even in the period of the early Brabmi inscrip-­
tions. But in · tracing this interaction in proper perspective, there is
considerable difficulty. There is resistance in certain quarters of Sri Lanka
to accept considerable Dravidian influence in Sri Lanka in that remote past.
Therefore this paper will be in two parts - the first part dealing with.
problems in ancient Sri Lanka history in connection with the Tamil problem
and the second part dealing with Tamil influence in the early Brahmi
inscriptions of Sri Lanka.
PART I
During the last sixty years, there were many attempts to study and.
interpret the Tamil Brahmi inscriptions from Tamilnadu. 1 Compared to the·
Brahmi inscriptions of North India and the Deccan, there were few pecillia-­
rities in the Tamil Brahmi inscriptions and compared to the Sri Lanka
Brahmi inscriptions, there were a few striking resemblances. 2 Tamilnadu
and Sri Lanka shared exclusively certain Brahmi symbols. Further, the·
recording of the inscriptions in the brow of caves below the drip ledge, is­
confined to these two states within the whole of South Asia. 8 H. Krishna
Sastri, the then Government Epigraphist for India, who first tried to
decipher the Tamil Brahmi inscriptions, called for a comparative study oi
64 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDIES

these two states. K.V. Subrahmanya Ayyar, who made substantial progress
in th_e decipherment and interpretation of these records, claimed that the
Tamilnadu records were also Buddhist like those of Sri Lanka and
mentioned the possibility that early Buddhist missionaries to Sri Lanka
cross' ed over the Pandya country to further their religion and brought the
art of writing from Sri Lanka to Tamilnadu. P.E.E. Fernando who was
4,

struck by the similarities in the early records of these two states, considered
that Sri Lanka and Tamilnadu might have derived their script from a pre­
Mauryan school of Brahmi. He discounted the possibility of early Buddhist
missionaries led by Aritta, crossing over from Sri Lanka to Tamilnadu. 6

However, scholars continue to theorise on the basis of the close

relationship in the records of these two states. T.V. Mahalingam drew
attention to the similarities in the records and pointed out a few words in
Sri Lanka epigraphs like aya and parumaka which might be traced to Tamil
words like iiy and perumaka11 and called for a study of Sri Lanka inscrip•
tions from the point of view of Tamil la?guage which might bear ample
fruit. K. V. Raman reverts back to the position of Subrahmanya Ayyar
.and strongly advocates Sri Lanka inspiration for Tamil Brahmi inscriptions.
According to him, "This problem needs greater attention and the Brahmi
inscriptions of Sri Lanka have to be compared in detail with those of Tamil·
nadu and studied in depth to get more precise information." 7 This paper
.aims at such a study.

This kind of study is made possible by the recent publication of Volume

One of the Inscriptions of Ceylon by Senerat Paranavitana. 8 This volume
,covers the edition of more than one thousand and one hundred inscrip­
tions of the period dated before the Christian era as well as more than two
hundred cave inscriptions of a slightly later period. There is definite mention
of Tamils by the designation Damef!a in four inscriptions: two in VavuniJa
in the Northern Province, one in Amparai in the Eastern Province and one
in Anuradhapura, the capital city. The Tamils mentioned were either
merchants or mariners. The inscription from Anuradhapura mentions,
according to Paranavitana, one ilu barata. On the analogy of Tamil Brahmi
this can be read as ilu barata. As Sri Lanka Brahmi does not have la, can
this be taken to stand for i{a(m) or ila(m)?10 The name ilam occurs in
Tamilnadu Brahmi inscriptions as well as Catikam literature. The Tirup­
pararikuiJram (near Madurai) inscription mentions a house-holder from Sri
Lanka (Ila kkuJumpika11) as the donor of a monastery. 11 There was a
Carikam poet from [lam (llattu Ppiita[1tiva1_1iir). 12• PaJJi1_1appalai, a
Carikam poem mentions food from Sri Lanka (! lat•U!Javu) as one of the
imports at Kavirippiimppa/Ji1_1am in the Cola country.18 These can be cited
as evidence for close ties between Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka in that early
period.
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT SRI LANKA 65
There is evidence for early trade contacts between North. India, South
India and Sri Lanka.u The Arthasastra of KauJilya speaks about the trade
between the North and South in the Age of the early Mauryan Empire.
.According to him, Dakshil)apatha abounded in conch-shells, diamonds,
precious stones of other kinds, pearls and articles of gold. The mention of
pearls and precious stones should be particularly noted as they could have
-come from Sri Lanka to SouthIndia. Another evidence for this trade was the
-discovery all over the Deccan, South India and Sri Lanka, as well as in
North India, of punch marked pura.ria coins which are clear witnesses of
ancient contacts among these regions. The name Tambapannai (Tamraparni)
was applied to the island of Lanka, to a Sri Lanka port at the mouth of the
river Aruvi lru and at the same time to the river flowing near the town of
Tirunelveli. This cannot be dismissed as a mere matter of coincidence.
K.K. Pillay guesses that one group of Aryan immigrants who came to South
India and later proceeded to Sri Lanka might have employed these names
with which they had become familiar in South ·India. 15 According to
Mahavamsa, the Sri Lanka chronicle, the first Aryan colonists to Sri L�_nka
got their wives from· Madurai in South India. With these women �Jso came
craftsmen and a thousand families of eighteen guilds. 16 This is evidence
for early ties between Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka.

Jn this connection, it should be nated that there was no regular direct

· intercourse between Sri L�nka and the West till the end of the first century
A.D., although the products of Sri Lanka were known to and were b·eing
purchased by Western merchants in South Indian ports. 17 According to
the author of Periplus, pearls and gems, among other things, were exported
from the harbours of Kerala. 18 These products might have come from Sri
Lanka. Considering-rhe intimate intercourse that existed between Tamil­
nadu and Sri Lanka, it is but likely that the Tamils, the nearest neighbours
in the continental coasts and a prosperous sea-faring people of South Asia;
might have established trading centres in the Island at Mato!lam and Kuti­
raimalai in close proximity to the continent. u Ko r_kai, at the mouth of the
river Tiimrapar1Ji, was a great port due to its pearl fishery. It was known
in Sanskrit literature as Kapadapura(m). Opposite to that in Mannar in Sri
Lanka was Ku<jakadavuk1. 20 These must have been important centres of
trade and frequent intercourse must have been going on through them.

As Branmi was the common script for records in South Asia for some
-centuries before and after the Christian era, so Prakrit was the common
language, during most of the time for the region except in Tamilnadu.
Though the Dravidian- languages, including Tamil, were sometimes classified
within the Prakrit group, there was no· unanimity in the matter and the
-Dravidian is now considered to be outside the Prakrit group.zi. Wilhelm
·Geiger called the language of the Brahmi records of Sri Lanka as Sinhalese
Prakrit. 2 .llThe Sinhalese Prakrit ·exhibited some of the regional characteris�
ties of Prakrit of eastern and western India as the early colonists to Sri
9
66 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDIES

Lanka mig,ht have been using the sea routes on both sides of India. Few
words and ·other linguistic features unkno\Yn to Indian Prakrits have also
been noticed in Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions. The Sinhalese language­
proper developed from the Prakrit. Hence, Paranavitana calls the language·
-of these records as old Sinhalese. z 8 The fact that the oldest records in Sr-i
Lanka are in Prakrit or Old Sinhalese, as he prefers to can it, is sufficient
evidence for Paranavitana to rush to the conclusion that the inhabitants of
Sri Lanka in that period were all Aryan speakers or rather Sinbalese spea­
kers, as he prefers to call them.

Paranavitana relies too much on the Mahavamsa and other chronicles

when interpreting archaeological remains and epigraphs but he is very relu­
ctant to concede South Indian or Dravidian contacts even when·they were
referred to in these chronicles. The reference in the Mahavamsa to close
ties with Madurai and even to the settlement of craftsmen and members of
guilds had already been r eferred to. According to the Sri Lanka archaeo­
logist, the three kingdoms in the Far South were first founded by the Aryan
colonists and later they were conquered and settled oy the Dravidians who
had retained the name of the kingdoms. What he was trying to argue was
that the first Aryan colonists to Sri Lanka established ties with Aryan bre­
thren in Madurai and not necessarily with the Dravidian people. For his
fantastic theory, he relies on the derivation of Pandya from Pandava of the
Mahabharata as well as the claim of the medieval Pandya rulers that Agas­
tiya, a Northern sage, was their Kulaguru. He does not seem to be aware
that the language of the inscriptions need not necessarily reflect the langu­
age of the people.' There is definite evidence that Telugu was the language
qf the people of Andhra Pradesh though inscriptions in that region contin­
ued to be written in a form of Prakrit and later in Sanskrit to the exclusion
of Telugu for well over a thousand years.u He is quoted to have been
said that the patriots of the Sinhalese language, literature and culture
should learn Tamil in order to learn authoritatively the history of the Sin­
haladvipa .through the pages of Dravidian history. 2 5 The present writer
(eels - that not merely Tamil but the entire Dravidian should be studied to
get at the correct perspective of Sri Lanka history.
-
The basic character of Sinhalese, whether it was an Aryan language or
a Dravidian language, was a matter of controversy among Western and
Westernised scholars for sometime. D.E. Hettiaratchi had traced the out­
line of this controversy."' While Rusk assigned Sinhalese a place in the
Dravidian family, F. M:uller indicated the basis' of Sinbalese as Dravidian.
·Hass maintained that Tamil had.at least an influence on the development
of the Sinhalese language. It was Caldwell who put aside any direct rela­
tions between Sinhalese and Tamil. The vi�w that Sinhalese was an Aryan
langQage was propounded by Jame1- de Alwis and this view was strengthe­
_end further by Childres, Rhys Davids, P. Goldschmidt and Ed.. Muller
-Geigei has summed up by saying that it was an indisputable fact that Sin-
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT SRI LANKA 67

nalese was one of the modern Indo-European vernaculars and that fact was
sufficiently proved by Sinhalese phonology and morphology. The geogra­
·phical distribution of the Sinhalese language at the border of the southern
..extremity of the Dravidian speaking area which separated the Sinh alese
from the North Indian languages by many hundreds of miles coupled... with
considerable Dravidian influence in every sphere of Sinhalese life, even
:Sanskritic influences penetrating into Sinhalese through Dravidianised
forms should have been responsible for the initial propouuding of the
·theory that Sinhalese was a Dravidian language. The finding of the lin­
:guists about the Indo-Aryan character of the language has bolstered the
traditional belief of the Sinhalese people that they were descendants of
Aryan immigrants, though in physical features it is now hardly possible to
.distinguish the Sinhalese from the Tamils. So, it is a misnomer to call the
.difference between the Sinhalese and the Tamils as racial; the differences
are mainly linguistic and cultural. As in South 'India where there is a ten­
.dency to minimise and deprecate Aryan influences on the Dravidians, in Sri
Lanka too, there is a tendency to minimise and deprecate the Dravidian
-influence on the Sinhalese.
It is not yet clear why the descendants of an Indo-Aryan group of
·immigrants began to call themselves Sinhala, the Sinhalese name for the
language and the people. The term Sinhala has been variously interpreted
.as descendants of Sinha, the descendants of the murderer of Sinha and
people with the heart of Sinha. The ancient chronicles of Sri Lanka, both
1he Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa, have legends explaining the origin of
the Sinhalese, keeping in mind the first two meanings. They claim that the
.Sinhalese people were the descendants of a couple comprising Sinha and a
princess of Vanga (Bengal), Later, Sinhaba.hu, their son, kill his father .
. Accordingto this legend, Vijaya, the leader of the first group of Aryan
:immigrants to the Island, was the eldest son of this Sinhab-a.hu, If this
story were to be taken seriously, there should have been Sinhala people in
India also. But, no such people exist in India. This story seems to be a
later invention to · explain the designation 'Sinhala'. Bu<ldh.ism seems to
have arrived in Ceylon from Bihar, the heartland of Mauryfln imperialism.
To take the sea route from Bihar to Sri Lanka, contacts have to be maintai­
ned through Orissa or Bengal. Even the story of Vijaya refers. to the prin­
.cess from Bengal. u The state of Orissa was a stronghold of Sun Worship
.and it still remains so as the region for Saura Worship. The lion represents
the house of Sun in astrology both Eastern and Western. Portion of Orissa
.and Andhra Pradcsh constituted th� Kalinga Kingdom whose ea pital was
Sinhapura.99 There is a Sinhasala in Andhra Predesh. The Bhatciprolu
inscription refers to one King Kubiraka, the chief of the Sinha committee. 8 0
The Vi�CJuhuCJfiin rulers of Andhra Pradesh had issued inscriptions with the
,seal of lion, realistic with its mouth open, paw raised and tail looped. 81 It
very much looks like the banner of the Sinhalese, only noticeable- difference
·being absence of the sword in the raised-paw of the 'lion. The Vi�C1ukut1-
-(lln had this type·of-lion in the coins they struck ai;w. on some of the car-
 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDIES

vings on the cave walls. Satyanarayana · seems to feel that they were­
scooped out of Buddhist structures. 811 According to him, the Buddhist
monastery St Sinhii.salam was usurped by the Brahmins. The Pallava rul- ·
ers, from the fifth century had names with the element of Sinha and from
the time of Narasimhavarman T, the inscriptions of the Pallavas issued
from the battlefields had this lion emblem.8 8 The present writer is not
aware of any Sri Lanka banner of this type of lion that could be dated
before the eighth century A.D. No Sri Lanka ruler had in his name the­
element of Sinha at least up to the fifth century A.D. as may be checked
from the Mahavamsa.

Paranavitana confesses that he searched in vain for any reference to·

Sinha in the earliest :Brahmi records of Sri Lanka. But he is ready with
an ingenious explanation that as almost everybody in the island was a Sin­
halese, nobody thought of referring to such a lineage.u Though it is
clear that Sri Lanka was under the domination of Aryanised people in the
period of the inscription, it is going too far to .J!Ssert that the people belie­
ved themselves to be of Sinha/a identity. By the middle of the second
century A.D., Ptolemy refers to Sri Lanka as '$alike" and the inhabitants
of Sri Lanka as 'Salai'. These terms are now interpreted to be derivations .
of Sihaja or Sinha}a. 8 6 Most probably, this Sinhala identity was later
foisted on the Aryanised people of Sri Lanka by the Buddhist clergy to pre­
serve the separate identity of Buddhists of Sri Lanka against absorption by
the Dravidians and in order to resist the revivalist Hindu flood which was. .
sweeping the mainland of India.

Who the indigenuous inhabitants of Sri Lanka were, when the first
Aryan colonists started coming in, remains a matter of controversy. The
ancient c�onicles of Sri Lanka mention the Niigas and the Yakkas. Accor­
ding to them, Lord Buddha himself visited the Island thrice, once to drive
away the Yakkas and twice to take into his fold the Nagas. His relation-­
ship with the Niigas was cordial while that with the Yakkas was hostile.
Vijaya's relationship with the Yakkas was also hostile, But there is no
mention o( his relationship with the Nu.ga�. The traditional chronicles of
Sri Lanka mention a number of rulers from Anuradhapura with Naga as an
element in their names. The early Brahmi records of Sri Lanka mention
quite a number of Niiga persons scattered throughout the country. Accor­
ding to the Mahavamsa, the Naga Sc!ttlements were i n the north and in the
west of Sri Lanka·

The problem of the identification of the Nagas i n the history of the ·

Island had been referred to by G.C. Mendis. 8 7 He mentions the fact that
it was perhaps James Ferguson, the author of Tree and Serpent Worship,
who expressed the opinion that the Niigas were not originally serpents but­
s�rpent worshippers, an aboriginal race of Turaoian stock, which inhabited.
northern India and were conquered by the Aryan invaders. He also quotes,-
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMlL INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT SRI LANKA

C.F. Oldham, the author of the Sun and the Serpent to say that these
Nagas were not demons, .but were so called because they claimed descent
from the Sun and had the hooded serpent for a totem. Mendis quotes
Paranavitana with approval that the Yakkas and the Niigas were clearly
stated in the chronicles to have been non-human beings. K.K. J>illay feels
that the Nii gas were either connected with the Tamils or that they had adop­
ted Tamil as their language. 8 " He mentions the suggestion of Parker that
the Nagas of Sri Lanka were early immigrants from Kerala and that they
were identical with the Niiyars. Generally speaking, Sri Lanka, South­
India and the Dekhan are rich in their Naga associations from early times ..
The Nagas are mentioned in Pattupi//u, a Carikam classic. Place-names.
like Nagapattinam and Nagiir in Tamilnadu, opposite the northern coast
of Nagadipa in Sri Lanka suggest the existence of Nng2s in South India�
There is a village called Nagercoil in the eastern coast of Jaffna peninsula
with signs of ancient human habitation and the name might have denoted.
the palace or rather the capital city of the ancient Nag:is. 8 9 Piitante�a11ar,.
one of the Carikam poets, is said to have been from Sri Lanka. Most pro­
bably, he was a Naga. Large number of poets and musicians of the Cari-·
kam period have the element Nliga in their personal names. • 0 Pointing
out most of the above factors, K.K. Pillay sums up as follows: "In any
case, there is no doubt that the Nagas had adopted the Tamil language be­
fore the early centuries of the Christian era and that there were some Naga
poets associated with the Tamil Sangam."
Besides the Naga settlements in the north and west of Sri Lanka, there
was another settlement in the south-east-c:>rner of the [sland. The chroni­
cles do not mention anything specifically ab:Jut the settlers in that region.
A number of inscriptions -no less than fifteen - discovered in Hambantota.
and Amparai Districts of the region, have the symbol of fish. u Paranavi­
tana interprets the significance of these symbols by saying that the Aryan
colonists from Matsya Kingdom in N:)ftn India might have settled in this
region because they seem to have had the fish emblem. Another . probable
explanation here is that these settlers were from the Pandya country who
also had the fish emblem. This may be reinforced by the fact that the
famous temple of Katirka.mam or Kararagama is situated very close to the
sites of the inscriptions. The Pandya country is noted for famous Muruga
temples. The Pandyas might have chosen the spot in order to control the
trade to South East Asia. But the difficulty i n accepting this interpretation
is that the Pandya records in Tamilnadu have the fish symbol.

The· need to present the Sinhalese people as the descendants of Aryan

immigrants exclusively, that is, excluding the Dravidians in p1rticular, lead
Paranavitana to propound contradictory theories. In one page in the His­
tory' of Ceylon, he is propounding the theory that the Pandya Kingdom i n.
the fifth century B.C. was an Aryan Kingdom. Because the Mahavamsa..:
itself claims that Vijaya and his followers espoused maidens from the Pan.:..·
70 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDJES

dya country, Paranavitana argues as follows: "Aryan influence seems to

have penetrated to the extreme south of the Indian Penisula before it arri­
ved in Ceylon. The ancient Pandya kings traced their origin to the Panda­
vas, the heroes of the Mahabharata war, and their family priest was belie­
ved to have been Agastiya who, it appears, was a pioneer in extending
Aryan culture to the south. The assumption that the Pandyas; with whom
the first Aryan settlers in Ceylon allied themselves were Dravidians is not a
necessary one for the names of their capital and dynasty are of Aryan ori­
gin"... In his book Sinhalayo, he develops his theory as follows: "Aryan
culture had been introduced to South India, before the arrival of the Dravi­
<iians; and three kingdoms, Pandya, Cola and Cera, had been founded some
what earlier than the establishment of a Kingdom of Indo-Aryan culture in
Ceylon. The invading Dravidians, apparently, imposed their dominion on
these kingdoms which had been founded before their advent, and continued
their names. They, in turn, gave their ethnic name to the people and the
lands over whom they imposed their dominion." 611

In another page of Sinhalayo, he says, "The Aryan languages are spo­

lcen today in the north of India. The languages of South India are inclu­
,ded in a different family, the Dravidian. These inscriptions thus corrobo­
.rate the literary tradition according to which the Slnhalese migrate to the
Island from Lala, a region in North India."u He develops the idea in
.another page in the History of Ceylon as follows: "The fact, that a large
1erritory inhabited by peoples speaking non-Aryan languages intervenes bet.
ween the Sinhalese and the speakers of Aryan tongues in India, clearly indi­
cates that the ancestors of the present day Sinhalese, migrated to this
-island from Aryavarta, as the abode of Aryanise_d Indians was known in
.ancient days - sometime before the third century B.C. when documents in
Old Sinhalese were first engraved on stone. The distance which separates
the Sinhalese from the nearest linguistic kinsmen also suggests that this
migration was not an overland one, but along a sea route. The inference
that we have drawn from the above is generally confirmed by the tradicions
.handed down among the Sinhalese, and recorded in chrqnicles."u If the
South Indian kingdoms were once Aryan kingdoms, the ancestors of the
Sinhalese could have just crossed over the Palk Straits or the Gulf of Man­
nar and landed in Sri Lanka. Further, Paranavitana seems to rely too
much on the fact that Prakrit, the language of early Sri Lanka epigraphs
testify to the fact that the people of Sri Lanka at that time were Aryans and
not Dravidians. He does not seem to have considered the fact that on the
northern borders of Tamilnadu where Telegu and Kannada, the other two
most important Dravidian languages are spoken, Prakrit was the language
-0f the inscriptions which were contemporary with ancient Sri Lanka inscrip­
tions.
The colonisation of Sri Lanka is sought to be explained in modern
terms by reference to trade. The development of trade always leads to
.movement of people. Paranavitana has this to say on the early Aryan
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT SRI LANKA 71

colonisation of Sri Lanka, "Legends relating to the settlement in this.

island, of a people of Indo-Aryan culture, were prevalent in ancient India.
These legends have been preserved in Sanskrit Buddhist literature and indi­
cate that the pioneers who introduced lndo-Aryan civilisation to this island
were merchant adventurers. They were most probably attracted to its
north-western littoral by its pearl banks and to the south-eastern regions
on account of the precious stones which the hinterland yielded." 0 Dis­
cussing the contents of Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions which refer to the­
Tamils, Paranavitana says, "One of these Damerjas was a mariner (n!vika),
and another a merchant. This accords with the earliest references to them.
in the Ceylon chronicles and the Pali literature.'· 6 7 Even if these inferen­
ces are correlated it should be clear that if the Aryans had started migra­
ting to Sri Lanka 'as traders and mariners in the fifth century B.C. the Dra­
vidians had started moving in by the third century B.C. As Paranavitana
himself had noted, all the Tamils mentioned in Sri Lanka records bear
Aryan names, hardly distinguished from the names of the other inhabitants.
This makes it difficult to trace Tamils from these records except when they
are distinctly referred to as Tamils. But every Tamil in that period could
not have been expected mention to his ethnic identity.
As there was difference in the language of the inscriptions in Tamil­
nadu and· Sri Lanka, there was difference aiso in the religious tradition ins.
piring the authors of the inscriptions. In this respect, the Sri Lanka tradi­
tion is fairly clear. The traditional chronicles of Sri Lanka which deal
mainly with the history of Buddhism in the country are unanimous that
Buddhism in the country are unanimous that Buddhism spread among all
the inhabitants of the island, throughout its length and breadth. Most of
the ancient inscriptions refer to donations to the Sangha. Though it is
never specified as to the Sangha of which religion various Buddhist remains
had been found in association with the caves. But in the case of Tamil­
nadu, the interpretation of the religious association of the cave inscriptions
is not so easy. The Hindu religion had no tradition associating with monu­
ments of this type. As T.V. Mahalingam says, these could be associated
with non-Hindu religions like Buddhism, Jainism and A jivaka-religion.u
Subrahmanya Ayyar who has expressed with the dynamism of Buddhism in
the third century B.C. and with the striking resemblance between the Tamil
nadu and Sri Lanka records, adduced few more arguments to his proposi­
tion that the Tamilnadu monuments were also Buddhist. Mahalingam bas.
left the matter wide open among the non-Hindu religious sects. The facts.
that there were Jaina remains near these records in the caves and that the­
Jains were a dominant religious group in Tamilnadu �t a subsequent period
have made recent scholars like R. Nagasamy and K.V. Raman to propose­
that the authors of the Tamilnadu Brahmi inscriptions were Jains.u
How Jainism _came to Tamilnadu is a m�ttter for investigation now.
Like K.arnataka, Tamilnadu .was more sympathetic to Jainism than to Bud-
,2 JOURNAL OF TAMJL STUDIES

.dhism. According to the Karnataka tradition, Bhadrabahu and his Jain

• disciples migrated to Karnataka during the reign of Chandragupta Maurya.
As the early Tamilnadu cave inscriptions had been found around Madurai,
· there is another possibility also. There might have been close ties between
Madura in north India and Madurai in Tamilnadu. The similarity of names
need not be a mere accident. From a purely palaeographical point of view,
-discussing the paleography of the earliest Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka,
Dani puts forward the theory that the influences from Madura had come
· to Sri Lanka not directly but through South Indian cave inscriptions. 05 It
i s interesting to note here that Madura remained a great centre of Jainism
from about the first century B.C. up to the period of the Muslim Con­
.quest. 5 1 In fact, it had been asserted that the antiquadan Jaina remains
at that locality were the conerete proofs for the antiquity of J aina tradi­
tions. 2 6 In the period of the ancient Tamil Brahmi inscriptions, Jainism
might have been an important link between Madura and Madurai.

Paranavitana who had edited the early Brahmi inscriptions bas tried to
•derive all the words and the other linguistic features of the epigraphs from
Indo-Aryan sources, Very heavy reliance is placed on the Mahaval"(lsa and
the other chronicles, as pointed out by Dani. Epigraphical evidence is
interpreted in terms of the chronicle and not vice versa. The author of the
Mahavamsa himself could never have expected an archaeologist or historian
to place such trust on his work. Every chapter in Mahavamsa ends as foll­
ows, "Here ends the ... chapter, called... , in the Mahavamsa, compiled for the
,serene joy and emotion of the pious". 68 Though it has much historical
.material, it was not meant to be a history; it is more of a religious and
kavya composition. Further, this work was composed in the fifth century
when communal tension between the Sinhalese and the Tamils was quite
high. The Buddhist Sangha brought up Dhatusena to repel the Tamil inva­
_-0ers from Anuradhapura. As Tilak Hettiaratchi points out, the Maha-
vamsa mentions an incident when Out iagamaQ.i pleaded with the Sangha
,for some bhikkhus to accompany the army to the battle-field as the sight of
the bhihkbus was a blessing and protection to them while Dipavamsa, the
-earlier chronicle, did not know of any role played by the Sangha in that
war. u So, Mahavamsa seems to have been influenced by the communal
background of the time of its composition.

B.H. Farmer gives a brillfant analysis of the way Mahavamsa seems to

shaped the thought processes of some people in Sri Lanka. 6 s The way in
which the Mahavamsa story was told was significant because it was a strong
formative influence on Sri Lanka's history in general and on communal
relations in particular. The conflict in Dhatusena's reign had then, as it
has now, overtones that hav� much to do with the view that the Sinhalese
took of their origin, of their particular destiny, and of their relationships
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCE IN ANCIBNT SRI LANKA

to the Tamils. The Mahavamsa gave the Sinhalese a myth about their 0,ri:­
gin, which, farfetched as it is, convinced th<;m that they were a peo_pl� wi.tb
something special about them. Besides mentioning th� descent of the _Si�
halese from a lion, Vijaya and his followers are said to have landed in Sri
Lanka under the protection of the Buddha who had given instruction to the
gods to carefully protect them and Lanka. The Sinhalese saw and stil) s�
in this myth special origin and identity, and their special character as· an
Aryan people set far from their hom!land am'.lng alien and hostile fqlk.
The Sinhalese conception of themselves as unique and specially favoured
was rooted not only in a myth about their distinctive origin but sprang also
from a belief about themselves as the chosen guardians of Buddhism and
about their island, 'Sri Lanka', as a place of special sanctity for the Budd­
hist religion.

Influenced by this type of attitude and anxious to deny the historical

rights of Sri Lanka Tamils, some scholars are holding very tightly to Furer
Hainmandorf 's hypothesis about the arrival of the Dravidians South India
in about 700 - 400 B.C. 5 9 H1im:::ndxf's hypothesis seems to have been
taken seriously, only in Sri Lanka. Sir M:>rtimer Wheller who did excava­
tions at the same site, as examined by Hainmendorf, had not come to any
such conclusion. His hypothesis sh:>Uld be tested on other types of evidence
and then only it could be called a theory as such. His main argument was
his suppposition that the conquerers and the conquered could not be Jin­
guistically related or could not have borrowed the Janguage of the other.
T.P. Meenakshisundaran had quoted the well-known instances of the Latin,
Celtic and Germanic speakers (all, Indo-Europeans) to disprove Haimen­
dorf's supposition. 5 7 His hypothesis also does not fit in with findings in
glotto-chronology. Working on the chronology of Dravidian languages,
based on a Lexico-statistic analysis, T.M. Kameswari shows that Malayalam
and Telugu must have sep,arated between 800 B.C. to 100 A.D. and Tulu
and Telugu should have separated between 800 B.C. to 1000 A.D. 6 8 These
Dravidian languages could not have sep:uated them5elves from each otp.er
before the Dravidians established themselves in South India. So, Haimen­
dorf's dating of 700 B.C. had to be pushed further to accommodate thit
fact. As the acceptance of Haimendorf's hypothesis will mean that the- firss
Aryan immigrants to Sri Lanka might have come earlier than the first Dravi­
dian immigrants, Paranavitana accepted the hypothesis without question.

But evidence is forthcoming that the ancient history of Sri Lanka could
not be told, ignoring the pa-rt played by the Tamils.- Paranavitana who rel­
ied heavily of Haimendorf's -hypothesis which was developed from excavated
iron-using megalithic sites, had to explain the -presence of megalithic -sites in
Sri Lanka. Megalithic funerary urns in Sri Lanka had been discovered in
Po1Jparippu in the west coast, Walawe Ganga basin in the soµthern s:oast,
Ktu,liraive/i in the east coast and . Val/ip!lram and Vara!li in the north �p�$,t.
��; .Paranavitana had. to.�o).l.c.ede. that the few megalithic m'.lnumeof.41 a!)d
10
 '74 JOURNAL OF TAMlL STUDIES

urn brials discovered in Sri Lanka were obviously an overflow from S:> uth
Ind'ia. 111 ,ijut unfortunately they were not scientifically studied and dated.
At the moment, it is not possible to go further than the comment of S. Ara­
saratnam, '•Urn burials found in a site north of Puttalam seem to be similar
to those found at Adiccanallur in Tamilnadu. Could this megalithic parent
of the later Dravidian civilisation have spread to Ceylon, and could this
have been the culture that existed in Ceylon, when the Aryans landed
there?''. 80
The north-west coast of Sri Lanka which is geographically the closest
to South India should have been the m:>st exp:>sed to Tamil influence. Cari­
/cam literature mentions Kutiraima/ai as the seat of chieftains like Yeli!l.i and
PiJJa!J Kor�lltl• No place called Kutiraima/ai seems to have existed in
South India ani Venkayya tried to identify it with Kudiraimukhmalai in
Karnataka, outside familnadu. There is a place called Kutiraimalai, quite
close to the megalithic site mentioned above near Puttalam. In connection
with the trade on horses, there is a me::ntion in the Mahavam,a of the Dame.
Jas or people of the Dravid-ian stock in the secon�entury B.C. Apparently,
the Tamils at Kutiraimalai imported horses from Arabia and Persia and sold
them to the kings and nobles of Sri Lanka. 81 Rasanayakam had identified
Mantai of Cankam literature with the modern Mantai (MahiitiJJa in Sinha­
lese, also Mii.to!Jam in Tamil). There is a reference in Cankam literature to
Kut t uva"I Mii.ntai. Here also, no place called Mantai could be located in
Ta�ilnadu. It has been identified with Mangalore of Karnataka 8 2 but this
has not found general acceptance. The basis for the suggestion that KuJ!u·
va11 Mantai was the Mii..:1tai of Sri Lanka was the view that the occurrence
of the adjective was indicative of the ownership outside his own territory. 65
Ccral]; CenkulJiiVa!i is credited with having crushed the KaJampas who had
taken to piracy.u Pliny had referred to the fact that the Indian seas were
infested with piracy. A Cankam verse te·stifies that the KaJamp,is were one
o f the four ancient tribes of Tamilnadu. 6 5 There is definite evidence that the
river now known as Aruvi At:_u among the Tamils and Malwatu Oya among
the Sinhalese, had the .ancient narn� KaJampii.nati. This identificat_ion had
been made by the Mahavamsa referenc:! to the founding of Anuradhagama
(later Anuradhapura) near that river. 8 5 In the map of Ancient Sri Lanka,
attached to the Mahavamsa translation of Wilhelm Geiger, t.his river had
· been given the name Ka1ampa11a1i. This river could have acquired its ancient
name by the Ka1ampa settlement on its basin. In this connection, it is in­
teresting to note that PiJ!a1, Kor.r_a11 was referred to as an ally of the
Ceras. 8 7 When Ce,iku!Juva11 conquered the KaJampiis, places like Kutirai­
malai and Miintai in close proximity to the KaJampanati should have come
under the Cera rule or dominance.
There is evidence· from a·nother source that Mii.n tai must have been
mainly a Tamil settlement.
68
Mahatitta had not been referred to· in any
.ancient doc_ument as nagara or pura. It was always referred to - as Mahil­
' ·1i11apaJla'1a. : · Pa11iJ:1_a(m) n;teans a s�a coast town from the Age of Cankam
I)'
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT SRI l.ANKA 1S
Literature. n This word occurs in this sense, only in the Dravidian-spea­
king areas like Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala and this word does
not�ccur in NJrth Tndia. Therefore it should have been a Dravidian loan
in Pali. The facts that the ancient port in Jaffna was referred to as Jambu­
kolapa11a-ga 70 and that Trincomalee was referred as Gonapa!Jana n in ancj.
ent chronicles of Sri Lanka have their own story to tell. So, these ports
must have been mainly Tamil settlements in ancient Sri Lanka history.
According to H. Ellawala, MahatittapaJ!wga was an urban settlement ml'!-i,.
nly occupied by Tamils, for otherwise, the several waves of South Indian
inva�ions could not have landed there as freely as they did. Jn this light,
it is interesting to note that according to the early chronicles of Sri Lanka,
were Se}1(1 and Gu 1takii, two Tamil horse-traders. Thier country was not
the first two Tamils to rule from Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka speci­
fied so they could have been Tamil chieftains from Kutiraima/ai. Later
in the first century B.C. Elara is said to have ruled from Anuradhapura
for forty four years. The D1pavarbc;a, the earlier chronicle, did not spe- ·
cify the country of Elarii while the fater ·chronicles specified the country as
Co{amanja/am. . So, it is quite possible that Elara too was a native of Sri
Lanka. The later chronicle might have preferred to paint him as a foreig­
ner in order to characterise Du11Jzakarn(l!'i as a national liberator.

NOTES
J. Mahalingam, T.v. Early South Indi­
. an Palaeography. pp. 127-157. Madras,
1,67.
2. Ve1uppillai, A. - Commonness in Early
uld l'aleography of Tamilnadu and
Sri Lanka. !:'aper to be presented to
the Yth Conference -- .::,eminar of
l.A.T.R. in Madurai.
3. i:.undaram, J. - 5emioar on Tamil Ins­
criptions. p. 76 Madras, 1966.
4. Subrahmanya Ayyar, K V. - The Ear­
liest Monuments of the Pandya coun­
try and their ins::riptions. Proceedings
and Traosactions of the Third Orien­
tal Conference. pp. 275-3,-0. Madras,
1924.
5-. Feraa1ndo, P.E.E. - Palaeographical
Development of the B�ahmi Script in
€eylon from 3rd century.B.C. to 7th
century A.D. University of Ceylon.
1<.eview. Vol. VU. pp. 2112�301. Coto-
' mbo, 1949. .,
6. · Mahalingam. T.V. op. cit pp. 158-160.
7. Ram,ln, K.V. - Brahmi Ins:ripuons of
Tamilnadu, an H rstorical Asssesment.
The .,ri Lanka Journal of South Asian
Studies, Vol. I, pp. 64-76· Jaffna. 1 ,76.
8• Pa,anavitana, S. - luscriptions 01 Cey­
lon, Vol I. E:irly Brabmi Inscriptions
Colombo, 1970.
9. Numbers ofinscrip.tions, here and sub­
. ·· sequently, are , given as in �aranavi­
taJia's; .publication (1970). ·356, 357
from Vavuniya Oistrict; ·480 _ from Am-
parai Distnct1 94 from Anuradhapura
District.
10, Sri Lanka had a name lsi-bhiimi. Dtpa­
vamsa. the fourth century 1-'ali chroni­
cle, explains that Mahinda, the sxn of
Asoka, who came to convert Sri Lanka
to Buddhism, was considered a grea&
Isi tKsi) and in his name. the island
came to be called isi-bhiimi It might
have been an attempt to explain away
a name which had s.>me otner origin.
Could this be a corru,>tion of !la111
where s had been SJb�tituted fvr .J
which the Aryan immigra11ts could not
pronounce or trans:ri-�•( iil their
J.mguage. This of cou1s�•.,. �eds fur-
ther investigation. ;-;
1 I. For reference to s:e Isi>Mumi. B.C.
Law (Ed ) - L1pavamsa Chapter
XVH, Verse 109 - I he l eylon Histori­
cal Vol VII Colombo. 1957-�8.
12. Seven poems composed by this poet
are now extant in CaHam Literature.
Akana.•1iiru · 83, 23 I . 3J7; Kur_untokal:
181, 3-�3; 360; Na!:.[.i-rJ.'.li : 366 He ii
referred to as {/attu 1-utantl•·a�ir and
Madurai llattu Putantiva.1iir. The
secon·d desi ,cnation cuuld be explained.
as the author had taken up residence
at Madurai.
13. Pt.h1. 1appiil11i. one of the Ten ldyll11.
line' 191.
14. Nilakania Sastri, K. A. - fti History of
South Jndta, pp, 79-91. Madras, 195S.
76 JOURNI\.L OF TAMIL STUDIES
JS. Pillay, K.K. -· South India and Sri
Lanka, p. 4. Madras. 197S.
t.t;. '3eiger, Wilhelm. - The Mahavamsa or
the Great Chronicle of Ceylon. Chap­
ter Vil - The Consecrating of Vijaya
Colombo, 1960.
11. Nicholas. C. W. and Paranavitana,
S. - A Concise History of Ceylon, p 8.
Colombo, 1961.
18.. Pillai M.E· M - Culture of the Anci­
net Ceras, p. 272. Kovilpatti. 1970.
1 9 ..Navaratnam, C.S - Va:wi and the
Vanniyars, p. 6. Jaffna, 191\0
JO. See·map opposite to p 1 6 of Univer.­
sity of Ceylon History of Ceylon Epi­
graphical and Territoriai. Map of Cey­
lon.
21. Chatterjee, Sunni Kumar• Dravidian,
p. 3. Annamalainagar, 1965
22. Geiger, Wilhel m • A Grammar of the
Sinhalese Language, p 3. Colombo,
1938.
!3. Paranavitana. S. - Early Brahmi Ias­
criptions, P. XC
2'. Mahadeva Sastri , Korada - Historical
Grammar of Telegu, p. 19. Anantapur,
1969.
is. For example, a news it«-m in Ceylon
Daily News of January,20, 1979 quotes
him thus.
!6. Hettiarachchi, D. E. -Sinhalese (Peo­
ples and Languages). University of
Ceylon History of Ceylon, Vol. I,
Book I. Colombo, 19,9.
27. The most famous Su11 Temple at Gona­
arak is-located there near Bubanesvar.
28. Suniti Kumar Chatterjee discounts the
possibility that the early Aryan colo­
nists under Vij<tya of fifth century 8.C.
could have come from Bengal Bengal
was not sufficiently Aryanised during
this period. According to him, they
should have come from Western l h dia.
See Chatterjee, Suniti Kumar - The
Origin and Development of the Ben­
gali Langua2e, p. 15. Second edition.
Calcutta. 1970.
29.. There were intimate ties between Kati­
nga and Sri Lanka in the -medieval
.period from the el.eventh century A.D.
In order to deny Telel!u or South Ind­
ian t ies with Sd Lanka, Paranavitana
built up the Malaysian theory arguing
that Kalinga of Sri Lanka History in
that period was to'be located in Maia·
ysia and not in India. In order to find
evidence for his fantastic theory. he
was claiming to read minute letters in
between Jines in the inscriptions of
Sri Lanka - the so-called interlinear in
scriptions • and wits re-reading and re­
interpreting many published inscrip·
tions. For Paranavitana•s theory, se­
his book, Ceylon and Malaysia, Coloe
mbo, 1956, fo'r _ its un·acc'eptabiltiy,
R A.L.H- Gunawardana - ·Ceylon and
Malaysia A Study ofProfessor Parana­
vitana ·s Research on the relations bet­
ween the two regions' University of
Ceylon Review, Vol. XXV, pp. 1◄4'
and r E.E. Fernando • Sri Vijaya and
Malaysia in Sinhala inscriptions-The
Sri Lanka Journal of the Humanities.
Vol II. No. 2, pp. 138•145. Parade­
niya, 1976.
30. Buhler, G. • The Bhattiprolu Inscrip­
tions Epigraphia lodica, Volume Il, p.
328. Delhi.
31. :Sivaramarnurti. C. - Indian Epigraphr
and Sr>uth Indian scripts-Bulletin,
Madras Government Museum. p. 24.
Madras, 19c6. Also see the -cikkulla
plat�s of Viso:1k11o�in Vikramendravar­
man IC in th� same volume.
32. Satyanarayana, K - A Study of the
History and Culture of the Aodhras.
pp. 2 l4-35. New Delhi, 1975
33. Names like Simhavis�u, Simh�varman,
Narasimhavarman l & II. S1vararna-
rnurti. C. - opp. cit , p. 22.
34. Paranavitana S. - Early Brahrni Ins­
criptions, p. LXXXIX
35- Nicholas. C W and P:.raoavitan:t. S. •
A Concise History of Ceylon, p. 9.
36. For a list of these kin!!s, see
Ellawala, H. • Social History of Early
Ceylon. Colombo, 1969-
37. r.1endis, G. C- Problems of Ceylon
History, pp. 47-48. Colombo.
38. Piilay, K K. • op. cit., pp. 17-22.
39. Kanapathippillai. K. • l{attu ur ppey•
arka{-/!atw Va{vum va{amum-
Madras, 1962
. 40. Arunasala Kounder, K. - Paripataf
Cor.PC?Uvuka!, p. 18. Madras, 1955.
41. Inscriptions number 406, 549 and SSl
from Amparai District and 556 SS9
561-56S and 567-56) from Harnbantota
District.
42. Paranavitana - History of Ceylon,
p 94.
43. Paraoavit'\na - Sinhalayo, p.8. Colo­
mbo. 1967.
44. Ibid, p 4
45. Paranavitana - History of Ceylon pp.
82 83
46. Paranavitana - Sinhalayo. p. I.
47_ Paranavitana - Early Brahmi Inscrip­
tions. p. XC.
' 48; Mahalingam, T.V. opp. cit., pp. 161-
192.
49. Nagasamy, R. Tami!i Kalvettuka(
Kalvettiyal. pp. 48-80 Madras, 1972. :
Raman. K V.- opp. cit., p. 72
50. Dani, A H - Indian Palaeography, p.
21&.. Oxford. 1963.
51. Voge/, J. Pb. Catalogue of the Arc­
haelogic ,I Museum at Mathura, p. 27.
Allahabad, 1910.
52. '. Chanda, Rarnaprasad • Medieva.l Scul.
pture in Eastern India-Journal of the
Department of Letters University of
Calcutta, III, pp. 22S 246-Calcutta,
1920.
Monumental Inscriptions in all parts
of the World-Calcutta Review LXIX,
Art 5-p. us.....:calcutta, 18-7'.
 Digitized by Viruba
TAMIL INFLUENCB IN ANCIENT SRI LANKA 77
53. Geiger, Wilhelm's translation of the 61. Pillay, K-K. • op. cit., pp. 31, 39.
original Pali version. 6Z. Pillai. M.E. M. • op: cit., p. 242
S4. Hettiarachchi, Tilak - History of King 63. Rasanayakam, G. - Ancient Jaffoa-,
ship in Ceylon -p. 134-Colombo Madras , 1926.
)972. n Patirr_uppattu V Teo was in praise of
SS. Farmer, B H. - Ceylon, A divided Kata? pi!:,akkii!liya -..ii ke1u Ku{tuv�•­
nation, pp. 6-15-Oxford, 1963 • KuUuvan who pushed out the sea with
56, Furer Haimendorf, H. V. - New Aspe­ his spear'. This epihet must be refer­
cts of the Dravidian Problem-Tamil ring to his victory overseaa. Cilappati·
Culture, Vol. 11, No. 2-Madras, 1953. kiram V'lilttukkiitai refers to his vic­
57. Meenakshisundaran, T.P. • <\ Histo1y tory over the Katampis.
ofTamil Language, p. 158-Poona, 65, Puranl 'lliru 335 : 7 8
1965. 65. G!igcr, Wilhelm's translation of Maha.
58, Kamesvari, T.M.. - The Chronology of vamsa, p. 58 .
Dravidian Languages A Lexico statis­ 67. Akanii�O!:,u 143-
tic Analysis. Dravidian Linguistics
68:
(Seminar Papers), Proceedings of the 69. Ellawala, H • op. cit•, p. 118.
Vithiananthan. S. - Tami/ar Cillpu, P�
Seminar on Comparative Dravidian, 188-Kandy, 1954.
pp. 269-274--Annamalainagar, 19,-J.
59. Paranavitana - Sinhalayo. p. 9. 7J. Ellawila. H. • op. cit., p. tl9.
60. Arasaratnam. S. • Ceylon-p. 99- 71. See map opposite to p 30 of Nicholas,.
New Jersey, 1964. c.W. and Paranavitana, S. • opp. cit-
 Digitized by Viruba

Tamil Influence in Ancient Sri Lanka

with Special Reference to Early
Brahmi Inscriptions
A. Veluppil/ai

PART II
This part of the paper will mainly deal with Tamil influence$ on the
-early Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka. Certain words occuring in these
inscriptions appear to be of Dravidian origin. An attempt will be made to
trace such words. Some linguistic features occuring in the early Brahmi
inscriptions in Sri Lanka occur also in Tamil- Brahmi inscriptions. A com­
parative study will be made of such occurences. Some expressions in Sri
Lanka Brahmi epigraphs have their parallels in contemporary and subse­
-quent Tamil literature. They too will be pointed out.
The methodology of Paranavitana in the study of the Sri Lanka Brahmi
jnscriptions was to trace Indo-Aryan etymologies for every word. Besides
-dictionaries in Sanskrit, Prakrit and Pali, be had also made use of literary
works and inscriptional usages of the Indo-Aryan languages. Even when he
found expressions not amenable to this methodology, he manages to squeeze
-out some ingenious explanation through his fertile imagination to explain
the linguistic features in the inscriptions. Th:re should be a limit to this
exercise, as otherwise, the study becomes unscientific and anything becomes
-capable of being derived from anything. Such a study may result in tracing
the entire vocabulary of the Dravidian to Indo-Aryan origin. R. Swami­
natha Ayyar had tried to prove that the Dravidian belongs to the same
family as lndo-Aryan and had criticised Caldwell and some other Western
1.cholars for advocating a separate family for the Dravidian languages. 7 •

Rev.Gnanapragasar had tried to prove that Tamil was the mother to all
the language of the world. 7 a The Western scholars, who worked on the Dravi­
dian languages, have shown that loans from lndo-Aryan to Dravidian was
not a one-way traffic and that there were loans from Dravidian to Indo-Aryan
also. Caldwell, Gundert and Kittel have given separate lists of words which
each of them considered loans from the Deavidian to the Sanskrit langu­
age. 76 G.C. Uhlenbek who worked on the ludo-European etymologies after
the findings of these scholars had been published, had failed to take note
-of them probably because some loans suggested by the above mention�d
Dravidologists were suspect.
 RARLY BRAH Ml INSCtOP rlONS i

It was Caldwell who first tried to frame rules to differentiate the

Dravidian Joans from the main body of Sanskrit vocabulary. 7 6 T.Burrow
brought his profound scholarship in Sanskrit and Dravidian to bear on this
problem aod developed a fairly scientific meth:>dology, improving the
methodology of Caldwell, to trace Dravidian loan in Sanskrit. 7 • Just be­
cause a word occurs in an ancie:it Indo-Aryan document, it is no guarantee·
that the word belongs to the Indo-Aryan. The same word, occurring first in
an Indo-Aryan document, and occuring later in a Dravidian document, also
does not guarantee that the word belongs to the Jndo-Aryan and that the­
word was a loan to the Dravidian. This kind of folk methodology is too­
simplistic and unscientific. Burrow's criterions are as follows:

The first and most obvious essential is of course to make sure that
the word has no Jndo-European etymology. Since the lndo-European
vocabulary of Sanskrit has long been worked out and established, and
as it is hardly likely that much that is new remains to be found in this
field, the investigator with even a moderate knowledge of Iodo-Euro­
pean linguistics is here on fairly safe ground, and can proceed with
reasonable confidence. The question that next arises, is whether a
Sanskrit word of unknown etymology may not itself have been borro­
wed into Dravidian and not necessarily be derived from that source. As
a matter of caution, the following tests should be applied. Firstly, the
currency of the word, in the Dravidian languages, is to be considered.
If a word occurs widely in Drav dian and is of the nature of a basic
element in the vocabulary, a corresponding word in Sanskrit, if without
Indo-European etymology may reasonably be considered a borrowing
from Dravidian. Secondly, a word is shown to be Dravidian if it is
clearly to be derived from some Dravidian root. A third point to be
considered is the an tiquity of the \vord in Dravidian. The number of
Sanskrit loan-words in the early texts of Tamil literature is surprisingly
small, and consequently the occurrence of 3 word in Tamil so early is.
an argument for its being Dravidian; if on the other hand, it only
appears late, it is more likely to have been borrowed. Fourthly, the­
phonetics of the words in question may often be used to establish that a
word is originally Dravidian. Fifthly a comparison of the meanings o f
the Sanskrit and Dravidian words is often useful.

Since Burrow bas raised the methodology to a scientific level, Mayrho­

fer who worked on lndo-Aryan and Sanskrit etymologies had given recogni­
tion to Joans from Dravidian. n Paranavitana did not seem to be aware of
such developments. At the same time as Paraoa vitana •s edition of the early
Brabmi inscriptions of Sri L1nka came out, Asko Parpola was again reite­
rating this methodology, "If the word does not have a water-tight Indo-
 Digitized by Viruba
8 JOURNAL OF l'AMJL STUDIES

European etymology the Sanskrit word is more likely to have been borro­
wed from Dravidian than vice-versa, especially if it contains such charac­
teristically Dravidian phonemes as the cerebrals and denotes some specifi­
cally Indian or Hindu concept". 7 8 There ·is only one word, ma,umakat1(a)
'grand-son' which Paranavitan a could not dismiss as not belonging to Tamil.
This word occurs in five or six places in ancient cave inscriptions and in five
-places in the later cave inscriptions. 711 Rev. Dhammaratna Thero too had
mentioned that this was a definite loan from Tamil. 8 0

Like the word marumakat1(a), th:re was another word perumaka. This
ubiquitous word occurs in a large number of localities in almost all parts of
Sri Lanka. Its feminine form perumaka{, which Paranavitana prefers to
nad as perumakalu. had also been found. n No corresponding form which
could fit into the context had been found in Indo-Aryan. One similar form
from Tamil is perumaka(1)! perumakal. Paranavitana is reluctant to accept
that the form could be from T�il. He derives the form parumaka from
pramukha. In inscriptions from Andhra Pradesh, Pamuka was the form
occurring for pramukha. 82 It is quite difficult to derive paramuka from the
Sanskrit pramukha. The derivatives could be either pamuka or piramuka•
In fact, the latter form is available in Tamil and lexicographers like those
-0f the Madras Tamil Lexicon recognise this form as a loan from Sanskrit.
Though the form parumaka had been found in such abundance, yet it is
-strange that only in a stray case, the form parumaka had been found,
Paranavitana considers this stray case to be supporting his derivation by
being a form in transition but the present writer is sceptical and considers
this an engraver"s error. Paranavitana finds it difficult to brush aside peru­
makat1, the Tamil form. He says that the Tamil forms occurs in Carikam
literature of the second century A.D. meaning that this form had not existed
in �awii in an earlier period and asserts that even the Tamil form could be
a derivative of Sanskrit pramukh. Firstly, it should be investigated whether
parumaka and perumaka (n) could be phonemically alternate forms. The
-possiblity of such alternation had been recognised by Caldwell and Burrow
who of course give different reasonings. Caldwell has shown that a evinces
a tendency to be weakened into e while in Telugu and Malayalam, this
vowel is less subject to change. 8 " In Sri Lanka Brabmi probably because
o f the heavy Telugu influence from the Satavahana and Ikshvaku regfmes
the form parumaka, instead of perumaka, might have been referred. The
relationship between these two terms could be explained according to the
fourth rule of Burrow, where he speaks about the phonetics of the word.
That Sri Lanka Prakrit was using a loan from Tamil in this case could be
.gathered fropi his argument which is as follows:
There is: no reason why ii Sanskrit a should give Tamil u, Ka; Te.o (in
the present case Tamil e) if Dravidian wete the borrower, but assuming
 EAltLY BRAHMl INSCKIPTIONS

that Sanskrit is the borrower, the correspondence is natural. Sanskrit

has no short o (in the present case. short e) and consequently has
substituted short a. ----There is a similar correspondence between
Sanskrit short a and Dravidian e in the following word which is origi­
nally Dravidian. Skt. arka-calotropis gigaota/Tamil erukku, Ma.erikka,
.Ka. erke, yakka, Tu. ekkamii le, ekkume".86

Secondly it should be investigated whether parumaka occurs many

.centuries earlier in Sri Lanka, compared to perumaka(n) in Carikam litera•
ture. Paraoavitaoa is very liberal in giving an early date to the Brahmi ins•
criptions of Sri Lanka while very parsimonious in pushing forward the date
of the Cankam literature. The earliest Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka and
Tamilnadu were once dated in the third century 8.C. as contemporanaeous
with Asokan inscriptions mainly on the evidence of the chronicles of Sri
Lanka. Paranavitana was responsible for dating of the early Brahmi inscrip.
tions. According to Paranavitana, the name Uti, u mentioned in two ins­
.criptions from Mihintale, must be referring to Uttiya, a brother of Deva.
nampiya Tissa and should belong to the end of the third century or the
beginning of the second century B C. As the genealogy of Uti had not been
_given in Mihintale inscriptious, it is too much to identify him with a ruler
mentioned in chronicles, composed after some centuries. Likewise, Parana­
vitana's attempt to identify rules mentioned in the inscriptions 86 with
th0se in the chronicles does not carry conviction. When Dani proposed that
the earliest Sri Lanka inscriptions were later than the beginning of the
Christian era, the present writer criticised his views. 8 7 But after going
through the volume edited by Paranavitana, the present writer feels that a
re-examination of many assumptions about these inscriptions is necessary.
Saddhamangala Karunaratna raised a valid point when he suggested that it
was not necessary to over-emphasise the accounts of the Kavya style Sri
Lanka chronicles but he himself did not go far. 88

As for the date of the Ca,ikam literature, there are wide differences of
opinion. Traditional accounts claim hoary antiquity for the Ca,ikams and as
a reaction to such claims, few modern scholars have brought too forward
the date of the Carikam literature. 8 9 There is general agreement that the·
end of the Cankam Period is about the third century A.D. The controversy
is about the beginning of the Carikam period, that is. the period in which
the Carikam literature began to be composed. The recent trend is to push
back the date of the Carikam again. By computer analysis of the linguistic­
features, V.I. Subramaniam puts forward the view that the beginning of the
Carikam Age was about 180 B.C. 9 0, Kami] Zvelebil dates it to 150 B.c. ••
M.G.S. Narayanan pushed the date to the fourth century B.C. 9 9
2
 Digitized by Viruba
10 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDIES

In order to see whether parumaka O and perumaka11 could be equated ..

it is only proper to study how the word perumaka11 occurs in Tamil litera­
ture. 116 Paranavitana quoted one instance and dated in the second century
A.D. About twenty-five instances occur in Car!k-am literature.
1. Kur_untokai : 200-6; 328-3.
O{vii ! i{ainar perumaka!!
2. Nan:_ic,ai : 52-9; 150-1; 265-3
viI/or perumaka11
3. Ainkur.u11ur_u : 458-3
piic,ar perumakalJ
4. Patir_,:_uppattu : 58-8
vayavar perumakalJ
5. Akanii11uru : 69-17; 83-9; 1 13-3; 152-15; 253-18; 338-18; 342-6;.
37S-JO.
akavunar perumakalj

6. · Purana11ur:.u : 88-3; 157-7; 387-28

Kur.avar perumaka'l
1. Cir_upii!l iir:.r_uppa/ai : 86, 122.
iiviyar perumaka11
8. Perumpiif1iir_r_upptl /ai : 101
l'ayavar perumakQ1J:
An example. each from the eight texts of Cankam literature has been
given above. The meaning of the word can be defined as the leading
member of a particular group. In Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions. it proved
difficult to find the meaning of the word parumoka but Paranavitana hit
upon the meanir,g 'chief•. A comparative study with the usage of the
parallel form i o Tamil literature could give the clue to the meaning of the
word. The meaning 'chief' for perumaka!! will not fit all the contexts. The
feminine form perumaka{ occurs in Post-Carikam literature in Jaina
Cilappatikiiram and Buddhist Ma!limekalai.9 5 The word perumka11 becomes
perumii!J: by the disappearance of the intervocalic-k- and the assimilation of
the two vowels. Four instances, one in Patirruppatt u and three in Kalittokai
are available from Carikam anthologies. The former text has 'cenniyar
perumlln' "(85-3). The form peruma11 becomes more popular in subsequent
Tamil literature. The form of address for .this form in Tamil is 'peruma'.
About one-hundred forms of address are available in Carikam literature, of
which nearly half are from Pur..anii.!]ur_u. Two examples from this text are
as follows :
 EARLY BRAHMl INSCRIPTIONS 11
l'a�avarampa1;1ai n;yo peruma (2-16)
kii11akaniiJa1;1ai niyo peruma (5-3)
The form parumaka is also capable of another interpretation. Though
1he usual form found in Tamil literature for the second half of the word
'maka' is maka1;1 / maka? the word maka(vu) is recognised in Tolkiippiyam,
1be classical Tamil grammar. The terminations, -n and -1 are mere gender
·markers. The word 'maka• means 'off-spiriog'. But as in Sanskrit putrii
and Prakrit puta, Tamil makaJJ also has wide: connotation. ln the Mauryan
empire, the provinces were placed under viceroys,kumcira (son of the king)
-0r Aryaputra (brother or any other member of the royal family). 9 8 ln
the Bhattiprolu inscription, the term puta had been used to denote a
mercantile corporation as in shaga [th]inigamaputanain, 'by the sons of the
Shaga/hi nigama'. 9 7 1·he change of -maka!1 into -ma11 in perumakat1 /
perumiin had already been mentioned. This is confirmed by Skt. Kera/aputra
becoming Ceramii!1 in Tamil. The rulers of Kerala were refered to as
Keralaputas in Asokan inscriptions, as Coe/obothros in Plioy, Korobothros in
Ptolemy and Kepobotos in Periplus. In contemporary classical Tamil,
1hey were always referred to as Cerama,J. So, this -mii!l stands definitely
for maka11. In this light, it seems quite strange to note chieftains of
.contemporary Tamilnadu using this mii11 suffixe a

Atikamii1;1; Atiyamii?1 NeJumii1.1 Ar1d; Atiyamiin Eli11i.

Oymii!1 NalliyakkoJal'l; (JymiilJ Vi//iyata[l.
Ma/aiyamiiJJ. TirumuJikkari; Malaiyamiil'J. Co[iya Eniiti Tirukka,;zrian.
To'(l!aimii11 l{antiraiyalJ.
Na111'J.a11 Ve!miil'J. Ve!iyan Titta[l.
Ve{avikkoma1 Tevi
Tiima11 To!1r.ikko!1

All these chieftains ruled the peripheral regions of Tamilnadu. The

Pandya rulers were never using the -mii n suffix:. Could Sri Lanka might
have been considered the southern peripheral region of the Pandyanadu, as
the equivalent - make form was very popular in Sri Lanka epigraphs? If
maka were to be explained this way, the earlier half paru- has to be
.explained as referring to Sri Lanka. The word par in Tamil means pearl
bank. 9 9 These pearl banks lie along the coast of Arippu, bordering the Gulf
-0f Mannar. The coastal land mark to the north is the island of Mannar
.and Kutiraimalal Point in the south. It is interesting to note . that the
.coastal area between Mannar and Puttalam was known as Muttukara.10 �
This ex:pression meanmg 'pearl coast' is Tamil. The type of alternation
par I paru can be shown to have existed in classical Tamil. 1 0 ' According to·
Paranavitana, Kautilya mentions Sri Lanka under the- name Piirasamudra ·
 Digitized by Viruba
12 JOURNAL OF TAMIL sruoIES

:and this was the fore-runner of the later Greek Pa/aesimoundu. 1 0 2 Dealing
with the story of the visit of one of the previous Buddhas to Sri Lanka r
Mahavamsa mentions the name Varadipa for the island. These forms have­
some resemblance to each otqer and it looks certain that Sri Lanka or at
least its north western coast was calJed Plir I Paru. Paranavitana admits the­
possibility that the early . Aryan immigrants to Sri Lanka were traders­
attracted by pearls in the north-west. It was the north-west settlement
that developed into the dominant group in Sri Lanka. So, parumaka could
have denoted the ruler of Paru.

Expressions like ve{ (Velu, as read by Paranavitana), aya and bara /'
barata are found in the early Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka. It is­
remarkable that there were people called ve!, iiy and batoi in and around
the extreme southern tip of the Indian peninsula which is situated in v�ry
close proximity to Sri Lanka. There was a Ve!liiJu (Ve! +niiJu), the country
of the Ve {s, on the western side of the southern extremity of South India.
Besides that, many chieftains rulin_g in different parts of Tamilnadu were­
<:.alling themselves Ve{i,, the plural form of Ve{. Some of the rulers with
.
Vel in their personal names in Carikam Tamil literature are as follows.ta.

. JleliyalJ Velmiin;
irunkofil; . Veliivikkoman;
. -
Vel. Pari;
V;rai Ve£man; . Jlip {ma; etc.

The form read as Velu by Paranavitana occurs in sixteen places in

various parts of Sri Lanka. t 0 "' He has read a form as Calu in fiv e places.
-On closer examination of the photographs of inscriptions, the present
writer finds that they can be read as Ve/ too. The form Calu in a record
from Hambantota District could have been a mistake for Ve/. Th� word
. ..
VeI is closely connected with Ve Iii/a, •cultivators' and the ni.odern inter-
pretation is that they were land-owners. 10 & The Ve{ir of Tamilnadu also-
claim a:n improbable north-Indian origia. 1 0 8 ParanavJtana, of course, takes­
it as a personal name.

_The form read as aya occurs in about forty inscriptions in various­

parts of the country. 1 0 1 Paranavitana takes it to be a derivation from·
Sanskrit Arya, Prakrit ayya 'noble' and says that it serves as a title prefixed
to names of princes, sometimes comes after the personal name. The Ay
.chieftains were ruling AYnliJu, the country of the Li.ys in the territory round
.about Cape Comorin. Though they had to accept Pandya suzerainty- even
1n the Cankam period, they were relatively independent and they main-·
.4ained th,eir identity till about the Co[a expansion in the eleventh century
A.D. Mahalingam suggested that the terms of Aya of Sri Lanka epigraphs
.
.and Ay of T.amil Carikam literature might be identical because of
 EARLY BRAHMI INSCRIPTIONS 13-

geographical proximity as well as of the close relations between the Pandya

and the Sri Lanka even at the beginning of Sri Lanka history. On
linguistic grounds, the forms are identical as ya can be read as and the
Sri Lanka records usually prefer the short vowel. But unlike in Tamilnadu.
where 1.ys were found in a small locality, the term aya bad been found in
records of almost all areas of the Island. In a later age, the Ays of South
India derived their origins from 1.yar 'shepherds• and claimed to be
descendants of the Yadava clan of Lord Krishna. If the Ays were just iiyar­
'sbepherds', it is quite possible that leading shepherds were wieldmg.
political power in certain parts of Lank a.

There is another expression bata, which Paranavitana derives from

Sanskrit bhatr, Prakrit bhattu ·lord' used before proper names as honorific·
particle. Ptolemy refers to Batoi in Tamilnadu coast between the Pandya
and the Cola kingdoms and refer to their ports and towns. The Aiois and
the Batoins had their metropolis also. There are about one hundred anci
fifty references to 'bata' in Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions. 1 0 8 There is.
another expression •barata' which also Paranavitana derives from Sanskrit.
bhatr inflected from bharata 'lord', as honorific epithet for personal names.
About twenty records refer to this word and they were also found in.
different parts of the country. Paranavitana takes the two expressions bata·
and barata as of same significance. On Ptolemy's description also, it may
be possible to take Batoi and Parava (Paratava) as identicat.n° The,
similarity of names should be given due weightage but evidence is too­
scanty to propose definite relationship.

Some forms in Sri Lanka Brahmi inscnpt1ons can be pointed to be

Dravidian. Paranavitana refers to an expression 'putalaha' in a Brahmi
inscription from Pulmoddai in Trincomalee District. Paranavitana himself
considers it a derivation of putra/ puta and refers to the Tamil form
outa/va(11) meaning 'son•. If read as in Tamil Brahmi inscriptions the form
itself can be read as 'putalva'. In an inscription from Kegalle District,
numbered 778, Paranavitana has the reading •Kotaya Velu'. This ko/aya
is derived by him from Sanskrit koHhya, derivative of ko�tha meaning 'of
fort', So, he interprets the phrase ·commander of a garrison of fort'. Thi�
Velu should be taken as Vel. as the present writer had already pointed out.
The word 'kotaya• could stand for 'kottaiya • as in Tamil Brahmi inscrip­
tions also, single consonant is preferred for long consonants. The word
1
kottai' signifies •fort' in Tamil and •a' is a possessive case sign. So, ko\aya.
v�J. in Tamil also, will signify something like the meaning given by Parana•
vitana. An inscription from Amparai District, numbered 1 175, mentions.
kuti which Paranavitana translates as 'monastic cell' and explains that kuti
 Digitized by Viruba
14 JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDIES

in Prakrit is 'cell'. Tbe Tamil word kuJi meaning 'house, abode, home
family, lineage, town, tenants', etc., is Dravidian as pointed out b/
T. Burrow and M. B. Emeneau. 111 In Ca,ikani literature, it also denotes
·the settlement of tbe hilly tract. 119 It is interesting that in this inscription
from Amparai District, it refers to an abode in the hill. Further more, the
-conotation of Kuti 'lineage' is very important in the modern social and
religious life of the Tamils of Batticaloa and Amparai Districts and it is
..quite possible that this concept was important in that period also.

There are reference to nagara 'town• or 'city' in about eight records

found in different parts of the country. In two of these instances from
Puttalam District the term occurs as nakara. As Puttalam District in Sri
Lanka is located very close to South India, opposite to Cope Comorin -
·Tuticorio area, it is quite possible that this phonetic change was due to
·strong Tamil influence in the area.

In Sanskrit, nagara means big tow-a or city. In Tamil the word nakar
is very productive and forms like nakar, nakaram, nakari and nakarikam
.are found. Words like nii.ka, ikam, niikarikar, niikariki, niikarikam, niikar_ikar
and nii.karikkarar originated from Tamil •nakar•. The word nakar has six
meanings in Tamil while nakaram has five meanings. The word nakar has
the meanings house, mansion, palace, temple, festival -ground and town.
Thus, it is possible to trace the evolution of meanings of nakar in Tamil
-only.1 1 11 But in Ca,ikam literature, this term which occurs in more than a
hundred places, rarely denotes a big town. According to the ancient usage
in Sri Lanka chronicles, the words gama (grama) and nagara seem to have
been used indifferently. 1 1 ' lt is quite possible that the snuation existed
oeca'use in the early settlements of Sri Lanka, the Aryan speakers and the
Dravidian speakers were found together. Burrow argued that this word
was Dravidian and the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary has included this
;item. 1 1 5 Sunlti Kumar Chatterjee also felt that this was a word of
Dravidian. 1 ' 11

There are. other words i n Sri Lanka records that betray Dravidian
-connections. At Sigiriya in Matale District had been fo1,10d_a� inscription,
numbered �68 wluch has the form riri as an honorific epithet. Paranavitana
-derives it from Sanskrit Sri. Prakrit Siri and compares it to tiru of Tamil.
Sanskrit Sri and Tamil tiru are synonymous and it is qute possible that the
Tamil form developed from the Sanskrit form. In that case. the Sigiriya
inscription can be considered to preserve an intermediate form. An inscrip­
tion from Puttalam District numbered 1020 has the feminine form naga
which Para_navitana takes to be nangi::, "younger sisters... According to
-Paranavitana, nanga is an E{u word. The designation. E{u denoted the
 P.ARLY BRAHMI INSCIUP flONS 15

taoguage used in Sri Lanka, sometimes considered at present as Pure

Sinhalese. (of Pure Tamil or Sentamil) before that language succumbed
to large scale Sanskritisation from the fifth century A.D. Whatever that.
may be, there is a Tamil word nalikai, one of the meanings of which is 'a
lady of distinction• as given in Cu [amapi Nighar,;u. That meaning also
will fit the context in that inscription. In Matale District. another inscrip­
tion numbered 826 mentions pa<Ja. This is the Prakrit form for Sanskrit
PiiJ;i<jya, according to Paranavitana. A later inscription from Aukana in
the same District mentions pa<Jagama. So, this could be Pap<Jya-gru.mam.
These references had some connections with the Pandyas. Another word.
of possible Dravidian origin from these records is 'mala'. An inscription
numbered 202 from Anuradhapura District mentions Pusa- malana which
Pa:ranavitana restores in 'Sanskrit as Pusya-malla, genitive plural. He
derives 'mala' from Sanskrit and Prakrit malla ·champion'. This word
occurs in other records in Vavuniya and polonnaruwa Districts also. The­
Dravidian etymological Dictionary takes this word ma//ma/la,! as Dravidian
in origin. 1 1 7
Few more forms in Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions could be considered
this way. Paranavitana has read bako i n ,nscription numbered 295 from
Polonnaruwa District. He has derived this word from Sanskrit and Prakrit
bhaga and compared it to Elubu. meaning 'share'. The present writer ftnds.
that the word could be read as baku also. In that case, it could be said to
stand for paku (pariku, as sometimes represented in Tamil Brahmi inscrip-­
tions also) in Tamil. This paku/ pa,iku is also an item in the Dravidian
Etymological Dictionary.11 s- The inscription number 295 from Polonnaruwa
District has the word paravepi which Paranavitana bas translated as 'heri­
table land•. The usual word in Sinhalese is pravepi is the usual form in_
Tamil and it is in common use. Inscription 768 from Ratnapura District
mentions what Paranavitana reads as aya-keraha. Keraha is interpreted as
genitive of Kera which Pzranavitana compared to Sanskrit Kerata and
Tamil Cera which occurs as Kira in the Dipavamsa. This form from Sri>
Lanka could be an intermediate form between Tamil and Sanskrit names.
There is another form ayimara in inscriptions from 6 i O and 684 in
Hambantota District. Paranavitana, as is usual with him, takes this to be·
a derivative of Sanskrit Aryaman, name of a Vedic deity. This expressio n
also occurs in inscription 1097 from Puttalam District and 1097 from
Kurunegala District. G.C. Mendis, in another context, admits that the
name Mar_a suggested a connection with the Pandya royal family.1 u
The names of seven PiiQgya rulers with this title were available in Carikam
literature. 1 2 0 Puttalam and Kurunegala Districts were in close proximity
to the pandyas and .Ays. The discovery of two records in Hambantota
District is especially significant when compared to the appearance of fish.
 Digitized by Viruba
16 JOUkNAL O P TAMIL SfUOl1'.S

-symbols in a number of inscriptions in the District. There is another word

.abi appearing in 18 of Anuradhapura District, 272 of Polonnaruwa District
and 994 of Kurunegala District. Paranavitana derived this feminine form
from Sanskrit amba with i suffix erroneously added and interprets this as an
honorific title attached to names of princess. This form is very similar to
Tamil avvai/r.mmai, 'mother'. 1 2 1 The interchange of va and ba bas also
been noted as one of the grammatical features in the inscriptions of the
·period. In BeJ Ja Kur_umba, a Dravidian language, abbi stands for mother
.and in Tulu, another Dravidian language, appi stands for mother.1 2 2 Even
the Sanskrit word ambii bas been traced to Dravidian origin. 1 2 8

Another point of resemblance that may be observed between the

Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka and Tamilnadu is the occurrence of
-similar forms of words of lndo-Aryan origin. Kasaba occurs as a personal
name in Anuradhapura, Trincomalee and Kurunegala Districts.1 u
Paranavitana derives it from Sanskrit Kasyappa and Prakrit Kassappa and
l'efers to the name of a sage and a previous Buddha. Ku.sapa11· occurs at
Alakarmalai, near Madurai. KuJubika occurs in Anuradhapura District. 1 u
Paranavitana traces it to Sanskrit and Prakrit Ku/umbika •a householder··
Kutumpika11 occurs at TiruppararlkufJ.r:_um near Madurai. This Kutumpika11
it is interesting to note, claims to be a Lankan. Kuvira 1 2 0 which occurs at
j\mparai and Anuradbapura Districts, bas been derived by Paranavitana
from Kubera Kubira. Kuvira occurs at Me//upaJJi near Madurai. AriJla
was mentioned as a great Buddhist missionary in the Asokan period to
have come to Sri Lanka while Arita11 occurs at .J..'laimalai near Madurai.

There are some striking similarities in the grammatical features ol

Tamil Brabmi inscriptions and Sri Lanka Brahrni imcriptions. The vowel
-system of Sinhalese has ae vowel, both short and long. Jt is remarkable
that BeJ!a Kurumba, a Dravidian language now spoken in Nilgiris District
-0f Tamilnadu but claimed to be formerly prevalent in Kiiifcipuram area,
has this phoneme. 1 2 7 Paranavitana bas enumerated in detail, in the form
-0f rules, the grammatical features of Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions. Some
-0f these rules are equally applicable to the language of the Tamil Brahmi
inscnpttons. Some of the common rules are as follows : The most striking
-0f the phonetic changes is the shortening of long vowels. The phoneme
-exchanges into i. At the beginning of a word, only a single consonant can
remain. As a rule, consonants that are aspirated in the Old Indian and
Middle Indian stages are found without aspiration in the documents. The
-0ccurrence of v in place of an intervocalie p was noticed. Compound
,consonants are assimilated, the second prevailing among equals and the
stronger prevailing among unequals. A nasal before a mute is elided.
The sentence structure was to state the subject in a word in the nominative
 EARLY BRAHMI INSCRIPTIONS 17

.case with its qualifying words preceding it where they are necessary and to·
_give the predicate also in the nominative case. These observations of
Paranavitana on the language of Sri Lanka Brahmi inscriptions, with slight
modifications, are equally relevant to Tamil Brahmi inscriptions. Some o(
the grammatical features of Old Sinhalese, as given by Paranavitana,
became important subsequently in Tamil and other Dravidian languages.
Sounds between vowels change to their c<,rrespondent sonants,. Based oa
this rule, Caldwell developed the theory of the convertibility of surds into
-sonants. 1 2 8 As in Pali and Prakrits, all stems in Old Sinhalese and in a
vowel, those ending in-a being by far the most numerous. Telugu follows
this trend, the only difference being, most stems there end in-u. The South
Indian spoken Tamil approximates to Telugu in this respect. South India
and Sri Lanka must have had a similar linguistic background, otherwise it
is difficult to explain why Prakrit, the then lingua franca of South Asia was
undergoing changes in Sri Lanka in consonance with the lingui�tic situation
in South India.

A proper assessment of archaeological and epigraphical evidence in

relation to the possibilities of the geographical location of Sri Lanka should
be made for a proper history of ancient Sri Lanka to emerge. Too insular
an attitude and biassed thinking are anachronisms in the modern age. The
Tamil contribution19 9 to ancient Sri Lanka history is not as little as it
sometimes made out.

NOTES
72. Swaminatha Aiyar, R. • Dravidian
Theories, pp. 1-574 Madras, 1965.
73. Onanapragasar, Rev. - An Etvmologi.
cal and Comparative Lexicon of the
Tamil Language, Vol. I, Parts 1-o­
Jaffna, 1938-46.
74. Caldwell, Robc:rt - A Comparative
Grammar of the Dravidian or South
Indian Family of Languages. Third
edition, Reprint. Madras. 1956.
Gundert, H. Die dravidschen Elemente
in Sanskrit• ZDMG 23, pp, 517-530.
1869.
-;5, Caldwell - op cit., pp. 566-567.
76. Burrow, T. Coilected Papers oo Dravi•
di,111 Linguistics - A_onamalainagar.
1963. The relevant paper eotitled' Some
Loan words in Sanskrit' was published
first in the Transactions of the
Philological Society, 1946.
77. Mayrhoffer, M. Kurygafasstes etymo­
logiekhes Worterbuch des Altind,scon
(io progre,s). Heidelber_e, 1953 ff.
78. Parpola. Asko - Proto Dravidian and
Sanskrit in Reconstructing the Earliest
· Form of Hinduism / Notes oo Metho-
3
dology, Procoedings of the Third Inter
national Conference • Seminar, I.A.
T.R., p. 30. Paris, 1970-
79. The usage of this word was widespread
as it was found in different districts
such as Aouradhapura, Polonnaruwa,
Amparai, Moneragala and Kurunegala
Districts even in the age of the mos't
ancient records so far discovered in Sri
Lanka. So, Paraoavitao.i would not
have liked to accept i t as a Tamil
word. So, his entry in the Glossary
reads as follows: marumaka11a. [Elu
munmburu, ofT. marumakan] , descen­
dant]. grandson; He wants to go to
the absurd length of deriving maruma•
kana from mu1111mburu just to distort
historyParanavitana claims tohave read
vemarukana in an inscription from
Hambantota District.. As the photo­
graphic plate for this inscription had'
not bee11 puolisbed. it is not possil:)le·
for the present writer to check whe1her
it also.could stand for marumakan pre-:
ceded by some Tamil word as a�
adjective.
 Digitized by Viruba
ts JOURNAL OF TAMIL STUDll!S
80. )}'bammaratoa Thero, Rev. -The In­
fluence of the Tamil Language on Sin•
bala Letters, Proceedings of the First
Conference - Seminar or· l . A- T. R.,
Vol. 11, p. 801 Kuala-Lumpur, 1966.
SI. This fornt bad been recorded in five
epigraphs; two from Anuradhapura
District, one from Vavuniya District,
one from Hambantota District and one
from Ratnapura District. Paranavitana
claims to have f,JUnd a form �aruma·
kali in Kurunegala District. where he
says that tb'c. p,roper feminine ending i
had been aoded. Unfortunatelv, it is
not possible to check this record also
as photographic plate for this record
bad not been published. The relevant
numbers for - records here are 148,260,
331. 610, 775 and 910.
82. Karlbigeya Sarma, L. - Epigraphical
Discoveries at Guntapalli. Paper read
at the Fourth Annual Conference of
the Epigraphical Society of India.
83, Caldwell,· Qp. cit- 153.
84. Burrow, T, - op. cit. p. 30Z.
85, It is remarkable that the first Cera
ruler mentioned in Pati[[Uppattu was
Uti-ao Cera!. The term Utiyao is also
given as a generic name for the Cera
rulers in Tamil Nigbantu.
86. Paranavitana - Early Brahmi Inscrip•
tions. PP· XLIX-LXll.
87. Veluppillai, A. • (Review of) Indian
Pal::eography. Oriental Art, Vol. X, p.
190. Oxford, 1964.
-Keview of the Works of Tamil
Palaeography, Paper presented to tbe
Second International Conference •
Seminar of Asian Archaeology.
Colombo, J969.
-Caca�aoium Tamifum, pp. 12-14.
Perademya, 1971 .
as. Saddha�nga1a Karunaratoa, W. •
The Date of the Brahmi Inscriptions of
Ceylon-l'aranavitana Felicitation Vol•
ume. Colombo, 1965.
89. Traditional account preserved in the
commentary of /raiyanar Akapporul
claim antiquity of more than nine
thousand years for the three Cankams
or Academies. Amon!? modern scholars
who had an overall view of the field of
Tamil literature, Professor Vaiyapuri
Pillai proposed the latest date for the
beginning of Sangam literature.
The date of second century A. D. had
been proposed by S. Vaiytpuri Pillai -
History of Tamil Languaize and Liter­
ature, p. 22, Madras. 19S6.
9C). Subramaniam, V. J. - Tbe Dating or
Sangam Literature , linguistic factors /
grammatical elements. Proceedings of
the Third International Conference •
Seminar, J.A.T.R., p 83- Paris, 1970.
91. Zvelebil, I C V. Tamil Literature, pp.
28-33 E.J. Brill, 1975.
92. Narayanan, M. 0 .S. - Re-interpret­
ations of South Indian Hi�tory, pp. 83·
98 Trivandrum, 1977.
93. The following two instances arc quotedl
as examples to sh�w bow they occur
in Sri Lanka Brahmi ioscriotions :
A11uradhapura District : 120
Text : Parumaka Naga pula Tisaba
lane sagasa.
Translation ; The Cave or Tissa, son­
of the Chief Niiga [is granted) to the
Sanp:ha.
Hambantota District , 6S4
Text : Parumaka Pusadevasa puta
parumaka Abayaha lene.
Translation : The Cave of the chief
Abaya, son of the chief Phussadeva.
94. Index des mots de la littenlture tamoul­
ancienne, Vol. 11 I of the lnstitut Fran­
cais D'indologie Pondichery, 1970.
95. Cl/oppatikiiram , 16-74; Manimekalai:
.
7 -98, 11- 133.
96. Chakraborti, Haripada - Early Brahmi.
Records in In:lia p. 168 Calcutta, 1974.
97. Buhler, G. - op. cit .p. 328.
98. Saojrvi, N- - Canka ilakkiya araycci
atta�anaikal Madras, 1973.
99. See Mi111tas·Tamil Lexicon.
Also a newspaper arllcle, de Silva, J .S.
-The Sunday ObserverA.K. Colombo,
1-4-79.
Considerir.g the importance of foreign
trade in pearls in the Age of Rome and
the contemporary Cankam Period io
Tamilnadu. this is one more reason to
suppose that Kutiraimalai refened to in
Cankam literature could be the one in
Sri Lanka
100. See the Epigraphical and Territorial
Map of Ceylon, opposit 10 page 1 6 in
the University of Ceyloo's History of
Ceylon.
101. Compare oru and or •one'; iru and ir
'two•.
102. Nicholas, C.W._and Paranavitana, S.
op. cil, p.. 7. It 1s not clear how the
Greek word is to be derived. It might
be connected with Nagadlpa. See Bur­
row, T. and Bhattacnarya S • A
.Comparative Vocabulary of the Gondi
Dialects, Jouroalof tbeAsaiaticSociety,
Vol. l l . Calcutta, 19W for ilem 2208 -
palimundo •snake•. Cf also Parlakhe­
m11ndi, a place name in Ori1Sa.
103- Sanjivi, N . op. cit.
104, The following example shows how
, they occur i_o Sri Lanka Brahmi inscrip
· ,ions.
.A.1111radhapura District , 123
Text : Oapati Velu puta!!a tini bati•
kana sagasa Bata Databa lcne:
Translation : [The Cave] of ·,he three
brothers, the sons of the house-bolder
Velu, [is given] to the Sangha. The
cave of Lord Datta.
105. Sambasivan, s. - "Pillai" ina pperu­
=-
mai. lntiya p palka/aikkalak°a ttamil
iiciriyar manram eliivatu karutturaitku
ayvukkovai Tokuti 2 pp, 677-682
Nagercoil, 1975.
106. Nilakanta Sastri, K.A. • A Historv of
South India, pp. 114. Madras, 1 �_55.
 EARLY BRAHMI INSCRIPTIONS
107. An example for this usage from Sri
Lanka Brahmi inscriptions :
Anuradhapura District : 13
Text : Gamar;ii Dhamarajhasa putasa
Aya Asalisa leQe.
'Tramlatio11 : The cav� of the Prince
Asali, son of Gamaoi Dhammaraja,
108. Narayanan, M, G. S. - op. cit., pp.
24-40.
l09. J\n example from Sri Lanka Brahmi
inscriptions :
Triccomalee District ' 382
Text , Bata Palaba !enc.
Translation : The cave of tord Pala.
110 Thani Nayagam, X.S. - Melainiittu
ni/a iya/ 11fl/ka(um canka kiila iiriiycci­
ynm - ira�1{iivat11 ulaka ttamil kkaruttar­
aitlwkila/ccika{. pp. 7-t 3. Ce,:wai, 1.968.
- 1 u . Burrow and Emcneau - opp. cit. Item
1379.
112. Yithiananthan, S· - op. cit. p . 18S.
See Saojivi. N. - op. cit. for a consi­
derable number of place-names in
Cankam Age : /rankukuti, Ukiiykkuf i,
A/ankfft ;. Ka/Iikuti, Ciraikkut i, Ma'i1-
kut° i Vellaikk;1f i. . -
113. Nachiniuthu. K. Nakar enra col/in
varalii!:u - 111:iyap pa/kalaikkkalaka
ttami/ iiciriyar malJ[nm - e/iivntuartu
karutlnrankuiiyvukkovai: Tokwi 2. pp.
720-724 - Nagercoil, 197S.
114. Hattiarachuchi Tilak- op. cit., p. 12.
llS. Burrow, T. - Collected Papers in Dra­
vidian Linguistics. p. 270. Burrow and
Emeneau - op. cit., item 2943,
116. Chatterjee, Sunlti Kumar - Dravidian
p. 17.
·111. Burrow and Emeneau, op. cit. item
3871.
118. Ibid• item 3 1 54.
119. Mendis, 3.C. - Addendum to Wil­
helm Geiger's translation of the Maha­
vathsa. Note 58, p. 310
120 See Sanjivi, N. - OPP. cit.
121. Auvai I Avvai is the name of a poetess
,o Cankam Age.
122. Jayapal, S. -Descriptive Grammar of
Kurumba, unpubliahed Ph.D. thesis'
Annamalai University, 1976
19
Tutu form is found in Dr:tvidian
Etymological Dictionary item 154.
123. Parpola, Asko et al -the Scandinavian
Institute of Asian Studies (Special
Publication No. 1), p. 5. Cepenha�en,
1965.
124. Inscriotious 93C. 98. I 44, 376, 406,671
983. 995. 1081-
125. Inscription 233.
126. Io1criptions 94. 469,
127. Jayapal, S. - opp cit.
128.Krishnan, K. G. - Convertibility of
Surds and Sonants-Historical Evidence
-lndo-lranian Journal XIV, No. 3/4
pp. 239-246. Mouton, The Hagt11:, : 972
As the Tamil alphabet ha, no symbols
for sonants, it continued to repsesent
the son•nt sounds by surd symbols­
:So. Caldwell's theory was criticised
that Tamil did not have this conveni­
bility in the past. Krishnan was able
to present evidence that this converti­
bility existed at least from the w.titb
century A.D.
129, It is arr.azing that question whether
1he Da111ilas (Tamils) mentioned inthc
Pali chro·nicles of Sri Lanka could
have been a North Indian Aryan tribe,
said to have been living on both side
of the Ganges. according to some Pali
source and not the Dravidiln Tamils
is still raised i n nawspaper articles io·
Sri Lanka. ·
ThePali Chronicles do not specify the
geographical location of these people
whom they mention frequently. So, it
is quite possible that these people
could h;1ve been from either Sri Lai:ika
or Tamilnadu.
A s one Dami/ is said to have retur­
ned to the Pandya kingdom after a
raid into Sri Lanka, 8.C. Law came to
the conclusion that they were the
Tamils from South Iodia.
Law, 8. C. - Dami!. and Dami{a­
attar . Geographical Essays, Vol. 1,
pj,'. 76-80. London, 1937.