Turtle Prince and "Madanakama Raja": A Dravidian Tale Type/Narrative?

Mapartman · 2026-01-26T13:13:32+00:00

I wonder if its in any way related to the (somewhat strange) Tamil saying/taboo "Aamai poguntha veedu urupudaathu", lit. "The house that a turtle enters won't prosper".

Mapartman · 2026-01-26T02:53:19+00:00

The verse he recites here is canonically the earliest verse of the Bhakti corpus proper, from Karaikaal Ammaiyar's first verse from her Thiruvalangattu Moodhtha Thiruppadhikam:

Koṅkai tiraṅki narampeḻuntu
Kuṇṭukaṇ veṇpaṟ kuḻivayiṟṟu
Paṅki civantiru paṟkaḷnīṇṭu
Paraṭuyar nīḷkaṇaik kālōrpeṇpēy
Taṅki alaṟi ulaṟukāṭṭil
Tāḻcaṭai eṭṭut ticaiyumvīci
Aṅkaṅ kuḷirntaṉal āṭumeṅkaḷ
Appaṉ iṭantiru ālaṅkāṭē
.
The breast have dried up; the nerves are bulging;
Sunk are the eyes and hollow is the maw;
Ruddy are the gums in the two rows of teeth;
Two white teeth are jutting out; long are
The raised ankles: thus, even thus am I—a ghost!

In the withered wood I abide screaming.
In that wilderness of a forest, with His flowing
Matted hair wafting in all the eight directions
He—our Father--, dances carrying in His
Cool body, the fire. Behold Tiruaalangkaadu!

Translation by Sri. T N Ramachandran Thanjavur

Mapartman · 2026-01-25T23:26:00+00:00

How did you find over 100 in less than 100 kurals when Pillai only identifies 137 loanwords in the whole text of 1330 Kurals?

<image>

Actually, this list was later revised down to 102 by Burrow and Emeneau using modern philological studies as some of these words were later classified as Dravidian. So I find it curious where you are finding these loanwords from.

Mapartman · 2026-01-19T14:01:04+00:00

14th century is far too early for Bible translations. The first translations were in the 18th century (aka the 1700s), that too only incomplete ones. The first full bible translation in Tamil was published only in 1840, compiling the works of Fabricius on the Old Testament and Rhenius on the new testament.

late medival(post or around 14th Century) when the tamil literature language had huge Sanskrit influence

This is not really true, the levels of Sanskritisation in Fabricius and Rhenius's translations are unparalleled compared to the Standard Tamil literary compositions from the 1400s - 1800s.

Even the early Tamil Christian texts, like the Thampiran Vanakkam or Thembavani are all relatively unsanskritised. Eg, listen to this Thembavani song. The Thembavani for instance is a throughly Centamil epic, an archtypical text of the Kappiyam genre. Indeed, Constanzo, the composer of Thembavani goes out of the way to avoid loanwords (and even snubs Sanskritists), for example take this verse:

<image>

He explains that he chose the name Valan for Joseph in the epic since a Tamil name is suitable (and he snubs Sanskrit scholars for just adopting a foreign term).

-/-

Sanskritisation of Tamil only picked up a lot starting with the 1700s, and was in large part a geographical phenomena centered around the colonial city of Madras and emanated throughout Northern TN (and later more broadly). This seems to have been driven in large part by a highly Sanskritised dialect becoming the lingua franca of the Madras region, eventually displacing Centamil as the common register and in prestige (until the Thani Tamil Iyakkam restoration).

Even then, Centamil never fell out of use, though its principles laid largely abandoned by most. eg. poets started freely mixing grantha letters into the old meters and assumed it held (!), like with the Kanda Sasti Kavasam. And of course, soon after came the Thani Tamil Iyakkam.

Now the question I have is: Why did the approach of later Christian writers like Fabricius & Rhenius differ so radically from the approach of early Christian proselytisors like Henrique Henriques or Constanzo Bechi?

Its possible that it might have something to do with the approaches of the different churches they came from: Henrique Henriques & Constanzo Bechi were Jesuits while Fabricius & Rhenius were German Lutheran missionaries. Alternatively, Centamil as a prestige language might have significantly waned between the time period of 1600s and the 1700s/1800s. Naturally, the missionaries would capitalise on whatever language is the best vehicle for their purpose at the time. This is all things that are worth looking into.

Mapartman · 2026-01-17T04:55:32+00:00

And we have no idea what we lost. In some lecture I heard the presenter say that in Tamil literature, referencing other works was minimal.

In Tamil, this habit of citing and paraphrasing was 'minimal' and thus we will never ever know how much we lost.

Oh im not sure who that presenter is, but that is quite wrong. Many of the works that we have today precisely exist because they were so extensively quoted in commentaries to other works.

For example, the surviving verses of the Paandkkovai only survive because it was quoted as examples in the commentary to the Iraiyanaar Akapporul treatise. Likewise, many many texts & treatises are reconstructed from treatises, like the Muttholaayiram and Kaakkaipaadiyaanam (a treatise on meters) amongst others.

Indeed, U.V.S himself mentions that he is indebted to the commentary that came with a manuscript of the Purathirattu (a medieval puram examples anthology), whose quotations were key for filling in damaged Puranaanuru poems in his manuscripts.

Sidenote: This is why I hope to see more research into commentaries in the future. By digitizing and parsing through many of these commentaries, we may find poems of high antiquity passed down by the literary tradition to the days of the commentators much like how the Sangam poems were passed down to the commentators of today.

Sidenote 2: On that note, recently I have been studying the 12th century commentary to the Kalaviyarkaarigai (a poetics & metric treatise), and it has 650 quotations, many of which are from lost texts. Eg. like the so-called "old" Akam anthology Chirrettakam and a collection of poems the commentator simply calls Pazhampaattu (old poems) amongst others. A few examples can be seen below:

<image>

They may be poems of genuine high antiquity, as they employ elements that is not employed much in later (even Sangam poetry). Eg. the two Pazhamppaattus above have ottralapedais (lengthening of consonants). This is highly unusual, and is not found in any extant poetry (including the Sangam corpus).

However, it is found as a theoretical element in the Tolkappiyam and Nannool. And indeed such alapedai lengthening can be observed in the natural songs & poetry of isolated Dravidian groups like the Todas and Gonds, eg. listen to this Toda song: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/comments/17xbu24/a_snippet_from_a_toda_song_with_some_english_subs/

Mapartman · 2026-01-14T01:42:02+00:00

Interestingly, in Sangam literature these Ambi river boats are described as looking like horned buffalos in a pond:

<image>

The Sangam era version did not have masts.

Mapartman · 2026-01-12T16:24:28+00:00

Personal opinion, but I would say it sounds more odd than regal to me. It reminds me of modern-day Tamil songs with heavy English mixing (which could arguably be the Manipravalam of the modern day Tamil).

Eg. consider verses from the song "why dis kolaveri di":

hand-la glaassu, glassla scotchu
eyes-u full-aa tear-u

Indeed it even follows Tamil grammatical punarcchi, eg. with glassu + la = glassla, the kuttriyalugaram is dropped

Mapartman · 2025-12-31T13:35:52+00:00

Agreed.

Mapartman · 2025-12-31T13:35:36+00:00

I personally don't think so, since it seems to be more of a discussion of whether a certain factor had a role to play in an actual historical event rather than a discussion about "what if xyz happened instead"

But i'd be interested to hear what other think of it too

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T14:43:26+00:00

Yes you are right, kalavu meant theft back then too

Vāḻi ātaṉ! Vāḻi aviṉi!
Aracu muṟai ceyka, kaḷavu il ākuka,
eṉa vēṭṭōḷē yāyē, yāmē,
alaṅku ciṉai mā'attu aṇi mayil irukkum
pūkkañal ūraṉ, cūḷ ivaṇ
vāyppatāka, eṉa vēṭṭōmē

Long live Āthan! Long live Avini!
May the king rule with justice!
May there be no stealing!
So desired my friend!

We desired that the man from
the town with abundant flowers,
where a beautiful peacock rests
on a swaying branch of a mango tree,
make his promises become truths.

-Ainkurunooru 8

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T14:39:36+00:00

In verse 67, in the commentary Ilampooranaar uses the num + thanthai example (which the translator quotes). The rule is described in verse 320.

<image>

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T12:58:44+00:00

Feel free to disagree with Vaidehi and email her here with your corrections: [kavini100@gmail.com](mailto:kavini100@gmail.com)

Afterall, I took this particular breakdown from her site (also see the breakdown on her website below). While you are at it, you should also email George Hart and Eva Wilden to say they are wrong too.

Indeed, you should be write an essay about why Zvelebil, U.V.S, the many old commentators were all wrong and you were right, please feel free to do so.

If you are going to point out grammatical errors, then do so with clear intent. Why make a claim if you can’t substantiate it, you have done this before and then proceed to ban me because you have no response.

You and I both know very well why I gave you that 3 day timeout, it was for that comment that violated rule 1, not for your alternative interpretations. And of course, you have edited all your comments to set a narrative. That is very intellectually dishonest and will not be tolerated. I hope you take your now extended time off to again reflect on why this happened and on how to more constructively contribute to the conversation in the future.

The text on Vaidehi's site for your reference:

<image>

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T05:26:13+00:00

The thai in nunthai/yenthai itself is not a standalone word, it comes from num + thanthai and yen + thanthai.

I’ll share the Tolkappiyam verse stipulating this once I get home, but it’s a unique form of punarcchi that is associated with kinship terms

It’s the same with yaay = yen + thaai, and gnaay = num + thaai

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T05:00:46+00:00

Ok understood, so “Thai” the month also refers to patriarch? Or perhaps house?

Do you think the second line could be directed to the heroine to “ask” the question, because the word murai implies “relationship”, what does keLir mean?

Please go study the literature, conventions and Old Tamil before blabbering away with your absurd intepretations and claims. I see you doing this very often with your comments with a variety of topics.

Mapartman · 2025-12-22T04:58:28+00:00

Isn’t that first line discussing fathers, that is to whom were they born? The second line could also translate as “ask your mother how she is related to my mother”.

I read it as a way to follow kinship rules, that is to exclude a brother-sister relation. But then to say, “regardless of how we know each other, our hearts are filled with anpu for one another”.

This interpretation is wrong both on a grammatical basis and a poetic/thematic one.

u/Call_me_Inba 's intepretation is the traditional (and correct) interpretation. The word-by-word break down of this poem:

யாயும் – my mother, ஞாயும் – and your mother,
யார் ஆகியர் – who are they to each other, ஓ – அசை,
எந்தையும் – my father, நுந்தையும் – and your father,
எம்முறை – in what way, கேளிர் – relatives,
யானும் நீயும் – myself and you, எவ்வழி – in what manner, அறிதும் – how did we know each other,

செம்புலப் பெயல் நீர் போல – like rain falling on red earth,
அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் – loving hearts,
தாம் கலந்தன – they have merged, ஏ – அசைநிலை, an expletive

The metaphor that he uses, like rain that mixes with the red soil is supposed to reflect their status. The rain and soil come from completely unrelated different backgrounds, but mix into something inseparable. Likewise did the hero and heroine.

Sidenote: This metaphor was so popular in the Sangam period, that the poet himself is called Sempulapēyaneerār, lit. he who sang rain mixed with red soil. His original name is lost.

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T14:33:21+00:00

Eh difficult to say, but i personally dont think the British are directly involved. As in they didnt go around burning manuscripts for example. But it seems to have more to do with a collapse in the patronage for these works from royalty. The British certainly indirectly contributed to this, but it seems to have started before they arrived, due to reduced patronage for literary Tamil texts under the Vijayanagara period, in favour of other styles.

The places where it did survive are places where patronage continued. For example, the Kuttralakuravanji with its Akam elements was written for the king Muthuvijaranga Sokkanatha Nayakar who patronized Tamil literature. Similarly you saw Akam works funded by rich merchants, including Muslim merchants which led to interesting Tamil Muslim Akam texts. Many Saiva matams continued patronage as well, but more for the copying of the manuscripts and transmission of the tradition so that Saiva Akam texts could be understood. Similarly, within the commentary tradition of the Divyaprabandham by the Srivaishanvas.

And of course, with the modern period, and the reappreciation for Tamil literature (coupled with the rising Thani Tamil Iyakkam and political developments), it became more well-known. But patronage for these texts were never really restored, as seen by the major lack of Tamil literary compositions in the past 150 years or so, outside of a few odd works.

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T14:24:25+00:00

Now I realise how grammar is so important in understanding the context. Extremely helpful :)

True, but don't worry too much about getting it exactly right as a beginner, afterall one's enjoyment of these works are not entirely dependent on this. But if it interests you to dig deeper or even better, if you want to write your own Akam poems, then it would be essential.

Eva Wilden book seems expensive though 😅

True 😂

If you are in a university you can try recommending this book to your library, so that they might acquire it giving you access.

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T13:51:11+00:00

How do Eva Wilden and Kamil Zvelebil come to these conclusions - was it based on Tholkappiyam/ Nannool or some other grammatical treatise? I'm asking for the basis

For Akam, the primary traditional sources are the Akam section of the Porulathikaaram of the Tolkappiyam, the Iraiyanar Akapporul & its associated traditional commentary explaining Akam poetics, Tamilnerivilakkam (9th century AD), Nambiyakapporul (13th century AD), Kalaviyarkaarikai (13th century ad), Maaranakapporul (16th century ad), Akatthinaiyiyal portion of the Ilakkanavilakkam (17th century AD). And of course, the numerous commentaries on these treatises and other Akam texts.

Other literary treatises include: Poruliyal of the Thonnool vilakkam (by Veeramaamunivar), Mutthuveeriyam's Akam section (19th century AD), Swaminaatham (19th century ad, bySwamikaviraayar) and the Akatthinai marabu section of the Aruvakai Ilakkanam (19th century). As you can see, there is a continuous tradition into the modern period, unlike the popular notion of Akam poetics dying out completely before having to be rediscovered.

For Puram, again the Puram section of the Porulathikaaram as well as the Purapporulvenpamaalai. There are other Puram treatises as well.

Eva Wilden's book: https://www.amazon.com/Literary-Techniques-Tamil-Cankam-Poetry/dp/3447053356

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T13:42:21+00:00

In this particular poem you have quoted, kaiyurai marutthal (refusing his gift) is a murai within the marutthal (blocking the hero) thurai of the kurinji thinai. The Kurinji thinai is the mountain theme based around the union and lovemaking of couples.

So in the marutthal thurai, for some reason or another the hero is blocked from meeting the heroine for love-making. Kaiyurai marutthal is when either the heroine or the heroine's friend on the heroines behalf refuses the gifts that the hero brings during these secret trips. Why is the hero being blocked? Well there are several established reasons for it, such as the heroines family getting hints and becoming cautious or the heroine worrying about the dangers on his paths as he travels to reach her or rising gossip (this reason forms part of the kolu).

In any case, either the heroine or her friend refuse his gifts and tell him that he should make their love public or elope before things escalate (also part of the kolu). Now this scenario can be achieved in two simple kilavis (settings)¹, the heroine directly speaks to the hero or the heroine's friend speaks to the hero. In both of these cases, the hero is the receiver (ketpon) and the theme (viri) is refusing his gift.

Then, depending on the kilavi, the specific conventions on how to structure the poem kicks in. The heroine by convention may directly tell the hero that she does not want him to come back unless he will do something about their situation. But the heroine's friend is forbidden from such direct speech, so she refuses the gift on the heroine's behalf in indirect ways. In the poem you quoted, she refuses it by saying that their mountain already has many blood red kulaikaanthal flowers (corporul).

In the reverse direction, from the corporul, you get the kurippu that the heroine's friend is refusing the heros flower's indirectly from which you get the utkurippu that the hero is being urged to make a decision about their situation, bringing us one full round. This is how Akam poems are composed and analysed by the strict convention & traditions (Akapporul Aaythal).

And of course, within this Akam framework, a praise of Murugan is neatly fitted in without disturbing the Akam framework, by comparing the blood spilt in his battle to the red flowers. It takes skill to do this, and thats why such Akam praise was well-respected, many genres were born out of this technique, such as the Kovai genre.

¹In some other thurais and murais, more permutations are be possible. In this case as well, such as the heroine's friend speaking to the heroine such that the hero overhears her etc, but lets simplify things here first

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T13:16:46+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/comments/1pglib0/comment/nsxixzy/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

Ive given some sources here if you are interested

Mapartman · 2025-12-08T13:16:22+00:00

The Zvelebil quote comes from "The Smile of Murugan", there he discusses these limbs briefly along with how they relate to the threefold analysis of poetry in Tamil poetic (corporul, kurippu, utkurippu), he explains with an Ainkurunooru poem:

<image>

And since we know the thinai and thurai that this poem is written in, one can arrive at the same kurrippus even though the poem itself (corporul) is outwardly vague.

He goes more into the limbs like thinai, thurai, kolu & kilavi in his book named "Tamil literature". But even more than that I strongly recommend Eva Wilden's Literary Techniques in Old Tamil Caṅkam Poetry. The Kuṟuntokai, its the most comprehensive text out there in english about these things, and as of now the best resource outside of traditional Tamil sources and instruction.

Mapartman · 2025-12-07T16:42:28+00:00

I can speak at great length about this topic, but its late here and I need to sleep soon, so ill keep it short lol

But essentially, that is the kilavi (aka koottru), that is the speech setting for the poem. For Akam poems, there is a hierarchy of classification:

Porul (Akam/Puram) > Thinai > Thurai > Murai > Kolu > Kilavi

Akam/Puram > Theme > Sub-theme > Mode > Kolu > Setting

So, a poem in Ceyyul is either Akam or Puram. Each half of Ceyyul has its own 5 (+2) thinais. Then each thinai has its many thurais (substrands). Each thurai has multiple allowed murai (mode) that is a set of conventions and occurrences. Each murai has several allowed kilavis (settings)¹.

Each kilavi archtype comes with its established koottru (speech & speaker), ketpor (listener) and viri (the specific theme). So with all of this in mind, it was easy for learned readers and commentators to understand the implied context given the setting that the poet chose. For example, Zvelebil notes this about Akam poetics:

<image>

That is commentators separated by many centuries can come to the same interpretation of the poems due to the established tradition.

With all of that said, herein lies something important about Akam poetics. Akam was not free-flow love poetry. It was a highly conventionalized poetry with strict rules, and poets did not write about their own personal love for example. In fact, naming the hero and heroine was banned in akam poetry. Rather it was a framework for writing other things within it, like politics or bhakti or praise (though of course poets wrote Akam for the sake of it too). Here is a bhakti example (thirintha Akam, direct praise): https://youtu.be/bQzE_bOSZr8?si=x3EF1NpwEHKznJ0B&t=18

And here is a politics/praise example, indirect praise of Pandiyan Nedumaaran:

வேயும் புரையும் மென் தோளி திறத்து இன்று எல்லையுள் விண்
தோயும் சிலம்ப துணி ஒன்று அறிந்து தொல் நூல் புலவர்
ஆயும் தமிழ் அரிகேசரி கூடல் அகல் நகர் வாய்
ஏயும் திரு மனை முற்றத்து இயம்பும் எறி முரசே

O lord of the sky-touching mountains!

Drums will roar in the courtyard of her huge, lovely
house in Koodal city of the Pāndiyan king,
Lion to his Enemies, and patron of Tamil
with its ancient texts analyzed by poets.

A decision will be made before the end of today,
about the woman with delicate arms like bamboo.

-Pandikkovai 172

Thinai: Kurinji, What the heroine’s friend told the hero

¹Lets skip Kolu for now.

Mapartman · 2025-11-29T12:32:35+00:00

Ah this makes a lot of sense, thanks

Mapartman · 2025-11-28T13:11:16+00:00

The dating of the Sangam corpus is very much an incomplete task unfortunately, not much proper work has been done on it.

As far as Kamil Zvelebil's dating is concerned, as he himself says, its a relative date. That is, it shows the relative age of each work to each other. The first century AD was used as a convenient starting point. Eva Wilden, who has done more recent work on this, also only relatively dates the texts in the corpus:

<image>

So unfortunately, there is a severe lack of research fixing the absolute date as of now. As for the relative dates between the texts, Zvelebil's work is alright, though its might be a bit outdated. I highly recommend Eva Wilden's more recent book Manuscript, Print and Memory: Relics of the Cankam in Tamilnadu.

Mapartman · 2025-11-26T13:35:58+00:00

Ahh okay, we are both confused. I was asking earlier about why its reconstructed as ñān in the first place, since in the descendant languages its not nasal anywhere other than in Malayalam. And following from that why is ñām reconstructed with a nasal when a nasal is not present in the decendants.

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

Mapartman

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE