Studies in Cola History and Administration c6.31
Studies in Cōḻa History and Administration c6.31
- Language
- English
c6.31.1
which is translated by Mr. Aiyangar thus: "He stands so as to adorn the carved post of the chariot; whoever he may be, may his garland not fade for a long time." A more literal rendering would be: "Who verily is it that stands so as to adorn the carved post of the chariot? May his garland flourish!" Far from being ignorant of the identity of the boy-king, the poet is sure that there is only one answer to his question. Further if amidst the many uncertainties of the literature of the Śaṅgam, there is one fact established beyond all doubt, it is that the hero of Talaiyālaṅkāṉam was a little boy whose youth tempted the cupidity of his neighbours.* And this raises a strong presumption of the identity of the persons to whom *Puram* 76 and 77 refer; and what can be more natural than that an admiring poet should, as he does in *Puram* 77, exaggerate the youth of his hero in celebrating his victory and sing of him as a tender child who, despite his youth, worked wonders on the field of battle? The next instance adduced is *Puram* 74, which is said to have been composed in a Cōḻa prison, by a Cēra king amazed at his own pusillanimity in seeking water of his jailors to quench his thirst. The colophon says that the prisoner did not drink the water he got, and describes his act in the words: "uṇṇāṉ sollittuṉjiya pāṭṭu" which might mean that without drinking the water, he uttered the lines and died. This is the meaning accepted by Mr.
c6.31.2
Srinivasa Aiyangar who draws attention to a contradictory tradition related in the Tamil-nāvalar-caritai which says that this ode was composed by the king and despatched to his poet-friend Poygaiyār who thereupon sang the 'Kaḷavaḻi Forty' and obtained his release. "The fact that the two legends contradict each other shows," we are assured* "that supposed traditions which Tamil scholars regard as sacrosanct are but brittle reeds to lean upon in historical investigation." The first thing to observe in this connection is that the Tamil-Nāvalar-Caritai is, as Mr. Srinivasa Aiyangar admits, a demonstrably late work of the sixteenth century A. D.† and some regard must be had to this in pitting its traditions against those in the colophons of the Puraṉāṉūṟu. Further, in this particular instance, the note in the Caritai leaves altogether unexplained the reference to drinking water that occurs in the text of the poem. The suggestion has been made‡ that the Cēra for whose release the Kaḷavaḻi was composed by Poygai was some king other than the author of Puṟam 74. But it is not possible to accept this, because Śeṅgaṇāṉ, the Cōḻa king is expressly mentioned both in the colophon of the Puṟam song and that of the Kaḷavaḻi as the Cēra Irumporai's foe; and the Kaḷavaḻi celebrates Śeṅgaṇāṉ's victory.
c6.31.3
The real solution is that offered by Paṇḍit Svāminātha Aiyar himself;¶ we should understand the word ‘tunjiya’ in the colophon not in the sense ‘died,’ but in the not less usual meaning ‘slept’ or ‘swooned.’ The note in the Nāvalar-caritai which says that the song was despatched to Poygaiyār seems hardly trustworthy; because the poet should, even without such a reminder to him, have known of his king’s fate. The other discrepancies * between the notes in the Caritai and the colophon of Puṟam 74 are too inconsiderable to affect the authenticity of the latter. Again, two objections are urged by Mr. Srinivasa Aiyangar against the colophon to Puṟam 47. It says that by this song Kōvūr Kiḻār saved a fellow poet from being put to death as a spy by Neḍuṅgiḷḷi who died at Kāriyāṟu. First “there is nothing in the poem remotely suggesting a spy;” secondly, “Kōvūr Kiḻār was a favourite of the enemies of Neḍuṅgiḷḷi i.e., Nalaṅgiḷḷi and Kiḷḷi Vaḷavaṉ, and therefore not likely to have any influence with Neḍuṅgiḷḷi.” Neither of these objections is sound. The first objection is easily met. The translation of the poem given by Mr. Srinivasa Aiyangar himself clearly suggests the idea of espionage, or at any rate, of some means of injuring persons. It is this: “The life of these seekers of patronage is free from the blame of harming others.” This in fact is the main argument of the piece and the original is very vigorous: