Talk:Legendary Tamil Sangams

message: If vedas is 1700bce or ?4340bce, chinese and Sumerian is 3000bce, Egyptian is 1500bce, Abraham is 2300bce, and Noah is 1760bce, by "somehow" guesswork calcultions, there should be a possibility of truth in 4440bce Sangam age with atleast some probability, as well;
it is the duty of anti-Sangam ?scholars to PROVE THAT SOMETHING ELSE EXISTED IN SOUTH INDIA IN 3-4 MILLENIA BCE, ARE THER ANY SANSKRIT/KANNADA/TELUGU/PALI ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSCRIPTIONS IN SOUTH AT THAT TIME, CAN ANY ONE OF YOU CITE ANY SUCH EVIDENCES AT LEAST IN NORTH INDIA?
envy at Tamil, yu anti-Sangam antiTamil ?scholars; continue to envy ... it still adds up to the pride of Tamil lang -to be envied upon even in 21stcentury
everybody knows only those who cannot bear would still try countering the above facts -in some awkward vague blatant blasphemous way, because...
kutram ulla nenju kuru kurukkum
Senthilkumaras (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Is 4440bce Sangam age not possible?

message: (B.C. 1465 to B.C. 165)
For over 1300 years and 49 generations, the three ancient tamil kingdoms ruled by three kings and twelve velars, had an agreement of understanding or a treaty of cooperation and strictly abided by the same. The basis of this agreement was based upon the literary creation Tolkappiyam’s Purathinai.
The ancient Hathikumba inscription, its message on the Tamils
The great king of Kalinga Karavela tells in his Hathikumba inscription (Elephant cave) “All the tamil kings were bound by an united alliance”, when he had visited these parts of Tamil country during 165 B.C. and states tha this alliance were in force since 1300 years back “ and these kings acted cohesively”. He feels that if this agreement continued to exist, it will be an impending danger even to his empire. It was at this time the Cheraputra Anthuvan defeated the Kongu country king at Karuvur and captures it. As per the existing agreement, the King sows decayed seeds in the fertile paddy fields and ploughs them with asses. However, Karavela induces the Cheraputra King to expand his kingdom by not relieving his captured territory, thereby enticing him to break the treaty which had lived over the ages. As the king Karavela showed a submissive attitude and respect towards the Tamil Kings, he was abundantly gifted by the Pandya King with precious gems and pearls as token of friendship.
The inscription of Hathikumba was fully deciphered by J.P. Jayaswal MA Barister, Patna and Professor R.D. Banerjee, MA Banaras Hindu University. They were of a doubt whether this alliance or agreement of the three ancient tamil kingdoms could have lasted 1300 years. Hence, they manipulated a major fact and based on prejudiced thoughts convinced themselves that the total number of years could not be 1300 years  and decided it as 113 years. As I had already earlier clearly deduced and confirmed  firmly  through evidences from Sangam literature that this period is 1300 years, there would not be a need for further debate on this issue and it is fully evident that the “Agreement among the three ancient tamil Kingdoms” existed as early as 1465 B.C.
Though there are no inscriptions in Tamil Nadu that such agreements existed, it is true that such an agreement existed throughout the Samgam Period. To carryout such a treaty, it is a necessity to have a sort of control document. Hence, to implement such an agreement, these guidelines and rules were framed in into the famous book of Tolkappiyam which is considered a literary and legal bible of the Tamils. This could be found in Purathinai of Tolkappiyam. Just like a legal document, the Purathinai which comprises of the five divisions (Kurinji, Mullai, Marudham, Neidhal and Paalai), contains all the legal guidelines for this agreement. And this should have been done when Tolkappiam was formulated in its early ages. In a similar manner to Purathinai, Agathinai should also have been scripted together with Purathinai and created during its nascent stage.
In the olden age, the rules formed by the Tamil literary books had not been created by any one scholar. Each rule must have been created by one scholar (Pulavar) or by a group of learned men after considerable research. It was then created into an organized structure of rules and regulations. Most of the Rules / Regulations stated in Tolkappiyam ends with “enba” or “Mozhiba”. For example,
“Nunnithinayadhor kandavarae”
“Yenmanaar Pulamayoerae”
“Enba Unarumoerae”
“Enba arichandinoerae”
are some verses of Tolkappiyam.
It can be inferred that these verses have been created and large volumes of regulatory/ legal books of Sangam literature have been created by means of conducting conferences (Tamil Sangam) of Tamil scholars during that age.
This legal document of Tamils, named Tolkappiyam, had evolved through the ages after its original creation by groups of Tamil pundits by suitably amending periodically and regulated as per the prevailing times and finally formed into a final shape as being read now. Both Agathinai and Purathinai were added with further information like “Agreement of Tamil Kingdoms”, and evolved into a biblical book called Tolkaapiyam, which means “to preserve the olden and enlighten it to the people”. Considering the beginning of the era of “Agreement of Three Kings” to be 1465 BC (as confirmed vividly before) this creation of the final issue of Tolkappiyam should be after about 5 years or in 1460 BC. From this day, the culture of the Tamils had been classified as “Agam” and “ Puram” and people had lived by it.
Understanding the core of the Treaty or Accord
1.	Rule by Small Grouping: When this was decided, there was only one crown prince of the Pandya King who along with his two brothers divided the country into Chera, Chola and Pandya and ruled the entire kingdom. Later the 12 velirs divided the country into smaller areas and ruled with greater interaction with the common people. Even during ages when good transportation facilities did not exist, there existed such kings who can be called upon any time. This way of rule which existed so long ago in Tamil country has a special reputation on its own.
2.	Way of working of these Kings: “Kudi purangathombi kutrangadithal vendhan thozhil” – this means the kings’ duty is to do  service to his country men, render justice, carry out punishments for criminals, maintain an army to safeguard the country. He himself undergoes a lot of training regarding warfare.
3.	Three countries and the Three Kings: The three kings were praised profusely for their rule. The many velirs in each of these kingdoms were a sort of subordinates to these kings. The geographical contours of these kingdoms were used to create the symbols of these kingdoms and these symbols were minted in their coins. The symbols and flags were individualistic for each of these three kings. Velirs did not have such symbols or flags.
4.	Relationships – Friendships and enmity: Among the velirs and kings, relationships were maintained through marriages and this was maintained ancestrally like a rule or a regulation . This can be inferred from Kabilar’s visit along with Paari’s daughters for trying to engage these girls with Velir’s sons (Puram: 200, 201, 202). For any grudge/ disagreements, there were conflicts only among these velirs or kings. These conflicts were only among the 3 kings + 12 velirs and their relations and strictly as per the rules and guidelines of the literary legal books.
5.	Capture of Territories: If war was conducted as per Purathinai, even if a king captures several countries, there will be no change in the state of the kingdoms. Only the bravery of the war was looked upon and praised. The books tell about the direct involvement of the kings in the war and their brave deaths. However, the three kingdoms always existed as separate entities and secured as per the common law. For the bravery of the warriors, symbols of bravery called “Ninaivu chinnams” (small buildings) were only created. There were no kings who had thought about inscriptions to show his pomp or pride.
6.	The guidelines of the learned scholars: These pulavars sang in praise of the kings and velirs indicating their important achievements, functions and celebrations. It was a common practice that these kings and velirs listened to the advice of Pulavars regarding warfare and acted accordingly.
It was only because of the deceitful king Kalingathu Karavelan that this treaty was broken in 165 BC. In this period, we can find evidences of one ruler capturing another’s territory by Cheraputras and Sathyaputras. Even during this time, the Chola King Killivalavan spared the children of Malayan Kari when he ran away in fear, as advised by the Pulavar “Kovoor Kilaan”. Also the king abandons the Malayan Kari’s kingdom and does not take over it, but leaves the place.
Also, it is evident from the Sangam literature that these kings also participated in creation of Ilakkana Nool or literary books and they themselves were established Pulavars.
7.	Division of Wealth: While capturing other kingdoms, the victorious always took over a lot of the loser’s wealth and brought them to his kingdom. However, he did not take it away for himself. It was divided to all the people of his country. It is not like usurping the entire wealth and dividing among a few greedy rich men. There is no such evidence in any of these literatures indicating such events. Also, there is no evidence of kings flaunting their wealth by constructing self enjoyment houses such as operas etc., There were a lot of developmental activity in agricultural, handicrafts in this age. Trade flourished by sea and land by improvement of infrastructures. It was unthinkable in the Tamil Kingdom of such selfish acts like the kings being draped in gold and treasures, and exorbitant expenditure to preserve their dead bodies by building pyramids as in Egypt, which does not serve as an example of an overall developmental culture of a society.
8.	The invasion of other nations: It is evident that when a foreign invader threatens any of these Tamil countries, all the 3 kings and 12 velirs joined together to form an alliance. There had been training grounds to fight bravely and effectively in a war. It is clear that even the Maurya king could not invade the Tamil country because of their unity.
9.	The long existed Treaty: This accord of understanding created in 1465 BC survived this longest period ever for 1300 years among the Tamil kings and velirs by scrupulously following the Rules and Regulations by all the kings and rulers, which finally faltered in 165 BC by the Kalingathu Karavelan.
Cheraputhra – the law breaker: Unlike the Pandya and Cholas, the cheras were called as “Cheraputras” as evident from Ashoka’s inscriptions and Greek Scholar Ptolemy’s “Periplus” writings.
After the invasion of Aryans, they elevated themselves by means of their habits and created good relations with kings and big merchants. They were helpful to the influential class by helping them in creating contacts with foreign nations, language translations, understanding other languages and telling their meanings etc., Many Aryans also learnt Tamil and became scholars. It is understood that the word “Cheraputra” must have been introduced by the Aryans during Ashoka’s invasion.
A group of descendants of Chera king (Cheraputra) became dominant over a period and captured important positions in trade and governance. It was these bandits who had crept into the Kongu country and captured the big trade center Karuvoor and its allied Chola country. By the wily advice of the Kalingathu Karavelan, these cheraputras had retained the captured country for themselves. These culprits were in hold of the captive regions for about 2 - ½ years.
Chilapathikaram was written by Chera King. In it are the details of the Kongu Komaan (Zamindaar) and Kongu existing as a separate velir country. When this literary creation was being formulated, these cheraputras might have already started dwindling their evil designs and would have returned back to their country.
After the 2 – ½ years, even though the original cheras returned back to power, they were like men without strength. As they had already been in a time gap of about 10 generations, they were unable to establish themselves like their earlier counter parts and failed to created history.
Karuvoor has been depicted as a Trade center only in Karavela’s inscriptions. It is not the capital of Chera King. As per Sirupaanatrupadai (Verses 41 – 50), the capital of Chera king was Vanchi Nagar, situated in kutta naadu.
It is in recent times are being written by numismatists that the capital of Chera king was Karuvoor, which is false, as Karuvoor was in the hands of Cheraputras and Cheras. If Karuvoor is considered a Chera capital, then it is like betraying the present Kerala out of the original Chera country, which cannot be true.
Cheraputras never followed the “common treaty or accord”. Their complete ancestral details are available in the book Pathitrupathu. Lots of treasures were distributed among the Pulavars. As per the accord, since the kingdoms do not belong to them, their coins minted in Kongu desam did not have any sovereign symbols. Slowly the Ways of the Sangam Age degenerated and Sangam Period is believed to have ended in AD 200. The powerful alliances of these Sangam Kings declined and rulers of other nations emerged and new ways of governance began to arise.
 
Bibliography
1.	Tholkappiyam – Porul Adhigaram, 1963, Saiva sidhandha Publishing society, Chennai 18.
2.	EPIGRAPHICA INDICA – Vol. XX 1929-30, New Delhi, 1983, No. 7, Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela. Authors: K.P. Jayaswal Barrister at Law, Patna and Prof. R. D. Banerji, Banares Hindu University, Publisher: Archeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
3.	Thamizhaga Thonmayum Sirappum, Author: M. Kandaswamy, Kumaran Publishers, 3, Muthukrishnan street, Pondy bazaar, Chennai – 17.
4.	Purananooru – Vol I and II Commentator: Avvai S. Duraiswamy Pillay. Publishers: Saiva Sidhanta Publishing society, Chennai 18.
5.	Cilappadhigaaram
6.	Chirupanatrupadai
7.	Pathitrupathu
----
I've just made the above page a redirect to this article.  If anyone has the time and expertise, perhaps they could see if any of the material could usefully be incorporated into the Sangam article. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 11:25, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: One Thousand Three Hundred Years of Sangam Period

message: The more I read this article the more I can confirm that this article is a hoax.  For example this article puts the Tolkappiyam back into the second sangam.  The second sangam is supposed to have started in 10000 BC around, and continued for 3700 years.  So if we do the math, it means that the Tolkappiyam's date has now been pushed back to around 6300 BC!!!
We all here know from the famous letter that Prof.Hart wrote to someone that, the oldest parts of the Tolkappiyam go back to 200 BC.
So what we have here, is the article pushing Tolkappiyam's date from 200 BC and the first sangam into the second sangam and to 6300 BC.  And further, the article goes on to describe dozen works with the author's first and last names which supposedly drew their references from the Tolkappiyam.  And Tolkappiyam from what I know translates to 'Old kaappiyam' or old kavya.  And I also have been lead to believe that it was a work of grammar.  This article however says that it was an authoritative text about law.  And it seems these Sangam kings have cooperative treaties based on this law book!!!
If all this is not a hoax, tell me what is?
My suggestion to salvage anything from this article is to blank out the whole article and rewrite.  I am in no mood to salvage this hopeless wreck of an article.  Unless someone volunteers to do it and starts off with blanking out what is there right now, I will be tagging this article a hoax.  Sarvagnya 08:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blatant lies in the article. 

message: I have rewritten this article with more than sufficient citations, clearly stating that the Sangam legends are what they are - legends. If the other editors would take more positive attitude towards WP, ie, if they find something not correct, try and fix it with appropriate citations, instead of whinging on the Talk pages and declaring they are not in the mood to work on the article, most of the India related articles in WP would be in much better shape now. Thanks Parthi talk/contribs 03:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me answer you.  Any account which describes fantastic kingdoms, royal lineages and poets in the Ice Age is most certainly only a legend.  There is absolutely no bias here and things have to be said the way they are.  Whether or not people like to hear it that way is immaterial.  This applies to both 'Abrahamic' and 'non-Abrahamic' religions and cultures.  I am neither very interested nor very knowledgeable about Abrahamic cultures, so I can comment on its historicity.  Also remember Jesus is said to have lived almost 15000 years after these Sangams started.  Nobody claims that Jesus lived in the Ice age alongside wooly mammoths.  That said, even here on Wikipedia there are articles like  this and this which you should probably check out.  If you really feel that there is a bias and 'Abrahamic' articles are free of any scrutiny, feel free to go and correct it.  Article X on Wikipedia being free of any scrutiny shouldnt be an excuse for Article Y to go scotfree too.  Sarvagnya 01:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally second this. For example, some  ignorant editors claim that Cilappatikaram does not represent Tamil culture becasue its author could have been a Jain! Can you believe that? That was so stupid. - Parthi talk/contribs 23:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah its an exercise in futility dealing with morons who live in english speaking countries but dont understand english. Lets cultivate some character first.-- ॐ Kris ( talk | contribs) 23:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, we need to clean WP of blatant fancruft and spamming to start with. - Parthi talk/contribs 00:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Why don't we start a Wikiproject:Vendetta to deal with these people?!!! - Parthi talk/contribs 00:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks, I got my answer when my cited sentences about this being a hoax were removed unceremoniously by anon IPs, without any discussion. You can claim whatever you want, but that does not make Sangam or Changam as a factual account. Sea Calamities and tsunamis, looks like an Alice in Wonderland kind of a story. Tsunamis are common in Tamil Nadu? You must be joking... -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 08:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article rewrite