Last updated

Religion Hinduism
Language Tamil
Period150 BCE or earlier. [1]
Topics in Sangam literature
Sangam literature
Agattiyam Tolkāppiyam
Eighteen Greater Texts
Eight Anthologies
Aiṅkurunūṟu Akanāṉūṟu
Puṟanāṉūṟu Kalittokai
Kuṟuntokai Natṟiṇai
Paripāṭal Patiṟṟuppattu
Ten Idylls
Tirumurukāṟṟuppaṭai Kuṟiñcippāṭṭu
Malaipaṭukaṭām Maturaikkāñci
Mullaippāṭṭu Neṭunalvāṭai
Paṭṭiṉappālai Perumpāṇāṟṟuppaṭai
Poruṇarāṟṟuppaṭai Ciṟupāṇāṟṟuppaṭai
Related topics
Sangam Sangam landscape
Tamil history from Sangam literature Ancient Tamil music
Eighteen Lesser Texts
Nālaṭiyār Nāṉmaṇikkaṭikai
Iṉṉā Nāṟpatu Iṉiyavai Nāṟpatu
Kār Nāṟpatu Kaḷavaḻi Nāṟpatu
Aintiṇai Aimpatu Tiṉaimoḻi Aimpatu
Aintinai Eḻupatu Tiṇaimālai Nūṟṟaimpatu
Tirukkuṟaḷ Tirikaṭukam
Ācārakkōvai Paḻamoḻi Nāṉūṟu
Ciṟupañcamūlam Mutumoḻikkānci
Elāti Kainnilai
Bhakti Literature
Naalayira Divya Prabandham Ramavataram
Tevaram Tirumuṟai

Tolkāppiyam, also romanised as Tholkaappiyam (Tamil : தொல்காப்பியம் listen , lit. "ancient poem" [2] ), is the most ancient extant Tamil grammar text and the oldest extant long work of Tamil literature. [3] [4] It is the earliest Tamil text mentioning Gods often identified as Hindu deities. Mayyon as (Krishna or Vishnu), Seyyon as (Skandha), Vendhan as (Indra), Varuna as (Varuna) and Kotṟavai as (Devi or Bagavathi) are the gods mentioned. [5] The surviving manuscripts of the Tolkappiyam consists of three books (atikaram), each with nine chapters (iyal), with a cumulative total of 1,610 (483+463+664) sutras in the nūṛpā meter. [6] [note 1] It is a comprehensive text on grammar, and includes sutras on orthography, phonology, etymology, morphology, semantics, prosody, sentence structure and the significance of context in language. [6]


The Tolkappiyam is difficult to date. Some in the Tamil tradition place the text in the mythical second sangam, variously in 1st millennium BCE or earlier. [8] Scholars place the text much later and believe the text evolved and expanded over a period of time. According to Nadarajah Devapoopathy the earliest layer of the Tolkappiyam was likely composed between the 2nd and 1st century BCE, [9] and the extant manuscript versions fixed by about the 5th century CE. [10] The Tolkappiyam Ur-text likely relied on some unknown even older literature. [11] The Tolkappiyam belongs to second Sangam period.

Iravatham Mahadevan dates the Tolkappiyam to no earlier than the 2nd century CE, as it mentions the puḷḷi being an integral part of Tamil script. The puḷḷi (a diacritical mark to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with inherent vowels) only became prevalent in Tamil epigraphs after the 2nd century CE. [12] According to linguist S. Agesthialingam, Tolkappiyam contains many later interpolations, and the language shows many deviations consistent with late old Tamil (similar to Cilappatikaram), rather than the early old Tamil poems of Eṭṭuttokai and Pattuppāṭṭu. [13]

The Tolkappiyam contains aphoristic verses arranged into three books – the Eluttatikaram ("Eluttu" meaning "letter, phoneme"), the Sollatikaram ("Sol" meaning "Sound, word") and the Porulatikaram ("Porul" meaning "subject matter", i.e. prosody, rhetoric, poetics). [14] The Tolkappiyam includes examples to explain its rules, and these examples provide indirect information about the ancient Tamil culture, sociology, and linguistic geography. It is first mentioned by name in Iraiyanar's Akapporul – a 7th- or 8th-century text – as an authoritative reference, and the Tolkappiyam remains the authoritative text on Tamil grammar. [15] [16] [note 2]


The word Tolkāppiyam is a attribute-based composite word, with tol meaning "ancient, old", and kappiyam meaning "book, text, poem, kavya"; together, the title has been translated as "ancient book", [18] "ancient poem", [19] or "old poem". [20] The word 'kappiyam' is from the Sanskrit Kavya. [21]

According to Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature and history scholar, Tamil purists tend to reject this Sanskrit-style etymology and offer "curious" alternatives. One of these breaks it into three "tol-kappu-iyanratu", meaning "ancient protection [of language]". [18] An alternate etymology that has been proposed by a few purists is that the name of the work derives from the author's name Tolkāppiyan, but this is a disputed assumption because neither the author(s) nor centuries in which this masterpiece was composed are known. [18]


The dating of the Tolkappiyam is difficult, much debated, and it remains contested and uncertain. [22] [23] Proposals range between 5,320 BCE and the 8th century CE. [23] [24]

The tradition and some Indian scholars favor an early date for its composition, before the common era, and state that it is the work of one person associated with sage Agastya. Other Indian scholars, and non-Indian scholars such as Kamil Zvelebil, prefer to date it not as a single entity but in parts or layers. [25] The Tolkappiyam manuscript versions that have survived into the modern age were fixed by about the 5th century CE, according to Zvelebil. [22] [25] [26] Scholars reject traditional datings based on three sangams and the myth of great floods because there is no verifiable evidence in its favor, and the available evidence based on linguistics, epigraphy, Sangam literature and other Indian texts suggest a much later date. [27] The disagreements now center around divergent dates between the 3rd century BCE and 8th century CE. [22] [27] [28]

The datings proposed by contemporary scholars is based on a combination of evidence such as:

Dates proposed


There is no firm evidence to assign the authorship of this treatise to any one author. Tholkapiyam, some traditionally believe, was written by a single author named Tolkappiyar, a disciple of Vedic sage Agastya mentioned in the Rigveda (1500–1200 BCE). According to the traditional legend, the original grammar was called Agathiam written down by sage Agastya, but it went missing after a great deluge. His student Tolkappiyar was asked to compile Tamil grammar, which is Tolkappiyam. [45] [46] In Tamil historical sources such as the 14th-century influential commentary on Tolkappiyam by Naccinarkkiniyar, the author is stated to be Tiranatumakkini (alternate name for Tolkappiyan), the son of a Brahmin rishi named Camatakkini. [47] The earliest mention of Agastya-related Akattiyam legends are found in texts approximately dated to the 8th or 9th century. [48]

According to Kamil Zvelebil, the earliest sutras of the Tolkappiyam were composed by author(s) who lived before the "majority of extant" Sangam literature, who clearly knew Pāṇini and followed Patanjali works on Sanskrit grammar because some verses of Tolkappiyam – such as T-Col 419 andT-Elutt 83 – seem to be borrowed and exact translation of verses of Patanjali's Mahābhāṣya and ideas credited to more ancient Panini. Further, the author(s) lived after Patanjali, because various sections of Tolkappiyam show the same ideas for grammatically structuring a language and it uses borrowed Indo-European words found in Panini and Patanjali works to explain its ideas. [30] According to Hartmut Scharfe and other scholars, the phonetic and phonemic sections of the Tolkappiyam shows considerable influence of Vedic Pratishakhyas , while its rules for nominal compounds follow those in Patanjali's Mahābhāṣya, though there is also evidence of innovations. The author(s) had access and expertise of the ancient Sanskrit works on grammar and language. [49] [50]

According to Zvelebil, another Tamil tradition believes that the earliest layer by its author(s) – Tolkappiyan – may have been a Jaina scholar, who knew aintiram (pre-Paninian grammatical system) and lived in south Kerala, but "we do not know of any definite data concerning the original author or authors". This traditional belief, according to Vaiyapuri Pillai, is supported by a few Jaina Prakrit words such as patimaiyon found in the Tolkappiyam. [51]


The Tolkappiyam deals with ilakkanam (grammar) in three books (atikaram), each with nine chapters (iyal) of different sizes. The text has a cumulative total of 1,610 (Eluttatikaram 483 + Sollatikaram 463 + Porulatikaram 664) sutras in the nūṛpā meter, though some versions of its surviving manuscripts have a few less. [6] [7] The sutra format provides a distilled summary of the rules, one that is not easy to read or understand; commentaries are necessary for the proper interpretation and understanding of Tolkappiyam. [52]

Book 1

"Eluttu" means "sound, letter, phoneme", and this book of the Tolkappiyam covers the sounds of the Tamil language, how they are produced (phonology). [53] It includes punarcci (lit. "joining, copulation") which is combination of sounds, orthography, graphemic and phonetics with sounds as they are produced and listened to. [53] The phonemic inventory it includes consists of 5 long vowels, 5 short vowels, and 17 consonants. The articulatory descriptions in Tolkappiyam are incomplete, indicative of a proto-language. It does not, for example, distinguish between retroflex and non-retroflex consonants, states Thomas Lehmann. [52] The phonetic and phonemic sections of the first book show the influence of Vedic Pratisakhyas, states Hartmut Scharfe, but with some differences. For example, unlike the Pratisakhyas and the later Tamil, the first book of Tolkappiyam does not treat /ṭ/ and /ṇ/ as retroflex. [54]

Book 2

"Sol" meaning "word", and the second book deals with "etymology, morphology, semantics and syntax", states Zvelebil. [53] The sutras cover compounds, some semantic and lexical issues. It also mentions the twelve dialectical regions of Tamil speaking people, which suggests the author(s) had a keen sense of observation and inclusiveness for Old Tamil's linguistic geography. [53] According to Peter Scharf, the sutras here are inspired by the work on Sanskrit grammar by Panini, but it uses Tamil terminology and adds technical innovations. [50] Verb forms and the classification of nominal compounds in the second book show the influence of Patanjali's Mahabhasya. [54]

Book 3

"Porul" meaning "subject matter", and this book deals with the prosody (yappu) and rhetoric (ani) of Old Tamil. [55] It is here, that the book covers the two genres found in classical Tamil literature: akam (love, erotics, interior world) and puram (war, society, exterior world). The akam is subdivided into kalavu (premarital love) and karpu (marital love). [55] It also deals with dramaturgy, simile, prosody and tradition. According to Zvelebil, this arrangement suggests that the entire Tolkappiyam was likely a guide for bardic poets, where the first two books led to this third on how to compose their songs. [55] The third book's linking of literature (ilakkiyam) to the grammatical rules of the first and the second book (ilakkanam) created a symbiotic relationship between the two. [52] The literary theory of Tolkappiyam, according to Peter Scharf, borrows from Sanskrit literary theory texts. [50]

Epigraphical studies, such as those by Mahadevan, show that ancient Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions found in South India and dated to between 3rd century BCE and 4th century CE had three different grammatical form. Only one of them is assumed in the Tolkappiyam. [52] The language of the Sangam literature is same as the one described in Tolkappiyam, except in some minor respects. [50]


The Tolkappiyam is a collection of aphoristic verses in the nūṛpā meter. [6] It is unintelligible without a commentary. [52] Tamil scholars have written commentaries on it, over the centuries:

Commentaries on Tolkappiyam
Author [50] Date [50] Notes
Ilampuranar10th to 12th centuryFull: all verses [56]
Cenavaraiyar13th or 14th centuryPartial: 2nd book [56]
Peraciriyar13th centuryPartial: 1st and 2nd book [56]
Naccinarkkiniyar14th centuryPartial: 1st, 2nd and part 3rd book [56]
Tayvaccilaiyar16th centuryPartial: 2nd book [56]
Kallatanar15th to 17th century [50] [56] Partial: 2nd book [56]

The commentary by Ilampuranar dated to the 11th or 12th century CE is the most comprehensive and probably the best, states Zvelebil. [57] The commentary by Senavaraiyar deals only with the second book Sollathikaram. [56] The commentary by Perasiriyar, which is heavily indebted to the Nannūl , frequently quotes from the Dandiyalankaram and Yapparunkalam, the former being a standard medieval rhetorica and the latter being a detailed treatise on Tamil prosody. Naccinarkiniyar's commentary, being a scholar of both Tamil and Sanskrit, quotes from Parimelalakar's works. [56]


There are two verses given in support of Tholkappiar's religious outlook. [58] Some made controversial and unconfirmed observation in Sangam poems that there is relatively meager reference given to religion in general. In the akam songs, Tholkappiar has made reference to deities in the different land divisions: Thirumal for Mullai, Murugan for Kurinji, Vendhan for Maarutham, Kadalon for Neithal and Kotravai for Paalai. [59]

Alexander Dubyanskiy, veteran Tamil scholar from Moscow State University stated, "I am sure that Tolkappiyam is a work which demanded not only vast knowledge and a lot of thinking but a considerable creative skill from its composer." Dubyanskiy also said that the authority of the text was undeniable: "It is a literary and cultural monument of great importance." [60]

See also


  1. The palm-leaf manuscripts and commentaries on the text vary slightly in the total number of verse-sutras; they are all about 1,610. [7]
  2. According to Thomas Lehmann, the Tolkappiyam rules are followed and exemplified in Old Tamil (pre-700 CE) literature. The Middle Tamil (700-1600 CE) and Modern Tamil (post-1600 CE) have additional distinct grammatical characteristics. [17] Causative stems of verb bases are "lexical in Old Tamil, morphological in Middle Tamil, and syntactic in Modern Tamil", for example, states Lehmann. Nevertheless, many features of Middle and Modern Tamil are anchored in the Old Tamil of Tolkappiyam. [17]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patanjali</span> Ancient Indian scholar(s)

Patanjali, also called Gonardiya or Gonikaputra, was a Hindu author, mystic and philosopher. Estimates based on analysis of his works suggests that he may have lived between the 2nd century BCE and the 4th century CE. Patanjali is regarded as an avatar of Adi Sesha.

<i>Cilappatikaram</i> Ancient Tamil Hindu–Jain epic

Cilappatikāram, also referred to as Silappathikaram or Silappatikaram, is the earliest Tamil epic. It is a poem of 5,730 lines in almost entirely akaval (aciriyam) meter. The epic is a tragic love story of an ordinary couple, Kannaki and her husband Kovalan. The Cilappatikaram has more ancient roots in the Tamil bardic tradition, as Kannaki and other characters of the story are mentioned or alluded to in the Sangam literature such as in the Naṟṟiṇai and later texts such as the Kovalam Katai. It is attributed to a prince-turned-monk Iḷaṅkõ Aṭikaḷ, and was probably composed in the 5th or 6th century CE.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sangam literature</span> Historic period of Tamil literature

The Sangam literature historically known as 'the poetry of the noble ones' connotes the ancient Tamil literature and is the earliest known literature of South India. The Tamil tradition and legends link it to three literary gatherings around Madurai and Kapāṭapuram : the first over 4,440 years, the second over 3,700 years, and the third over 1,850 years before the start of the common era. Scholars consider this Tamil tradition-based chronology as ahistorical and mythical. Most scholars suggest the historical Sangam literature era spanned from c. 300 BCE to 300 CE, while others variously place this early classical Tamil literature period a bit later and more narrowly but all before 300 CE. According to Kamil Zvelebil, a Tamil literature and history scholar, the most acceptable range for the Sangam literature is 100 BCE to 250 CE, based on the linguistic, prosodic and quasi-historic allusions within the texts and the colophons.

Agattiyam, also spelled as Akattiyam, according to Tamil tradition, was the earliest book on Tamil grammar. It is a non-extant text, traditionally believed to have been compiled and taught in the First Sangam, by Agattiar (Agastya) to twelve students. A few surviving verses of Akattiyam are said to be quoted in medieval commentaries.

The Eight Anthologies, known as Eṭṭuttokai or "Eight Collections" in the literature, is a classical Tamil poetic work that forms part of the Eighteen Greater Texts (Patiṉeṇmēlkaṇakku) anthology series of the Sangam Literature. The Eight Anthologies and its companion anthology, the Ten Idylls (Pattuppāṭṭu), is the oldest available Tamil literature. According to Kamil Zvelebil, a scholar of Tamil literature and history, dating these Eight Anthologies or their relative chronology is difficult, but the scholarship so far suggested that the earliest layers were composed sometime between the 1st century BCE and 2nd century CE, while the last layers were completed between 3rd and 5th century CE.

Ainkurunuru is a classical Tamil poetic work and traditionally the third of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. It is divided into five groups of 100 short stanzas of 3 to 6 lines, each hundred subdivided into 10s, or pattu. The five groups are based on tinai (landscapes): riverine, sea coast, mountain, arid and pastoral. According to Martha Selby, the love poems in Ainkurunuru are generally dated from about the late-2nd-to-3rd-century-CE. According to Takanobu Takahashi – a Tamil literature scholar, these poems were likely composed between 300 and 350 CE based on the linguistic evidence, while Kamil Zvelebil – another Tamil literature scholar – suggests the Ainkurunuru poems were composed by 210 CE, with some of the poems dated to 100 BCE.

<i>Akanaṉūṟu</i> Work of classical Tamil literature

The Akananuru, sometimes called Nedunthokai, is a classical Tamil poetic work and one of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. It is a collection of 400 love poems with invocatory poem dedicated to Perumal. The collected poems were composed by 144 poets, except 3 poems which are by anonymous author(s). The poems range between 13 and 31 lines, and are long enough to include more details of the subject, episode and its context. According to Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature and history scholar, they are "one of the most valuable collections" from ancient Tamil history perspective.

Kalittokai is a classical Tamil poetic work and the sixth of Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. It is an "akam genre – love and erotic – collection par excellence", according to Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature and history scholar. The anthology contains 150 poems and was compiled by one of the authors named Nallantuvanar. The collection has a different tone, metre and style than earlier Sangam literature, evidence that it is a late Sangam work, likely from the 3rd-century CE or after. Naccinarkiniyar, a Tamil scholar who lived during the 14th-century CE, has commented on this work.

Kuṟuntokai is a classical Tamil poetic work and traditionally the second of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. The collection belongs to the akam (love) category, and each poem consists of 4 to 8 lines each. The Sangam literature structure suggests that the original compilation had 400 poems, but the surviving Kuruntokai manuscripts have 402 poems. According to Takanobu Takahashi – a Tamil literature scholar, these poems were likely composed between 100 CE and 300 CE based on the linguistics, style and dating of the authors. Kamil Zvelebil, a Tamil literature and history scholar, states that the majority of the poems in the Kuruntokai were likely composed between the 1st century BCE and the 2nd century CE. The Kuruntokai manuscript colophon states that it was compiled by Purikko (உரை), however nothing is known about this compiler or the patron.

Natrinai, is a classical Tamil poetic work and traditionally the first of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. The collection – sometimes spelled as Natrinai or Narrinai – contains both akam (love) and puram category of poems. The Naṟṟiṇai anthology contains 400 poems, mainly of 9 to 12 lines, but a few with 8 to 13 lines each. According to Takanobu Takahashi – a Tamil literature scholar, the Naṟṟiṇai poems were likely composed between 100–300 CE based on the linguistics, style and dating of the authors. While Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature and history scholar, dates some poems to the 1st century BCE. The Naṟṟiṇai manuscript colophon states that it was compiled under the patronage of the Pandyan king named Pannatu Tanta Pantiyan Maran Valuti, but the compiler remained anonymous.

The Paripādal is a classical Tamil poetic work and traditionally the fifth of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature. According to Tolkappiyam, Paripadal is a kind of verse dealing only with love (akapporul) and does not fall under the general classification of verses. It has a minimum of 25 lines and a maximum of 400 lines. It is an "akam genre", odd and hybrid collection which expresses love in the form of religious devotion (Bhakti) to gods and goddesses predominently to Maha Vishnu and Murugan. According to Kamil Zvelebil, a Tamil literature and history scholar. This is the only anthology in the Eight Anthologies collection that is predominantly religious, though the other seven anthologies do contain occasional mentions and allusions to gods, goddesses and legends.

The Ten Idylls, known as Pattuppāṭṭu or Ten Lays, is an anthology of ten longer poems in the Sangam literature – the earliest known Tamil literature. They range between about 100 and 800 lines, and the collection includes the celebrated Nakkīrar's Tirumurukāṟṟuppaṭai. The collection was termed as "Ten Idylls" during the colonial era, though this title is considered "very incorrect" by Kamil Zvelebil – a scholar of Tamil literature and history. He suggests "Ten Lays" as the more apt title. Five of these ten ancient poems are lyrical, narrative bardic guides (arruppatai) by which poets directed other bards to the patrons of arts such as kings and chieftains. The others are guides to religious devotion (Murugan) and to major towns, sometimes mixed with akam- or puram-genre poetry.

<i>Tirumurukāṟṟuppaṭai</i> Ancient Tamil poem devoted to Murugan (Sangam literature)

Tirumurukātṟuppatai is an ancient intensely devotional Tamil poem in the Sangam literature genre entirely dedicated to the god Murugan. Murugan is described as the nephew of the god Vishnu, who is called Mayon or the ruler of the worlds. Authored by Nakkiranar, it is the first poem in the Ten Idylls (Pattuppāṭṭu) anthology. The poem is generally dated to the late classical period, with some scholars suggesting it may have been composed a few centuries later.

Kuṟiñcippāṭṭu, also called the Kurinchipattu or Perumkurinchi, is an ancient Tamil poem in the Sangam literature genre. It is a story about premarital love. Authored by Kapilar, it is the eighth poem in the Pattuppāṭṭu anthology. The poem is generally dated to the classical period.

Ciṟupāṇāṟṟuppaṭai is an ancient Tamil poem, likely the last composed in the Pattuppattu anthology of the Sangam literature. It contains 296 lines in the akaval meter. It is one of five arruppatai genre poems and was a guide to other bards seeking a patron for their art. The main hero honored in the poem is Nalliyakkotan, but the poem reverentially mentions an additional seven minor chieftains and three kings. The poem is dated to sometime between the late 3rd century CE and 5th century CE by Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature scholar.

Neṭunalvāṭai is an ancient Tamil poem in the Sangam literature. Also referred to as Nedunalvadai, it is a blend of a love and war story, highlighting the pains of separation of a queen waiting for her lover to return from the distant war. Authored by Nakkirar, it is the seventh poem in the Pattuppāṭṭu anthology. The poem is generally dated to the late classical period.

<i>Iraiyanar Akapporul</i> Early mediaeval work on Tamil poetics

Iraiyaṉār Akapporuḷ, or Kaḷaviyal eṉṟa Iraiyaṉār Akapporuḷ, literally "Iraiyanar's treatise on the love-theme, called 'The study of stolen love'" is an early mediaeval work on Tamil poetics, specifically, on the literary conventions associated with the akam tradition of Tamil love poetry. The date of the work is uncertain, but it is generally taken to have been composed between the fifth and eighth centuries.

Nacciṇārkkiṇiyar, also spelled Naccinarkkiniyar or Nachinarkiniyar, was a 14th-century Tamil and Sanskrit scholar famous for his commentaries on Sangam literature and post-Sangam medieval Tamil literature. His commentary on some of the most studied Tamil texts such as the Tolkappiyam, Kuruntokai and Civaka Cintamani have guided scholarship that followed him, including modern era studies of Tamil literature. According to Kamil Zvelebil, a Tamil literature scholar, Naccinarkiniyar had a "keen poetic sense, awareness of word values". He vividly analyzed the primary text and secondary literature on that primary text, in a sophisticated impartial manner seen in modern era scholarship. He paid attention to minute details with a critical observation, states Zvelebil, and Naccinarkiniyar's work shows "a clear mind and a vast erudition" of Tamil and Sanskrit works.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Old Tamil</span> Form of Tamil used from 300 BCE to 700 CE

Old Tamil is the period of the Tamil language spanning from 300 BCE to 700 CE and the many regional variations of it including the ones in Kerala. Prior to Old Tamil, the period of Tamil linguistic development is termed as Pre Tamil. After the Old Tamil period, Tamil becomes Middle Tamil. The earliest records in Old Tamil are inscriptions from between the 3rd and 1st century BCE in caves and on pottery. These inscriptions are written in a variant of the Brahmi script called Tamil Brahmi. The earliest long text in Old Tamil is the Tolkāppiyam, an early work on Tamil grammar and poetics, whose oldest layers could be as old as the mid 2nd century BCE. Old Tamil preserved many features of Proto-Dravidian, the earliest reconstructed form of the Dravidian including inventory of consonants, the syllable structure, and various grammatical features.

The dating of the Tirukkural, and by extension the period of its author Valluvar, has been a subject of intense debate among scholars for centuries, and it continues to remain so. The Kural is variously dated between 300 BCE and 5th century CE. According to Blackburn, the "current scholarly consensus" dates the text and the author to approximately 500 CE. The Tamil Nadu government has ratified 31 BCE as the year of birth of Valluvar. Still the precise date as to when Valluvar completed writing the Kural text remains murky. This article speaks about various dates arrived at by various scholars over time.


  1. 1 2 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 137 and 147, Quote (p. 137): "As we will see later, Tolkkapiyam, the core of which may be assigned to pre-Christian era, consists perhaps of many layers, some of which may be much earlier than others", (p. 147): "Thus, the nuclear portions of Tolkappiyam were probably born sometimes in the 2nd or 1st century BC, but hardly before 150 BC.".
  2. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, p. 131.
  3. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 131–133.
  4. David Shulman 2016, p. 28.
  5. Journal of Tamil Studies, Volume 1. International Institute of Tamil Studies. 1969. p. 131. Archived from the original on 13 November 2017.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 131–132 with footnotes.
  7. 1 2 Hartmut Scharfe 1977, pp. 178–179 with footnote 2.
  8. 1 2 Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16–17.
  9. Nadarajah, Devapoopathy (1994). Love in Sanskrit and Tamil Literature: A Study of Characters and Nature, 200 B.C.-A.D. 500. Motilal Banarsidass Publ. ISBN   978-81-208-1215-4.
  10. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 138–146 with footnotes, Quote: "this fact would give us approximately the 5th cent. AD as the earliest date of Porulatikaram, and as the date of the final redaction of the Tolkappiyam.".
  11. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 138–139 with footnotes.
  12. Mahadevan, I. (2014). Early Tamil Epigraphy - From the Earliest Times to the Sixth century C.E., 2nd Edition. p. 271.
  13. S. Agesthialingam, A grammar of Old Tamil (with special reference to Patirruppattu), Annamalai University, (1979), pXIV
  14. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 131–134 with footnotes, 150.
  15. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 131–134 with footnotes.
  16. Hartmut Scharfe 1977, pp. 179–180.
  17. 1 2 Thomas Lehmann (2015). Sanford B. Steever (ed.). The Dravidian Languages. Routledge. pp. 75–76. ISBN   978-1-136-91164-4.
  18. 1 2 3 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 131–132 with footnote 1.
  19. Bartholomaeus Ziegenbalg (2010). Tamil Language for Europeans: Ziegenbalg's Grammatica Damulica. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 1–2. ISBN   978-3-447-06236-7.
  20. Willem van Reijen; Willem G. Weststeijn (1999). Subjectivity. Rodopi. pp. 321–322. ISBN   90-420-0728-1.
  21. Sir Ralph Lilley Turner - A comparative dictionary to the Indo-Aryan languages, Entry 3110 kāˊvyaāvikā&searchhws=yes
  22. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 138–146 with footnotes.
  23. 1 2 The Date of the Tolkappiyam: A Retrospect." Annals of Oriental Research (Madras), Silver Jubilee Volume: 292–317
  24. Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16–17, Quote=The date of Tol[kappiyam] has been variously proposed as lying between 5320 B.C. and the 8th Cent. A.D..
  25. 1 2 Ramaswamy, Vijaya (1993). "Women and Farm Work in Tamil Folk Songs". Social Scientist. 21 (9/11): 113–129. doi:10.2307/3520429. JSTOR   3520429.
  26. Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16–19.
  27. 1 2 3 Takahashi, Takanobu (1995). "2. Erudite works". Tamil Love Poetry & Poetics. Leiden; New York; Cologne: Brill. p. 18. ISBN   90-04-10042-3. These agreements may probably advance the lower limit of the date for Tol[kappiyam], but do not mean more recently than the 5th Cent. A.D., as suggested by some critics such as S. Vaiyapuri Pillai [...]
  28. 1 2 Tieken, Herman Joseph Hugo. 2001. Kāvya in South India: old Tamil Caṅkam poetry. Groningen: Egbert Forsten.
  29. Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16–18.
  30. 1 2 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 142–146 with footnotes.
  31. Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16, 18–19.
  32. Takanobu Takahashi 1995, pp. 16, 20–22.
  33. Kamil Zvelebil 1991.
  34. Sesha Iyengar, T.R. (1925), Dravidian India , Asian Educational Services, New Delhi, reprinted 1995, pp 155–157
  35. Gift Siromoney (1983), Origin of the Tamil-Brahmi script , Seminar on "Origin evolution and reform of the Tamil script", pp. 21–29, The Institute of Traditional Cultures, University Buildings, Madras-600005
  36. Mahadevan, I. (2014). Early Tamil Epigraphy - From the Earliest Times to the Sixth century C.E., 2nd Edition. p. 271.
  37. Rajam, V. S. 1992. A Reference Grammar of Classical Tamil Poetry: 150 B.C.–pre-Fifth/Sixth Century A.D. Memoirs of the American philosophical society, vol. 199. Philadelphia, Pa: American Philosophical Society, p. 7
  38. Vaiyapuri Pillai, S. 1956. History of Tamil language and literature; beginning to 1000 A.D.. Madras: New Century Book House.
  39. Kamil Zvelebil 1974, pp. 9–10.
  40. Kamil Zvelebil 1973 , pp. 138–147 with footnotes
  41. "It is thus impossible to put the original text much later than the eighth century, for by the tenth century the whole Pāṇḍiya kingdom had fallen under the orthodox Coḷas." Burnell, A. C. (1975). "On the Aindra School of Sanskrit Grammarians: Their place in the Sanskrit and Subordinate Literatures". Mangalore: Basel Mission Book and Tract Depository: 8–9.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  42. George Hart III. "Review of Tieken's Kavya in South India." Journal of the American Oriental Institute124:1. pp. 180–184. 2004.
  43. G.E. Ferro-Luzzi. "Tieken, Herman, Kavya in South India (Book review). Asian Folklore Studies. June 2001. pp. 373–374
  44. Anne E. Monius, Book review, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 61, No. 4 (Nov., 2002), pp. 1404–1406
  45. book titled "Tholkappiyar Kaalam", Madhivanan
  46. Zvelebil, Kamil. 1973. The smile of Murugan on Tamil literature of South India. Leiden: Brill.
  47. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, p. 136.
  48. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 136–137.
  49. Hartmut Scharfe 1977, pp. 180–182.
  50. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Peter Scharf (2013). Keith Allan (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics. Oxford University Press. pp. 253–254. ISBN   978-0-19-164343-9.
  51. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, p. 137.
  52. 1 2 3 4 5 Thomas Lehmann (2015). Sanford B. Steever (ed.). The Dravidian Languages. Routledge. pp. 76–78. ISBN   978-1-136-91164-4.
  53. 1 2 3 4 Kamil Zvelebil 1974, p. 132.
  54. 1 2 Hartmut Scharfe 1977, pp. 180–181.
  55. 1 2 3 Kamil Zvelebil 1974, p. 133.
  56. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Kamil Zvelebil 1973, pp. 134–136.
  57. Kamil Zvelebil 1973, p. 134.
  58. Dr.C.R.Krishnamurti. "2. The Sangam Period".
  59. Journal of Tamil Studies, Volume 1. International Institute of Tamil Studies. 1969. p. 131. Archived from the original on 13 November 2017.
  60. Karthik Madhavan. "Tolkappiyam is not dependent on Sanskrit sources: Tamil scholar". The Hindu.