________________
258
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
(SEPTEMBER, 1889.
the first half of the first century A.D.2 The era used by him, consequently, cannot have differed very much from that beginning in 58 B.C., which afterwards became known by the name of Vikrama. I do not, of course, mean to assert that the Vikrama era was actually used by Gondophares; I merely note the fact that he used an epoch which closely approximated to that known as the era of Vikrama. The era employed by Gondophares may have been that of the great king Moga," in the 78th year of which the Taxila inscription of the Satrap Liako. Kusulako is dated. 3
I hope that some one more learned in eras than I am, may solve the problems propounded by these inscriptions from the Yusufzai country. The style of the Hashtnagar relief is not very good, the figures not being undercat, as they are in the best examples of Græco-Buddhist art; and I feel more inclined to date the work in A.D. 351-52, than in or about A.D. 210-220; but I cannot say that the earlier date is impossible.
TAMIL HISTORICAL TEXTS.
By V. KANAKASABHAI PILLAI, B.A., B.L. There are several ancient poems still extant in the Tamil language, which are of great historical value, but are as yet unknown to European scholars. I do not speak of those poetical works, which are only professedly historical, such as the Madhurd-Sthala-Purdna and the Kanchi Purana, which are translations of Parâņas composed in Sanskrit by pious Brahmaps for the glory of the temples or local deities in which they were interested; they are full of absurd stories spun out of the imagination of the authors, interspersed with a fow legendary traditions, and are utterly anreliable as historical guides. But I refer to those poems which were composed in praise of contemporary kings or chieftains, and which belong to the class of metrical compositions known in Tamil by the name of Kovai, Uld, Param, and Kalambakam. They are all written in a conventional style peculiar to each class. The Kovai is an amatory poem, in every stanza of which the praises of his patron are cunningly brought in by the author. The Ulá gives a description of the personal appearance of a king or hero, when he comes out of his palace sarrounded by his nobles and officers of state, and of the enamoured behaviour of women, young and old, who are fascinated by his beauty. The Parani describes a battle or campaign, in which the victor is the author's patron. The Kalambakam is a poem very similar to the Kšvai, with only this difference, that in the former each stanza is of a different metre, and is addressed to the patron as uttered by his mistress, while in the latter the stanzas are all of one metre, and the patron is not one of the lovers. A poem of any of these kinds would be usually read by the author in a public assembly presided over by his patron, who on the conclusion of the recital would reward the poet with gifts of money or, land, and with costly presents such as horses, chariots, elephants, and the like.
These poems owe their preservation to the esteem in which they have been held, not as records of historical events, nor as relics of the poets who composed them, but as rare specimens of the class of metrical compositions to which they belong. Making due allowance for the exaggerations that would naturally find their way into enlogistic verses addressed by poets to their patrons, there is no reason to question the truth of the main events narrated in them; and to the antiquarian and archeologist who have now to elucidate the ancient history of India from inscriptions on temples and copper-plates, such works should be of great interest. The facts that may be gathered from this class of Tamil literature, would enable such enquirers not only to correct or confirm the information they have already collected from inscriptions, but also to trace the history of those periods for which no information can be gathered from the inscriptions.
Cunningham, Archeol. Surv. Ind., Vol. II. p. 60; V. pp. 59, 60; Gardner, Catalogue of Coins o Skythic kings of Bactria and India, p. Eliv.
8 Cunningham, Archaol. Surv. Ind., Vol II. p. 132; V. 07; Gardner, P. xlix.
