Indian Antiquary Vol 41

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 29

FEBRUARY, 1912.)
TRAVENCORE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERIES
25
The way in which Mr. Gopinatha Rao creates a queen for his Marañjadaiyan seems to be very queer. I use the word "creates" because the record itself does not warrant his conclusion. His whole argument hangs on what he believes to be the use of the honorific plural form of the third personal pronoun avaukknu in the Tirapparaigunram inscription. His argument may be stated thus:
Sattan Ganapati, the minister of the king, is referred to in this inscription in the third person singular. A certain Nakkan Korri is mentioned as the wife of a person whom the record introduces with the honorific plural" avarku. She cannot, therefore, be the wife of Sattan Ganapati, who is always referred to in the record by the third person singular. The only other possibility is that she must be the queen of Marañjadaiyan, and for him the bonorific plural" is appropriate.
It is easy to prove that Nakkan Korri is the wife of Sattan Ganapati and not the queen of Maranjadaiyap. Her elevation to the rank of a Pandya queen is due to Mr. Gopinatha Rao's misconception that avarku is the honorific plural of the third personal pronoun. I have only to show him that the word ararku is the mere third personal pronoun singular. It is made up of avan.
Third personal pronoun singular + Dative sign ku.
Rules of grammar require that when these two combine without the intervention of what are called śdriyai, the compound assumes the form ararku, the consonaut changing into r. Similar instances are :
en + ku = erku (Girst person singular).
nix + ku = nicku (second persons ). The dative case of nouns is also formed similarly, e.g:
vadugar + ku = radugarku. pånan + ku = pánarku.
nakkan + ku = nakkarku. If the sáriyai intervenes, the form becomes quite ordinary, as -
aran + ku = apar + # + ku = avanukku.
valugan + k# = vadugan + 4 + ku = vaduganulku. The honorific plaral is formed as followa :
avar + ku = ararkku (without the intervention of adriya!). arar + ku = araruleku (with sdriyai).
vadlugar + ku = vadugarkku (without śdriyal) = vadugarukku (with sdriyai); similarly, for pdnan or panar, odtlan or sáttar, nakkan or nokkar or naklanar.
It must only be pointed out that the spelling of the dative of the honorific plural of the third personal pronoun is avarkku with single r and double k and that the spelling of the third personal pronoun, singular, da ive is avarleu with r and single k.
The inscription has the form ararku with r and single & and as such it is only the dative of the third personal propoun, singular aran. There is absolutely no differnce between the two singular dative forms ararku and avanukku. And as Mr. Gopinatna Rao scems to concede that if the third person singular is used, Nakkan Korri would be the wife of Sattan Ganapati, I think I have satisfactorily shown that she is not the queen of Marunjacaiyan. That this mistake should have been committed after the inscription has been correctly read and translated previously, perhaps shows that ihe editor takes a peculiar pleasure in differing from others. One other point that could have been considered that if Nakkan Korri were the Pandya queen, she would have been termed Pândi nadeviyar, Nambirâtçiyâr or Deviyar Makkan Korrigar as is quite common in inscriptions.