Indian Antiquary Vol 58

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 123

Jun, 1929)
WAS ST. THOMAS IN SOUTH INDIA
WAS ST. THOMAS IN SOUTH INDIA ?
(A Reply lo Dr. P.J. Thomas.)
BY T. K. JOSEPH, B.A., L.T. In the Indian Antiquary, vol. LVII, pp. 7-10, Dr. P.J. Thomas of Travancore has published a criticism of my article, St. Thomas in South India, printed in the same journal, vol. LV. pp. 221-223. The same rejoinder by Dr. Thomas had previously appearod in The Young Men of India (Calcutta) for November 1927, pp. 652-662, with some prefatory remarks, and a controversy went on between us in that magazine for some months. As it is unnecebaary to repeat all that has been written by both parties in that journal, I shall confine myself to the most important points disoussed therein.
In The Young Men of India for November 1927, p. 652, Dr. Thomas declares that " legends grow around a fact." I do not agree that this can be laid down as a general rule. There are exceptions. For instance, take the following, which I mentioned in Y.M.I. for December 1927. p. 734 :" There is the local Hindu tradition of the coming of the Pandavas to soores of places in Malabar. But that does not mean that they ever actually came there. In Marco Polo's time (c. 1290) there was the tradition in Ceylon that on Adam's Peak 'is the sepulchre of Adam, our first parent' (Yule's Marco Polo, 1903. vol. II, p. 316). But that does not mean that Adam was ever in Ceylon."
In Y.M.I. for January 1928, Dr. Thomas says: "My conclusion is the same as that of my last article. There is no evidence to discard the" (South Indian) "tradition of St. Thomas." But my contention is that there is no evidence to prove the South Indian tradition of St. Thomas, i.e., to prove that St. Thomas came to South India, as the tradition alleges. Since South Indian tradition has all these centuries been saying that St. Thomas did come to South India, the onus probandi is on those who uphold it.
1. "Legends grow around a fact" (says Dr. Thomas). 2. A legend has grown around the coming of St. Thomas to South India. 3. Ergo the coming of St. Thomas to South India is a fact. Certainly this logic does not appeal to me.
In Y.M.I. for November 1927, p. 653, Dr. Thomas says: “We have patristic testimony in favour of the apostolate." No; none of the early fathers of the Church say definitely and explicitly that St. Thomas evangelized South India. True, the early fathers and other writers assign "India" to St. Thomas. But writers of the same period assign Parthia to him, not India.
Might we not say that both parties are right, on the assumption that it was to India Parthia (the Indo-Parthian region in the North-West of India) that St. Thomas went ?
"I admit,” says Dr. Thomas, "that direct evidences are now lacking to prove that the South Indian journey of St. Thomas is a fact, owing to the lack of contemporary records, ....." (from South India).-Y.M.I., November 1927, p. 652.
Very well, then, let us not say that the South Indian journey of St. Thomas is a fact until such records are forthcoming, especially because Professor Sylvain Lévi says in a letter to me from Japan, dated 29th April, 1927 (Y.M.I., July 1927, p. 402) :
" ... you are right in denying any historical value to local legends which bayo nothing to bring to their support. What is known from early books points only to NorthWest India, and no other place, for Saint Thomas' apostolio activity and martyrdom. This is, of ourno, more tradition too, no real history." (Italics mine.)
What recorded St. Thomas tradition of equal age has South India to pit against the St. Thomas tradition recorded in the early books of foreign countries like Edessa ! None at all.
Says Dr. Thomas : "I therefore assert again that no shred of evidence has yet been brought forward to discredit the plain tradition above noted” (that St. Thomas came to South India).
Y.M.I. for January 1928. We should rather express it otherwise, i.e., that no shred of evidence how yot been brought forward to prove the plain tradition that St. Thomas came to South