Indian Antiquary Vol 58

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

Page 124

114
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[JUN, 1929
India. The tradition may be plain, it may be hoary, age-old, ancient or of time immemorial; it may be held sacred by the Malabar Christians or even by the whole of Christendom. Yet when we begin to scrutinize and argue about it, the burden of proof rests with those who stand by the tradition, although Dr. Thomas says (Y.M.I., November 1927, p. 654) that "when we are dealing with such a hoary and respected tradition, the onus probandi is on those who claim to disprove it." A strange statement indeed! How could the (onus) obligation (probandi) to prove a tradition rest on those who claim to disprove it? This would be an inversion of the established rules of evidence.
On p. 41 of Y.M.I. for January, 1928, Dr. Thomas writes: "The plain question is, Have you any evidence to affirm that St. Thomas did not come to India or could not have come ; or that some one forged the tradition at some definite time and place ?"
Let it be granted for argument's sake that there is no evidence. Nevertheless we can ask Dr. Thomas, -Have you any evidence to affirm that St. Thomas did come to South India ?
I grant that St. Thomas could very well have come to South India. Why,-Asoka, or Mahendra, or Sanghamitra, or Alexander, or Megasthenes, or Cosmas, or Fa-hien, or Napoleon could have come to South India. But that does not imply that they did come.
As regards my theory about an Edeggene missionary of perhaps king Abgar's time (circa 200), I then and there said (Ind. Ant., 1926, p. 222) that it was a "speculation which may or may not be correct." As I have said, "Let it by all means prove to be wrong. But that will not help St. Thomas' cause." (Y.M.I., December 1927, p. 735). Since Dr. Thomas and some others seem to be busy tilting against my speculation, instead of proving the much-vaunted South Indian tradition, I have already withdrawn the speculation. Let Dr. Thomas ignore my theory, and address himself to the task of proving that St. Thomas came to South India. For the enlightenment of scholars who do not know Syriac, Malayalam, Tamil, and Telugu in which languages the South Indian tradition is recorded, Dr. Thomas will do well to get the South Indian Thomistio documents translated into English and publish them as early as possible. Let such scholars have a chance of scrutinizing the “hoary and respected "tradition, and estimating it at its true worth.