[see also Tamil 
	Drama & Film  - நாடகத் தமிழ், திரைப் படம் and
	The 
	Ritualistic Origins of Tamil Drama - K. Sivathamby]
	
		"This is a pioneering work, in which the author applies the method of 
		historical materialism to a new field. Not only does he throw new light 
		on features of Tamil drama which were previously obscure, but he also 
		points to some significant parallels with Greek drama. In this way he 
		points the way to a new field of comparative study. His work is 
		valuable, both for what it achieves and for what it will help others to 
		achieve." From the Foreword by 
		
		George Thomson
	
	From the Conclusion - Factors in Origin and Development of Drama in 
	Tamil Society
	An examination of the efforts so far made to assess the character and 
	trace the development of Ancient Tamil Drama has revealed to us the 
	necessity to approach the problem in a way different to the ones adopted 
	earlier. It was suggested in the first chapter that, in view of the absence 
	of literary dramas, it would be better to make a comparative study of the 
	social aspects of a well developed dramatic form. Such a study, it was 
	argued, would enable us to use the available evidence in a more positive 
	manner and sec new light in those areas which remained dark when viewed in 
	isolation.
	The preliminary outline of the social aspects in the history of 
	
	Ancient Greek Drama, and the ensuing review of the available Tamil 
	sources in which an effort was made to assess the exact nature of the 
	evidence and the true characteristic of those features which are said to be 
	associated with drama, made it imperative that, we should sketch the 
	socio-historical background of Ancient Tamilnad. The available literary 
	evidences viewed against that background brought to light the social 
	impulses that lay behind the institution of drama and revealed development, 
	which, like the society itself, had a 
	caste basis. A comparison of the features of this dramatic tradition 
	with those of Ancient Greece confirmed that the Tamilian development was 
	consistent with its social developments.
	After having thus traced a probable line of development it now remains to 
	see whether it is able to explain the features observed at the first 
	instance and account for them. Such a check would validate the line of 
	development postulated.
	The study of the origins of drama did not engage the attention of the 
	literary scholars because there was no dramatic literature. To the 
	historians, drama was just a part of the social entertainment and did not 
	deserve any serious inquiry. Whatever has been written on the problem of the 
	origins of drama has been in relation to other subjects like the concept of 
	poetry and the influence of monastic religions. It may, perhaps, be said 
	that as long as there was no history of Tamil drama, there was no need for a 
	major inquiry into the origins of it.
	But to a student of the history of drama, the origins of Tamil drama can 
	never be a problem, because, 
	ritualistic association of drama is yet a living reality in Tamil Nad. 
	Dramas are even today enacted for ritualistic purposes. We have already seen 
	how the Draupati Natakam is staged for ritualistic purposes with a great 
	religious zeal. 1 
	As in South India, in Sri Lanka too, among the more backward communities 
	drama is performed as a votive offering. In the villages of Tumpalai and 
	Karaveddi in North Sri Lanka dramas are staged as thanks-giving at the cult 
	centres of Kali, the mother goddess. The classical dance of the Tamils -
	Bharata Natiyam 
	is even now, nominally, a temple art. Though Bharata Natiyam as it is 
	performed is no more a ritual, there survived till recent times rituals in 
	dance like the Navasandhi which were expected to be performed by the dancing 
	girls attached to the temple. Because of the association with the temple, it 
	has now become difficult to distinguish the religious from the secular.
	In spite of the survival of the primitive function of drama, it cannot be 
	said that the myths depicted in these dramas are the same as those of the 
	Early Tamils. Our 
	study of the socio-cultural development has shown that the most important 
	feature in the religious sphere had been the mingling of cults. In some 
	cases, North Indian myths replaced the indigenous ones; in some the local 
	myths were given a Brahminic flavour. As had been mentioned earlier, the 
	fusion is best seen in the Southern rescensions of Mahabharata and 
	Ramanaya.
	The change in the myths had been so radical that it would be difficult in 
	most cases to postulate with any degree of certainty
	the features of the original myths. We have seen that the South Indian 
	dramatic forms have taken on these new myths as the theme of their plays. 
	This change has given an All India character to the Tamil dramatic forms.
	2
	This break in the continuity of the themes of the drama - makes it 
	difficult for a student to chalk out the continuity in development. The 
	change in the religious beliefs and the social values could be seen in the 
	only Tamil legend relating to the origins of drama. It speaks of Agastya, 
	Indra, Jayanta and the dancers in Indra�s court. The similarity this myth 
	has with the myths in the Sanskrit tradition has already been mentioned.
	It is interesting to note at this juncture that it is the classical  
	form - the vettiyal tradition-that has this legend of origin; there no such 
	traditional account available for the origins of the potuviyal tradition. 
	This absence of a legend of origin show s that the performers of the 
	potuviyal tradition were not a socially important group. It is an accepted 
	maxim that the need for a history arises only with a class or group 
	consciousness.
	We have examined in Chapter III, the efforts made to relate akam and 
	puram poetry to an original dramatic form. A, is evident, these were 
	propounded with a view to understand literature not drama. Our examination 
	of these views revealed the inconsistencies in the arguments put forward. We 
	also found that a fuller explanation of the exact nature of the akam and the 
	puram poems could be had, not in drama, but in folk poetry and heroic 
	ministrelsy.
	Drama and Society
	It has been said that art is a form of organization of social energy.3 
	It, therefore, reflects the relationship individuals and groups have with 
	the society at large. An art form achieves greatness only when it expresses 
	a wider social force.
	The analysis of the different historical phases of Ancient Tamilnad shows 
	that at no stage was there any one social or religious activity which could 
	bring all the people or at least most of them together. 
	In the heroic phase, in spite of the existence of a common tradition, 
	which brought the ruler on almost equal terms with the ruled, the emphasis 
	was on aggrandizing the heroic monarch and singling him out from his fellow 
	men. Hinduism, to be exact Brahminism, provided the emerging rulers with 
	ritual sanction and authority over the rest. This led to the fall of the 
	bardic groups and the decline of the art forms connected with them. It is in 
	that period we see the beginnings of the vettiyal tradition in music. 
	With the rise of the rulers and the emergence of the landlords, the 
	social differences between the developed groups and the backward communities 
	were beginning to assert themselves. The displacement of the traditional 
	bard from the royal courts symbolises the pattern of social developments. 
	The evidences we have for the ensuing feudal phase deal mainly with the 
	developed agrarian regions. The social characteristics of this period are 
	well reflected in 
	Tolkapiyam, 
	Kural and 
	the mullai poems in 
	
	Kalittokai. 
	The bard has become a family retainer. The uneven economic development of 
	the regions creates sharp differences in the social ethos of each of the 
	regions. Thus, in this period too there was no one social or religious bond 
	that could unite all. Instead, we see the emergence of different forms of 
	entertainment at the different social levels. At the aristocratic level, 
	arose a dramatic form which catered to the aesthetic, if not erotic, 
	pleasures of the aristocracy. The available evidence for the mercantile 
	phase shows that the social reality of caste division has become the 
	guideline for the classification of the art forms. The performances that 
	catered to the needs of the court were called the vettiyal and those which 
	catered to the common pleasures of these classes were called the potuviyal 
	ones.
	It could, thus, be seen that in the period up to 
	
	Cilapathikaram the emphasis has been on the differences that existed 
	among the different social groups. In such a situation, art too was bound to 
	be as varied and different as the different groups in society. Our analysis 
	showed that at each level of society a particular form of dramatic 
	entertainment was popular. This meant different types of performances and 
	different types of performers. At the aristocratic level there were the 
	maidens of celestial descent with their leader, the Dance Teacher; at the 
	non-aristocratic level were probably the kuttar and the down graded Brahmins 
	referred to in 
	
	Tolkapiyam and 
	
	Cilapathikaram respectively. Naccinarkkiniyar's commentary on 
	Tolkapiyam: Purat: 36 amply illustrate this. 
	Therein, he refers to paracavar (those born to Brahmin fathers and sudra 
	mothers and vellalar to those who perform to vilakku-dramatic poetry, to 
	those who perform (most probably ) acrobatics, and to pole dancers. Below 
	these two levels was the tribal set-up in which ritual and art were not 
	distinguished. The examples for such performances could be seen in Aycciyar 
	kuravai and Vettuvavari. 
	It was the art of the aristocratic performers that emerged as the 
	classical one. It is relevant to note here that Ranganath shows an almost 
	parallel form of development in Kannada drama.4
	The question could now be raised as to why the classical art was unable 
	to get universal appeal, and all-round popularity.
	Here again the answer lies in the social organisation. At the 
	aristocratic level dance and drama were the exclusive profession of a group 
	which was associated with harlotry. Though the performers had an important 
	social role to play, they were always kept out of the active life of the 
	community. Thus their art could never become a popular one. It should, 
	however, be pointed out that this group was not as exclusive as it was in 
	the Pallava and the Cola periods.
	The segregation of the performers as one social unit always has a great 
	impact on their behaviour, which ultimately influences the attitude of the 
	society at large towards them and their art. Ethno musicological studies 
	have shown that in societies in which musicians hold a low status they are 
	allowed the privilege of deviant behaviour and that they capitalise on it.5 
	Such a behaviour is viewed with dislike and thus develops the tendency to 
	downgrade the, art itself. The Griots of Senagambia in Africa, an endogamous 
	group of bards, are cited as the classic example of such a group. 6 
	The deviant behaviour of the performer is tolerated because of his important 
	role in society.
	In Tamilnad too, the performers as harlots were performing an useful 
	function in the preservation of the family unit by affording a socially 
	acceptable outlet for the extra marital activities affluent men without 
	infringing upon the segregated system societies of private property and its 
	transmission. These performers also in performed ritualistic spite of the 
	importance of their art and the social acquiescence to their deviant 
	behaviour, their art will not get practitioners outside the group. 
	It could be said with confidence that a social tabu against dancing 
	exists even to this day in Tamilnad because of the deviant behaviour of the 
	devdasis This could very easily be taken as one of the reasons which 
	prevented drama and dance from becoming an art form which had popular 
	participation and drama from becoming a respectable literary genre. 
	Attitude of the Buddhists and the Jains
	It has been said that the opposition of Buddhism and Jainism had been the 
	main cause for the decline of Tamil drama.7
	We have seen in Chapter VI that the Buddhist and the Jaina opposition 
	might have been prompted by social considerations too. Their main attack on 
	drama centred on its association with harlotry. It could be argued that had 
	there been no such association, they would not have attacked it. Whatever 
	had been the cause for their attack; the effects of it have been very great.
	
	Historically speaking, the Buddhists and the Jains were at the peak of 
	their influence during the period of the Kalabhra Interregnum. The history 
	of Tamil literature shows that it was during this post-Carikam, pre-Pallava 
	period that most of the important didactic works were written. It is 
	generally accepted that literature as their main weapon in propaganda. Being 
	organised monastic religions, they naturally dominated the literary scene. 
	During his period their control over the literary world was a complete one.
	
	Brahmin scholars did not have their traditional royal support during this 
	period because of the political disorder. This control over the literary 
	world and the avowed opposition to he pleasure giving arts like drama and 
	dance, led to the ostracism of drama from the world of literature. It is of 
	some interest to note the difference between the permissive and indulgent 
	life depicted in 
	Kalittokai and 
	
	Paripatal and the austere moralism that is seen in the didactic works 
	like Elati and 
	Kural. The 
	didadactic works adopted the venpa metre instead of the more musical kali 
	and akaval metres.
	It is thus clear that the Buddhist and the Jaina opposition to drama had 
	been one of the chief causes for its exclusion from literature.
	Drama and Literature
	Apart from these external factors which denied drama literary sanction 
	and social respectability, there were certain features inherent in the Tamil 
	dramatic tradition which discouraged a literary development.
	First of such features is the over-riding importance of mime and gesture 
	in the performances. Ilanko's order of mention the artistes reveal the 
	comparatively law position the `word' had in a performance. The librettist 
	is mentioned after the  dance teacher and the musician. A comparison 
	with the Greek performance tradition revealed that certain features in the 
	Tamilian classical tradition like the mime, the gestures, and the enclosed 
	theatre, did not allow the `word' or speech to dominate the play. The words, 
	extricated from dance and music, would not have been able to bring out fully 
	the varying moods in the play; and this is a very important aspect of the 
	literary drama.
	Another important feature of this dramatic tradition was that it varied 
	according to the level of society to which it catered. Literary drama could 
	possibly have evolved only out of the classical  form. But with that 
	form inextricably wedded to dance and music, there existed a natural barrier 
	to a literary development of drama.
	It is of interest to note at this juncture that not one of the major 
	Dravidian languages has ancient dramatic literature. The first known Kannada 
	drama was written only at the end of the sixteenth century.8 In 
	Malayalam, the 
	Kathakali itself is a later form. Besides, the libretti of 
	Kutiyattam 
	and other secular and religious performances never gained major literary 
	recognition. In early Telugu literature "drama is conspicuous by its 
	absence" 9
	It is generally accepted that in each of the languages, drama belongs to 
	the popular or desi tradition. In the case of Tamil, the first time a 
	libretto is given literary sanction is in 
	
	Mukkutarpallu. It could, therefore, be said that the gap between the 
	classical and the folk forms of drama was one of the factors which led to 
	the exclusion of drama from literature.
	The inability of  the dramatic form to become a literary genre did 
	not, however, stop literature drawing from `dramatic traditions'. The 
	adoption of kali as a literary metre is due to the influence of drama on 
	literature. The dramatic character of Uralkali is the unassailable proof for 
	this. Tolkappiar's mention of Pulan as a 'genre composed in colloquial 
	dialect and the commentator's citation of Vilakkattar kuttu as an example of 
	that genre provide another instance.
	The social order which grouped the various dramatists into exclusive 
	groups made dance and drama at professional level) a family tradition. This 
	enabled an oral transmission of the spoken part of the performance. Even if 
	a manuscript had to be made it was always kept within the family. Thus the 
	preservation of the text of the drama was never a serious problem in 
	Tamilnad. It should be recalled here that we are able to have today the 
	texts of the masters of Greek drama because they were consciously preserved. 
	The social organisation of Tamilnad never permitted such a situation.
	This naturally raises the question of the exact nature of the works which 
	are mentioned as lost. Atiyarkkunallar mentions the total loss of Paratam 
	and Akattiyam and the partial loss of Icai nunukkam, Intirakaliyam, 
	Pancamarapu, Paratacenapatiyam and Mativanar Natakattamil Nul. As has been 
	pointed out already, these works are not plays nor creative musical 
	compositions but works which deal with the technicalities of the art. It is 
	possible that works of these types were used by the various groups of 
	performers. To maintain that the loss of the works resulted in the loss of 
	the art is putting the cart before the horse. If there had been a 
	flourishing practice of the art, the works would never have been lost. The 
	loss of these works indicate an age long  negligence the art form.
	There is yet one more problem and that is the reference to Natakak 
	kappiyam -a dramatic epic in Mani. Cattanar, while mentioning the different 
	artistes speaks of
	atarkkuttinoju avinayam terivor 
	natakakkappiya nannul nunippar (XIX: 79-80)
	"Those who know dance, drama and gestures and those who delve deeply into 
	the dramatic epics."
	This reference has been taken as evidence for the existence of dramatic 
	literature.10 Any examination of this passage should observe the 
	distinction made between the dramatists who are skilled in dance, drama and 
	gestures and the literary scholar who makes a searching study of the epic. 
	The distinction between the two are very clear. 
	Kavya is as Sanskrit literary genre. Almost all the Indian languages 
	including Tamil, got the epic form from Sanskrit The literary and social 
	history of Tamilnad shows that the indigenous vilakku and vari or any of the 
	libretti never got such an attention from our literati. It is, therefore, 
	clear that tlm works referred to must be Sanskrit ones. The first Tamil work 
	written in the typical epic style is Civaka cintamani and it belongs to the 
	Pallava period.
	The History of Tamil Drama and the Concept of Muttamil
	This account of the features of the development of Tamil drama raises 
	certain important questions about the concept n Muttamil. According to this 
	concept, Tamil language has three distinct traditions-literary, musical and 
	dramatic. They are referred to as Iyattamil, Icaittamil,  Natakattamil. 
	The traditional view is that this classification has been in existence since 
	the beginnings. 
	The compatibility of this concept with the outlined development of Tamil 
	drama should now be seen.
	Studies in Language and Human Behaviour have shown  that  such 
	a classification is not possible at the earliest stage because as Thomson 
	says, "the three arts of dancing, music and poetry began as one. Their 
	source was the rhythmical movement of human bodies engaged in collective 
	labour. This movement had two components-corporeal and oral. The first was 
	the germ of dancing, the second of language."11
	Cankarra literature shows that in early Tamil tradition no distinction 
	was made between poetry and song. The word for the most popular metre of the 
	period, akaval, is a derivative of akavu, which means "to utter a sound as 
	peacock, sing, dance as a peaccck, call, summon" (DED:11). The word for both 
	poem and song was Pa,tal, derived from the verb patu which means "to sing, 
	chant, warble, hum" (DED:3348).
	The analysis of the kali metre and the dialogue songs of Kalittokai 
	showed that dancing/drama was not divorced from song.
	It would, therefore, be interesting to knovv the data of this 
	classification. According to Vaiyapuripillai, the earliest reference we have 
	to Muttamil is in 
	Paripatal. He cites the fragment quoted by Parimekalar in Kural (23).
	Terimantamil mummait tennam poruppan
	parima niraiyir parantanru vaiyai
	"Vaiyai, the river, is not as expansive as the cavalry of the Poruppan 
	(Pantiyan) of the South of the 'Three Great 'Tamil."
	Parimekalar states that the word mummai denotes number. He did not 
	specifically state that the three Tamils referred to are iyal, icai and 
	natakam. The question, therefore, is to check whether it was possible for a 
	song in 
	
	Paripatal 
	to mention this classification.
	First of all the lines referred to are the only ones we know of that 
	poem. We do not know the exact context in which this `three Tamil' is 
	mentioned. Vaiyapurippillai would have us believe that the word Tamil in 
	this context refers to language and literature. But the use of the word 
	'Tamil' in another Paripatal lyric shows that it need not be so.
	Tamil vaiyaittannam punal
	(Paripatal:6: 60)
	"The cool waters of Tamil vaiyai." 
	The word `Tamil' here probably refers to Tamilnad. The word Tamil has 
	been used in 
	Cangam texts to denote the country (Purananuru:35, 50, 51; Akananuru: 
	22, 31). In one instance the word has even been used to denote the army 
	(Pattirupaatu: 62).
	The lines referred to speak of the military greatness of the Pantiya 
	king. It, is, therefore possible that the word refers to the region. If so, 
	what could be the significance of the number three? No one needs emphasise 
	the importance of the three established monarchies in Cankam literature. 
	Cankam texts refer to the three kings as just muvar-the three (Purananuru:109, 
	110; Pattirrupaatu:20; Akananuru:31) It is, therefore, likely that the 
	Pantiya king is referred to as the Tennam Poruppan who rules the three great 
	states. In view of these possibilities  it would be unsafe to treat 
	this fragment  as positive proof of the classification.
	A more reliable check would be of the conditions of drama during the 
	period.
	
	Paripatal belongs to the feudal phase of the Ancient Period and is 
	itself an example of the marriage of poetry and music. We have even the 
	names of those who set the lyrics to music. It is, therefore, not possible 
	that the classification into muttamil would have been mentioned as an 
	abstract concept in the same work.
	This concept of a three fold classification could have arisen only after 
	years of separate development of each of the arts. Our review shows that it 
	was not possible at the earliest phase and that such a tendency of separate 
	development begins only with the increasing dominance of Buddhism and 
	Jainism. Even though it starts in the feudal phase, it was in the 
	mercantilist phase that the distinction is discernibly seen. If so, could we 
	then take it as the date of the classification too?
	The basis of the classification is the recognition and acceptance of the 
	independent development of the three arts as a noteworthy aspect of the 
	language. Such a recognition implies an equal treatment of music and drama 
	with literature. This could not have been possible in the mercantilist phase 
	because of the Jaina and the Buddhist influence. It would, therefore, be 
	most likely that this feature of independent traditions for each of the arts 
	was recognised some time later by those who gave equal importance to music 
	and dance.
	Such a situation did arise in the Pallava period when the Hindus reacted 
	to the supremacy of the monastic religions by resorting to a popular revolt 
	against them. The hymns of the 
	
	Nayanmars and  the Alvars reveal the importance of music in 
	literary composition. It was during that period that dancers were attached 
	to temples. 
	Significantly enough the first unambiguous reference to Muttamil implying 
	the threefold classification is seen in the hymns of Thirunavikkaracar
	mula nai tirkkum mutalvan kantai
	muttamilum nan maraiyum anan kantai
	How and why this change took, place forms the next landmark in the 
	history of Tamil drama and is a subject for another study.
	Notes
	l. T. Janakiraman, loc.cit.
	2. Balwant Gargi, Folk Theatre of India (London, 1966).
	3. C. Caudwell, Illusion and Reality.
	4. Ranganath, op-cit.
	5. P. Alan Meniam, The Anthropology of Music, p.123 ff. 
	6. Ibid., pp.138-40.
	7. Maraimalai Atikal, op.cit., p.13.
	8. Adya, Rangacharya, Indian Drama, p.67.
	9. Chenchiah and Bhujango Rao, opcit., p33 
	10. Cuppiramani Iyer, op.cit.
	11. SAGS Vol. 1 p.451