George Hart translates Puṟam 332 as follows:
 
The spear that belongs to the warrior from this city is not
Like the spears of other men but its worth is immense.
It may rest in the eaves of a hut, its long back
gathering dust. It may travel, garlanded, in procession
around the streets and reservoirs of pure water while
the sweet voices of virtuous women mingle with the notes
of yāḻs that had been stored in large sacks. Or it may advance
so that the entire land of the enemy reels! Should the spear do that, 
then it never stops thrusting into the faces
of the massive elephants of kings with their armies like the vast ocean!
 
In his notes, Hart says, “‘Virtuous women’ is the translation of maṅkala 
makaḷir. This probably means women who are cumaṅkalis, that is, who are not 
widows.”

I do not think maṅkala makaḷir simply means ‘women who are not widows’. The 
women should have the ability to sing and play the lute as well, which calls 
for specialized training in music. One cannot expect untrained women, who are 
not widows, to be able to sing and play the lute.  So, by maṅkala makaḷir, the 
poet should refer to bardic women - most probably Viṟalis - if we assume they 
sang as well as played the lute. (Otherwise, if we assume that the artists who 
sang and those who played the lute were different, then maṅkala makaḷir could 
be Pāṭiṉis.)
 
Is it possible maṅkala makaḷir could have been Gaṇikās? I do not think so. 
Nowhere else in the early Caṅkam texts, we see the Gaṇikās taking part in 
events in villages. However, Viṟalis do seem to participate in such events as 
given in Naṟṟiṇai 328 as explained by Auvai Turaicāmip Piḷḷai. For 
participation in village events, the Viṟali, customarily would seem to get 
white cloth and sesame oil. However, in this poem she is expected to get 
precious ornaments instead. The white cloth signified auspiciousness in 
Classical Tamil. (For instance, in Puṟam 279, the mother dresses her young son 
in white as he goes to battle.) The auspiciousness of white clothes seemed to 
have continued even into post-Classical times. (See Cilappatikāram 27.229 and 
Cīvakacintāmaṇi 614.1) where the king wears white on his birthday.) In his 
commentary on Tolkāppiyam Poruḷatikāram 90 beginning with ‘tāvil nallicai 
karutiya kiṭantōrkku’, Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar calls veḷḷaṇi as maṅkalavaṇṇam. The 
fact that the Viṟali was given the white cloth customarily signifies her 
auspiciousness (maṅkala) or that she participated in an auspicious event. So 
maṅkala makaḷir in Puṟam 332 should be Viṟalis.
 
Moreover, Tamil Lexicon has the following entry.
மங்கலபாடகர் maṅkala-pāṭakar , n. < id. +. Bards, encomiasts, panegyrists; அரசர் 
முதலியவரைப் புகழ்வோர். (பிங்.) The basis of this term seems to be those who 
invoke auspiciousness, prosperity, long life etc., for the kings. On this 
basis, the Tamil bards were associated with auspiciousness too. This also seems 
to support the case of maṅkala makaḷir being bardic women.
 
I welcome comments.
 
Thanks in advance
 
Regards,
Palaniappan
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

Reply via email to