92 



JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON). [VOL. XIII. 



knew from the writings of Greek geographers that about the first 

 and second century before and after Christ, Kolkai was the empo- 

 rium of the East, and that before the sixth century, as they knew 

 from the writings of Kosmas, it had dwindled into insignificance. 

 It seemed, therefore, that the author of Chilappatikdram must have 

 lived before the sixth century. For the reasons he had stated he 

 thought they must take it that the Gaja Bahu referred to in the poem 

 must be the first king of Ceylon of that name, and that the poem 

 Chilappatikaram must have been composed in the second century 

 a.d. He did not support the arguments adduced by the author of 

 the Paper, from the prefatory verses attached to the Tamil trans- 

 lation of Rdmdyana and Skdnda-purdna. In the preface to a Tamil 

 edition of Chilappatikdram recently published, which contained a 

 summary of the whole book, the Tamil editor called attention, he 

 might remark in concluding, to the fact that the name of Gaja Bahu 

 was mentioned, and arrived at the same conclusion as he (the speaker) 

 did, viz., that by the Gaja Bahu of the poem was meant Gaja Bahu I. 



Dr. W. G. Vandort thought the evidence of the poem as to priority 

 did not depend very much on tradition and conjecture. There was 

 one argument referred to by the last speaker which was, he thought, 

 important, as fixing the date as approximately as possible, in showing 

 that the Chera dynasty was extinguished somewhere about the ninth or 

 tenth century. They had a historical legend in support of the fact. 

 If the author of the poem was the son of the reigning Chera monarch, 

 why should he be anonymous ? It seemed unlikely that a Chola prince 

 should be forsaking his own house and indulging in such fulsome 

 adulation as brought about the downfall of his own people. But the 

 chief interest in the poem was its ethical significance — the view of 

 human life which the poet took — the fundamental principle on which 

 the structure of the poem depended. For instance, it contained the 

 very first record, so far as he knew, — his experiences comprised only 

 the Indian Antiquary ,— of the apotheosis of a woman not of royal 

 blood — not even of the warrior or priestly class — but a woman of the 

 people — one of the bourgeoise, exalted to the Indian Pantheon, not 

 for any heroic deed, not for any act of self-sacrifice or heroic devotion, 

 but for the commonplace virtues of domestic life. 



Mr. Harward remarked that the reading of Mr. Coomaraswamy's 

 Paper had given rise to a very interesting discussion on the question — 

 namely, that of synchronising the poem — whether it was written in 

 the reign of Gaja Bahu the First or Second. Another question raised 

 was that regarding the goldsmiths. The Chairman had expressed the 

 hope that it was a mistake, and that the real reading of the word was 

 gold coins. But he (the speaker) was afraid they denoted goldsmiths. 

 But he hoped the number was not correct, and that it was not a full 

 thousand. He believed that owing to the conduct of the goldsmith, 



