Due recognition not given to Tamil language: Madras High Court directs creation of separate Epigraphy Branch for Tamil at Chennai

Lamenting that the oldest Indian language, Tamil has not been given its due recognition, the Madras High Court recently ordered the establishment of a separate Epigraphy Branch for Tamil at Chennai within six months ( P Manimaran v. The Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Union of India and ors ).

. A Bench of Justices N Kirubakaran (now retired) and Justice M Duraiswamy issued the order in a petition which sought the shifting of Tamil and Dravidian inscriptions from Mysore to Chennai on concerns that these ancient artefacts are not being properly maintained at Mysore.

. Commenting on the antiquity of the language and the need to preserve Tamil inscriptions, the Court remarked,

" Tamil is liturgically developed, though it is one of the earliest languages; Tamil was spoken by the most ancient people and still it continues to be spoken by the modern-day people...It is not to claim or trumpet that Tamil is the first Language of the world. It is to emphasise that it is one of the ancient languages of the world and it is the oldest language of India viz., 409 B.C to 508 B.C...the inscriptions found in India would also echo the views of this Court that Tamil is the most ancient language of the country (sic). "

. When such is the antiquity of Tamil, the required recognition has not been given to the classical language, the Court said.

" However, this Court is of the view that every language spoken by the people, whether it is declared as a classical or not and included in VIII Schedule or not, is precious and has to be preserved and passed on to the next generation, " it added.

. The Bench went on to express disapproval over the apparent efforts to project a picture that the number of Sanskrit inscriptions outnumbered the number of Tamil inscriptions.

. On the basis of a 2018 Right to Information (RTI) reply from the office of the Director of Epigraphy, the Court was initially told that there were 38,000 ancient Tamil inscriptions (making it the highest number) found in India whereas the number of Sanskrit inscriptions were stated to be 11,000.

. Thereafter, however, the Court was told that the number of Sanskrit inscriptions exceeded Tamil inscriptions.

" It is not understandable as to how 11,000 Sanskrit inscriptions, which are stated to be available as per the RTI information given on 21.02.2018, all of a sudden, it multiplied and became 17,001 as on 21st December 2020 and 25,756 as on 14.07.2021, " the Court said.

. The contradictory information prompted the Court to conclude that there was an attempt to " make it to appear that the Sanskrit inscriptions are more, contrary to the statements and actual numbers given before this Court ."

. The Bench added that this was also indicative of an attempt either to destroy the number of Tamil inscriptions or estampages (an impression of an inscription made on paper).

. While it was asserted that the Tamil estampages are being preserved properly, the Court noted that " Volume XLI of South Indian Inscriptions " published by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) showed that several Tamil estampages are not traceable.

"... there are many estampages either damaged or lost as they are not properly preserved, " the Court observed.

. The Court went on to clarify that,

" By pointing out the contradictions, this Court is not underestimating the antiquity of Sanskrit. Sanskrit is a great and ancient language with rich ancient literature and Sanskrit language has to be preserved, for which, the Central Government is taking much efforts."

. In this backdrop, the Court also opined that the epigraphy and other materials connected to the Tamil language may not be safe at the Mysuru office of the Epigraphy Branch.

"... there is an i mmediate necessity to shift the Tamil estampages, copper plates with Tamil inscriptions and other materials and documents of Tamil language from Mysuru to Chennai for the purpose of proper preservation ...That apart, those materials are needed for Research and Development by the students of Archaeology and Epigraphy. Keeping the materials at Mysuru will definitely not serve the Research Scholars in Tamil Nadu...T his Court would not venture to give a direction to shift Tamil materials and estampages, if correct details regarding Tamil inscriptions and Sanskrit inscriptions had been given and the Tamil estampages are properly maintained, " the Court said.

. As far as the need for the creation of a separate Epigraphy Branch for Tamil, the Court also observed,

" Though the Sanskrit is one of the indo-aryan languages, a separate Branch has been established in the name of Sanskrit, whereas Tamil is clubbed with other Dravidian languages. The treatment given to Sanskrit, Arabic and Persian languages has to be given to Tamil language as well. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the Respondents to establish a separate Branch for Tamil . "

. Directions issued by the Court . The Court, ultimately issued the following directions to the respondent authorities, which included the Secretary to the Union Ministry of Culture, the Director-General of ASI, the Commissioner of the State Department of Archaeology and others:

. 1. The respondents are directed to create or establish a separate office of Epigraphy Branch (Tamil) at Chennai along the the lines of Epigraphy Branch (Arabic and Persian Inscriptions) at Nagpur, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order;

2. The respondents shall transfer all the estampages and other connected Tamil documents and inscriptions to Southern Zone Epigraphy Branch, Chennai or to the proposed separate office of Epigraphy Branch (Tamil) within a period for six months;

3. The ASI shall appoint required number of epigraphists and other officials according to the number of inscriptions in each language;

4. The State of Tamil Nadu shall provide all the infrastructure for the purpose of using the newly created/converted Epigraphy Branch (Tamil);

5. The Central government and the ASI shall allocate more funds for Epigraphy Division of ASI for research and preservation of estampages and other materials within six months.

. The Court further opined that the ASI has a duty to preserve properly the "precious wealth" of estampages " for the future generations to enable them to know about our history, culture and the way of life of our ancestors."

. Notably, the Court also expressed disapproval over the lack of progress when it comes to digitisation of inscriptions.

. Responding to a submission that the ASI would be undertaking digitization work by itself, the Court recalled that an MoU had been signed between the Epigraphy Branch of the ASI at Mysuru and the Tamil University at Thanjavur as early as on 2010 to carry out the digitization of estampages and inscriptions stored in the Mysuru Epigraphy Wing.

" Having entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, it is not known as to why the Archaeological Survey of India has not acted as per the MOU and the reason for doing digitization on its own...ASI agreed for providing facilities and in spite of agreeing to provide facilities, nothing has been done ", the Court said.

. [Read Order]

Due recognition not given to Tamil language: Madras High Court directs creation of separate Epigraphy Branch for Tamil at Chennai

Meera Emmanuel

Related Stories