that Pope was introduced to it and in this context, he writes “It has probably never been seen by any European till now, though the late Sir Walter Elliot obtained and caused to be translated some fragments of it. These were edited for private circulation by Mr. R. Sewell Esq. M.C.S.”³⁴⁹ In his view, it is an ancient work. He writes “It seems probable that the work itself is more ancient than the Kural and suggested many of its couplets.”³⁵⁰ This statement cannot be accepted in the light of modern research but its vice versa is true. Pope adds “It is closely allied in subject and in tone to the Puṟanāṉūṟu.” This however, is nearer the truth.

He discusses each of the 12 divisions. The first eight divisions have derived their titles from the names of eight different flowers. For each flower, he gives its corresponding botanical name and then describes each briefly. Natives have not given such a description of the flowers in grammar and hence Pope’s work was a novel way of dealing with the subject. But one wonders whether the flowers Pope had in mind, tallied with those mentioned in the original work. Later research alone can determine this.

Pope cites the examples from Puṟanāṉūṟu and Pattuppāṭṭu. The former has been frequently quoted. He writes “It is curious that Vañci” (a flower) “has become the poetical name of Karur, the Cera capital.”³⁵¹ Whether Vañci was the capital of the Cera kingdom was taken up for study by many.

The division of Vākai, Pope believes, “is probably of a later introduction.”³⁵²Tolkāppiam has this division but even as its seven divisions were expanded to 12 later to cater to the needs of the current literature so also perhaps the Vākai expanded with the fragments of later introductions, even though the division of Vākai itself was as old as Tolkāppiam.

349. P. L. T. Vol. II No.10, March 1899, Pp. 227-29

350. Ibid.

351. Ibid. No. 12, May 1899, Pp. 273-76

352. Ibid. Vol. III, No. 1, June 1899, Pp. 9-12