Latin arrest our attention. His ‘Kodun Tamil’ which is a treatise on dialects was written in Latin. Later on, it has been rendered in English. In ‘Sentamil’ he dealt with the grammar of the high Tamil. This was also originally written in Latin and then translated into English. “Clavis” (which means key) was also by Beschi and was written in Latin. This was meant for European Missionaries and he omitted the grammar of the subjective and objective poetry of Tamil. This topic on matter was treated rather in a twisted way in his Toṉṉūl Viḷakkam but he has treated it in an extremely concise way in “Clavis”, since ‘Clavis’ was meant for European Missionaries “who were masters of that art.”³

Generally our Tamil Grammar falls into five divisions. Tolkāppiam comprises those into three divisions. Viracōḻiam and Ilakkaṇa Viḷakkam retained the five divisions. Though in his grammar Fr. Beschi adheres to the five divisions, he reduces a thousand odd rules from various grammarians - rules that fit in with the mould of his composition one is led to infer that he must have had sufficient knowledge of their texts. The rules which he has framed are simple, lucid and terse.

Grammarians frame rules and the exposition of them has been made by the commentators. Unlike them it is believed that Fr. Beschi combines in himself the role of the framer as well as the commentator.

2. ORTHOGRAPHY

Beames is of opinion that the Tamil script might have been borrowed from Emperor Asoka’s inscriptions.⁴ Ellis believes that the ancient Tamilians were acquainted with the art of writing and that there were Tamil characters even before the advent of Sanskrit.⁵ Edward Thomas thinks that Prakrit itself

3. B. C.; clavis, P. 51

4. C. C. G. D. L.; P. 123

5. Ibid. P. 125