must have its origin in an ancient Dravidian script.⁶ Dr. Caldwell follows in the footsteps of Beames. But, he too is not dead certain about the origin.⁷ The various theories propounded clamour for a solution. This kind of research during the initial stages was novel to us and the endeavours of European scholars kindled in us a new spirit for research of this kind.

Caldwell feels that the alphabetical characters of South India in general have a common origin. But whether this script was borrowed from the North has to be established. In expressing this opinion, he indirectly pays a tribute to the Southern languages when he writes, “The greatness of the differences between the Southern and the modern Northern alphabets arises probably from the greater antiquity of the literary cultivation of the Southern vernaculars, as compared with the Northern.”⁸

Dr. Caldwell left for his successors to establish by research the origin of the Tamil script Prof. T. P. Meenakshisundaran and Dr. M. Vardarajan and some others have done outstanding work on these lines.^8a

In the chapter dealing with letters, Beschi had made a fresh contribution to orthography. To differentiate short from a long vowels, e and o have dots. One is likely to confound these two vowels with the consonants which bear the same dot.⁹ To avoid such a confusion he insists on attaching a dash to the short vowels ‘e’ and ‘o’. He has not invented the variation between the long and the short. Such a variation was in existence in Tolkāppiam and Naṉṉūl. Beschi has only steered clear of the confusion by adopting the dash for the short vowels.¹⁰

A certain amount of confusion existed during Beschi’s time in the way certain letters were written in Tamil. ‘r’ and the syllabic

6. Ibid. P. 126

7. Ibid. P. 128

8. Ibid. P. 129

8a. T. P. M. Kalaikkaḷañciyam; M. Varadarajan, Moḷinūl; Pp. 59 to 68

9. Tol. El. cu. 16. N. Cu. 98

10. B. A. T. V.; Cūttiram 12