of the Vaishnva Commentaries” which is a valuable guide to the colloquialism of the 13th and 14th centuries. This work has markedly influenced by Sanskrit.

The other work whose author is unknown is Akarāti Mōṉai-k-Kākarāti-y-etukai. This work also has not advanced beyond the second letter in the alphabetical arrangement.

Another work of interest is the Pattu-c-collakarāti. In this work the words in Tivākaram, Uri-c-colnikaṇṭu, nikaṇṭu-cuṭāmaṇi and nāmatipa-nikaṇṭu are indexed in 10 sections in the alphabetical order.

Before the advent of European influence, native scholars wrote nikaṇṭu but these were in verse. While European scholars were working on various dictionaries native scholars were also involved in similar work but these again were in verse form. Since paper was not available, the natives had to write on palm-leaves (ōlai) with the aid of an iron stylus. Several copies were difficult to make and they were also not easily accessible; so, much of the matter had to be committed to memory and retained. Verse was easier to memorise than prose and perhaps this was the reason why the natives resorted to verse.

It was only after European influence began to permeate native scholars, that the latter began to drop the method of depending on memory and switched gradually over to the mode of reference. European scholars have in this respect contributed immensely to the development, systematisation and standardisation of dictionaries both unilingual and bilingual. The myriads of hazards overcome by them have added a meritorious sheen to the galaxy of their contributions.

An analysis of their work will prove beyond doubt the lasting contributions they have made in this field.

Unilingual Dictionaries

The dictionary of high Tamil called Caturakarāti was written in 1732 by Beschi. Some editions give at the end of the dictionary