Tinais as Central to the Understanding of the
Tamilakam
The word ‘tinai’ refers to five geographical landscapes:
1) kuriniji- hilly terrain
2) Mullai- pastures and grasslands
3) Marutam- riverine
4) Neytal- coastal
5) Palai- arid
Each is named after a flower found in a particular geographical region.
Although we do not know how exactly the word ‘tinai’ was understood, we
can assume it may have referred to , 'space,' 'land,' 'abode,' 'genre,'
'genealogy' and 'situation.'
Historians have for long argued that each of the five tinais had their own distinct forms of
economic activity based on soil regime, climatic conditions, rainfall and availability of
other resources specific to the respective countryside. Thus, the undulating nature of
kurinji made hunting-gathering the ideal means of subsistence for the Vedars and
Kuravars inhabiting the highland terrains. Maravars, Kallars and other such communities
of the arid palai stretches were forced to rely upon loot and plunder, as the region was
resource-less and generally unsustainable for livelihood. Inhabitants of the wooded
mullai belts engaged themselves in pastoral activities, while the neidal folks took to
fishing, salt making and pearl diving, and the marudam dwellers to wetland agriculture,
primarily the cultivation of rice. This understanding is based upon a link between
geography and economic activity. Each tinai was also seen as a geo-specific islet,
although they were not isolated but were linked through symbiotic relationships of
exchange and interaction.
Till the 1970s, each tinai was seen as distinct phase in the evolution of economy by
scholars such as Srinivasa Iyengar, V.R.R. Dikshitar, S. Thaninayagam, K.V. Subrahmania
Aiyar, S.K. Iyengar, N. Subrah manian and Kamil Zvelebil. Sivathamby was the
earliest to suggest that the tinai represented five distinct zones of economic
activity within the same geo-political milieu, he subscribed to the idea of
evolution, his contention being that once the tinais had evolved, they embodied
the contemporary milieu in all its complexities and intricacies.
Rajan Gurukkal argues that it is not possible to mark out the limits of each
landscape as the Sangam bards visualised the topography as continuous with
overlaps between each landscape. According to Gurukkal, these overlapping
regions had their own economic activities like metallurgy, crafts and pot-making.
Manu Devadevan points out several incongruities in this particular model of
understanding tinais. Firstly, loot and plunder were the main forms of resource
appropriation, as well as being a means for power contestation in a volatile
political scenario on the threshold of state formation. This goes against the view
that plunder was specific to the Palai tinai. He also draws our attention to the
yavanapriya or pepper, the largest South Indian commodity in demand in Rome
and the Mediterranean, which was grown in the region of the Kurinji and Mullai.
Under the tinai model, it would be the pastoral and agricultural communities of
these regions that are engaged in trans-oceanic trade.
According to R Champakalakshmi, the Kurinji and Mullai regions were isolated
but had symbiotic relationships with the Marutam and Neytal regions which were
loci of power due to their strategic locations. She argues that the Cheras, Cholas
and Pandyas had two centres of power each, one in the Maturam and the other
in the Neytal. Goods were transported from these areas to inland towns which
were ‘consumption points’. Devadevan challenges this argument on the basis of
evidence to Kodumanal which was a producer of textiles, gemstones and iron as
well as the lack of craft production centres in the early Tamil landscape.
Devadevan also uses the archaeological evidence of Kodumanal to argue
against this economic understanding of tinais. The evidence shows that
Kodumanal was a centre of production gemstones and iron as well as for
weaving. As it is located in the Palai region, this goes against the notion of the
Palai being arid. Agriculture was also considered an important occupation
across all the tinais. Rice was the staple crop and grown in the fields of the
Maurutam, which were called the menpulam, and contrasted with the vanpulam
fields of other tinais where pulses, millets, roots and fruits were grown. Rice was
grown in the coastal wetlands, thus rendering the distinction between Neytal and
Mauratam conceptual. The village was not the settlement of a particular
occupation based community but rather a collection of families specialised in
different occupations.
It is based on these reasons that Devadevan argues that tinais are not distinct
topographical regions.
An alternative understanding of tinais is proposed by the Tolkappiyam. It lays
out five tinais of the akam genre of poetry which focuses on the internal and
seven tinnais of the Puram genre which deals with the external. Devadevan sees
these tinais as semiotic tools in the in the configuration of space in Sangam
mythopoeic imagination. The Sangam bards employed tinais as configuration of
space where the respective dimensions of desire and power are acted out. The Kurinji
landscape represents the initial union of lovers, one that is clandestine that brings out the
transient nature of happiness, according to Devadevan, this sense of crisis is
representative of a milieu in transition. The mullai stands for longing of lovers in
separation. Marutam signifies quarrels between lovers due to infidelity. The Neytal stands
for grief over separation, while the arid Palai represents separation forever.
