Page:The Indian Antiquary, Vol. 4-1875.djvu/167

 i.:,j THE ETOIAN A5TIQUARY. [JlATj But I may add that from the description in Air. Whiten ansa's most exhaustive litlla book of the M u a 1 g r iV in ft k u r, I oni confirmed in my belief thai they were Brxlhman cunvertr — or at least pnrUuUwiuverte--perliAp* tolrwvi Kortfcan himself. Mr. Whitohouac points out that thuy were ■ native law-courts," and that they became "trustees and protector:* of him' rihurahea," They wara also, under Kniln Thomn, tipfKMH'.cil ly " regulfttu and manage nil thai re- lated to tho aacittl petition and rait* questinui" of certain "artisan*" This is nil very natural if they were Brahman converts*, but why MauicliaiuuB ehould bod -rtnnli | hh It I cm a it Is hard in imagine- Mr. Whhuhouao further points out that Lho corpse of the lust pne^c of the Manigrainakar nt K&yenkiilaia was burnt— evidently B n-'.cnuotl trj tha Hindu customs of thoir forefather*. r lie tells us that in the neighbourhood of tj niton their priests, who wore called Ntdmar- BCfaobiM fj&J tihC way qaito a Hiudu up pollution) wore hurind in a "sitting posture." anil bhifl Way in which certain vary high casta Naffiburil ure buried to thin day. I am inclined to think, brftj that there is more evidenerT that (he* MdmyrtlmuJiur were high-vtuUr Bnlhmiia. con- verts, who originated from M an i g r A in & UviR&go, which tuny bavy been one of ths chief seata of Hindu learning' at the Lime that they were Wamouacftnaj nMoh supposition appears to ma to rest solely on tho fast that the DJUUd o£ the place begin a with M Again, there was the troublesome, char Munikuvftohakar," who did much aril a- in the early days of the Christian Church in Mala- bar. Now I (Id net think that thin mini bud uny connection whatever with the M & n i r r a rn n k u ?, h hiw name dooe begin with Mum Effl was in all probabibty a Tamil toroer e r ; and I am uot aware that the Munich-asms wera ores given to sorcery— at least there Is no hint of the kind in Bishop ArchelauVs disputation with Mnnw himself, nor in tha Treat! ae of U a -Iit, Biihnp of LiycopoUa, pot in any mibtwtpiunt tiesxriptioti uf tha Manicluesns I can nnd, MiLnikavuehtikar is a fiuruaiiio «(i|| wsSgting among tho Tamils, Tho name is to ho found to-day in JniTiiu, and no doubt olMwbort. Other Tamil name? Imro a similar origin. ForinsLii OOTOWn natrfV postern has for his original family name Olu'ni- vaohakar, the moaning of which is not far to find* QMtf being 'angar,' and v&ckahM "speech j" C h 1 - uivaohakar therefore rniymn Btt*jar~to)t$u?4 ; and MAnikavachftknr h ' Jewel. tongaed/ Mdnikya cxlfdnifct being a ' rnhy," or generally a jtaofli, MlnJltavflehakar Is therefore a purely Tamil uamu, and the uiun who boru it H think, simply a Tamli l o ti e ar w I may as well here confess that 1 myself once- suspectc-l tills man might have luan '1'hamas the Manichee, of whura there has been tionie ground for sup* posing that he was onc« ic Saalabar, tint 1 now I hat the iwmo and chamctor of Manikava- chakar is a suifi^ient answer in the negative. I ooucludc, therefore^ l.hut> neither Muuigra- miiu, not Manikav4cha k.ir, nor the luli- COrda, point with tho leant degrea of pro- bability to Manas and his follom There may indeed have been Mauiclueana in South India and in (VyLm ; but I do not Lhink wo have found any certain trace of them at pre- sent, and wa tboll l I Cajnly bv mi-h'd if wo begin to look up all tha words beginning with There if. no ^rnund wbntovcr for suppos- ing that Knaa Thoma was Mamobxean; nm It follow that MAp S&pbtir uud Mar ApUrottu cumu from Babylon thai they were Manir.havuis. The Sp&Ii of Mutur to India mij-Ut give some colour to tho nrppotiliut] iJhal psrl of the e ouail r j r, bat thee the Manigramakor, nor the jxirveirts of ManiknviWhriknr, DOT the writer; uf tho Pahlavi Inscriptioni were Miuiiditeans, where aro Rod any trace of the Mot on th>> Malabar enast P it regard to the Apontle Thomas 'a fir Molabttr, Dr- Burnetl aays there is '* no warrant Ibf supposing that St. Thomas Visited South India- tin idea Hrhkih nppears to have arisen in tha Middle Ages, and baa been since supported on fai gmnnds by fiomo m ." But it appears to me that the grounds for rm] •posing thut tin- Mm bIubaim wore tin' "j5rs< Ohristiiui mission* ariHs" to India— at least to MnUW— nrv mtieli have no evidence. For thii, . mau uia> havo fiinrtd Mnnictuuuni in Ceylon in 850 x.u. (which nevertheless I have idiown to 1» flome- what, doobtful)) tlufl AOM EMM deny the proba- bibty of then having bean Christians alren Malabar. tftfiood < vidence, ipiite at trustworthy as that of Abo Zaid, that there were Christiaiii* in Malobm- kuutj '■' ftm oven with regard to the ml vent of St. Thomas himself, the evidence is certainly not so * fanciful' as that ManigrAmaro is tho ' villa l Manes/ Cosmua in tho 6th century found Chris- tiana in Mrdnbar ; but he says nothing of chn-aiis, Fantamns speaks in tho 2nd century of •' - i n d of Q| ftttfefttbow befn|(ln India, md ol >i,. visit of on opoif f« ,• and Manas was not tlicn bom, !ITie report that St. Thomas had been martyred in India was known in EogUnd at least an early ■ Not iadead mcatwoed in Dr. Bornrir. p.^, but dwaibed »t leasth ia Mr, Waitekmr ,, n/ Light,
 * more fanciful," For this fact we absolutely