>The novel says that in ancient times, Ramayana & >Mahabharata were referred as 'Ariya Kuuthu', >meaning 'stories of Aryans'. What is the early >evidence of separation of aryans and dravidians in >literature? Is there any proof (in the history) for >Aryan invasion and Dravidians being pushed >south of vindhyas?
Hi...probably first mail from you reg. a thread...;-)
I am poking because you asked this question with an "others" subtext with "Gokul". ;-)
With my limited knowledge, I guess "Arya" those days did not mean "Aryans" that we mean at present. Rather, the sanskrit word "arya" means someone "brave" or "courageous" (hence mean "Kshatriya", persons of king's descent.)
In bhagavad gita also Krishna frequently refers Arjuna as such, "Arya!".
So Ramayana & Mahabharatha are Stories of Kshatriya's, which apparently is more so. Afterall, what for could the so called Dravidians have separated and still kept the so called Aryan's culture and story in such a high regard those days?
Dr. Kalaikkovan, in his recently published "Chozhar kaala aadarkalai" mentioned that some of the Thalippendir were experts in "Aaryakoothu". Probably this should have given inspiration to Gokul also. During RR's LIFE TIME itself certain things were carried out : 1. Naadu - Valanadu etc., were named after his Virudhupeeyargal; 2. His brass icon & his wife's brass icon were made. Of course Sundara & Vaanavanmadevi icons were made much earlier itself - even by Kundavai. 3. Rajaraja Nadakam (koothu) was also enacted. As we now read about the development of Cinema ( from earlier Bakthi stories to Rajarani stories to social stores) such development of Nadakams also took place. By enacting his story during his life time, we can understand that he set again another trend - like Survey of lands - forming of Taluks / Districts / Zones etc., - he also presented alternatives to epics like Ramayana - Mahabaratha (Veeram ) and Thiruthondarthogai (Bakthi).
Neelakanta Sastry does write about Arya - Dravadian subject to some extent when discusses Colas.